IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/jwecon/v2y2007i01p98-102_00.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Note on a Test for the Sum of Ranksums

Author

Listed:
  • Quandt, Richard E.

Abstract

In wine tastings, in which several tasters (judges) taste several wines, it is important to insure objectivity to the extent possible. This is usually accomplished by holding the tasting “blind,†i.e., covering the bottles so that the tasters do not know which wine is in which bottle. At some agreed upon point in the proceedings, the tasters reveal what they think about the various bottles. Ideally, this revelation would take place by secret ballot, lest a taster's choices be influenced by what he or she hears another taster say. But in any event, there are two standard ways of rating the wines. The older method is to assign them “grades†on a scale of, say, up to 100 points (Parker) or up to 20 points as in the famous face-off between California wines and French Bordeaux wines in 1976 (see Ashenfelter et al., 2007). As Ashenfelter at al. point out, this has the distinct disadvantage that a judge with greater dispersion in his or her grades will have a greater influence on the average score that each wine achieves.

Suggested Citation

  • Quandt, Richard E., 2007. "A Note on a Test for the Sum of Ranksums," Journal of Wine Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 2(1), pages 98-102, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:cup:jwecon:v:2:y:2007:i:01:p:98-102_00
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S1931436100000328/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cup:jwecon:v:2:y:2007:i:01:p:98-102_00. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/jwe .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.