Ninety-two experts and novices in three countries sorted nine whiskies plus a repeated sample. Spontaneous arrangements did not simply reproduce the single-malt/blended distinction in the selected set.
Source And Coverage
No access
Barry C. Smith, Cécile Sester, Jordi Ballester and Ophelia Deroy (2017) — DOI
9-page article; methods, categorization outcomes and limitations selectively reviewed; PDF sheet 3 visually checked.
Review completed October 24, 2026 using whole-file searchable extraction and targeted reading. “Complete” describes this scoped note, not an exhaustive audit. Page locators refer to the supplied PDF unless printed pages are specified.
Findings And Method
Ninety-two experts and novices in three countries sorted nine whiskies plus a repeated sample. Spontaneous arrangements did not simply reproduce the single-malt/blended distinction in the selected set.
Evidence Boundaries
Very peaty single malts were excluded after a pilot, narrowing the conclusion. Task order was fixed. Absence of category clustering is not proof that samples are indistinguishable. The preparation states 30 mL whisky plus 10 mL water and approximately 23% ABV; with stated 40–46% starting strengths, additive-volume arithmetic instead gives 30–34.5%. Actual preparation/strength is unresolved and should not be silently corrected.
Blending Lab Application — Researcher Synthesis
Use as a lesson in category expectations and protocol checking. Store actual volumes and computed ABV separately from a paper's stated strength; flag inconsistencies. Never conclude that single malts and blends all taste the same.
The practical recommendation is distinct from the authors' tested result. Established chemistry and measurement definitions can be taught directly; a particular whiskey's response, a consumer segment or a profitable offer still requires appropriate evidence.
Connected Research
- No access — compare method, population and outcome before combining evidence.
- No access — compare method, population and outcome before combining evidence.
- No access — compare method, population and outcome before combining evidence.
Academy Use
The Short Version can teach the practical comparison; the Full Story should explain the mechanism, source method and limits. Use this note with No access and No access.
Pricing and membership remain proposals to test; this source does not validate a commercial offer.
Linked Analyses And Batch Register
From Perceptual to Conceptual Categorization of Wines: What Is the Effect of Expertise? — Evidence and Blending Lab Applications- Whisky dilution changes both headspace chemistry and discrimination — Ashmore et al.
- Sensory Discrimination of Blended Scotch Whiskies of Different Product Categories — Evidence and Blending Lab Applications
No access