Double-blind Experiments for Dummies: Wine - Part 3

This is the final part of my wine-tasting experimentation trilogy preceded by Part 1 and Part 2.

Here, I'll be presenting the results, some basic analysis and a conclusion, including an evaluation of this experiment's credibility.

Double-blind Experiments for Dummies: Wine - Part 2

This is part 2 of yesterday's post entitled Double-blind Experiments for Dummies: Wine - Part 1.


As can be seen from yesterday, trying to conduct a proper double-blind experiment in the home is pretty hard. I identified 5 potential issues with my own lengthy experimental setup procedures (and I haven't yet mentioned how questionable the results would be in an experiment on only 4 participants).

This highlights why it always pays to be sceptical about reported results from scientific studies without first reading all the details, caveats, experimental snafus, etc. It especially highlights why pseudo-science is a load of crap; it relies on anecdote, selection bias, and the placebo effect, rather than rigorous scientific principles.

And now onto the experimental procedures of the wine-tasting experiment.

Double-blind Experiments for Dummies: Wine - Part 1

This is part 1 of my attempt to carry out a double-blind wine-tasting experiment.

I was studying a case involving Penfolds Wines at uni the other week, and it made me want to get some on the way home. But I thought it would be good to buy a really good bottle, rather than relatively cheap wine, like I'd normally have. Then I thought about what a waste of money that might be, as there would be no guarantee that the more expensive wine would be any better. That made me want to find out, as scientifically as I could, whether the more expensive wine would be any better. So here's what I did: