Decanting value priorities: Wine choice as an identity signal

Nils Hossli & Martin Natter

Journal of Wine Economics2026https://doi.org/10.1017/jwe.2025.10095article
ABDC C
Weight
0.50

What the paper says

Abstract In two studies with 1,275 participants, we examine how values are associated with wine cues and how these associations shape selection across private and professional contexts. Building on signaling theory and identity economics, we propose a utility framework in which choice utility is a context-dependent function of alignment with the private self (personal values), the professional self (role values), and anticipated reputational returns to identity signaling. Signal interpretability depends on a shared code in which observable cues carry similar meanings for senders and receivers. Drawing on Schwartz's value theory, we find evidence that participants systematically attribute distinct values to three observable cues—bottle appearance, short narratives, and tasting notes. Our findings show that in private settings, individuals favor wines linked to self-transcendence and openness to change, whereas in professional settings they prefer wines associated with self-enhancement and conservation. These cross-context patterns suggest that observing wine choice provides a novel tool for researchers to indirectly assess both personal and work-related values. In this respect, our approach relates to revealed preference theory, which infers individual preferences from observed choices.

Open paper page →

Cite this paper

https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1017/jwe.2025.10095

Or copy a formatted citation

@article{nils2026,
  title        = {{Decanting value priorities: Wine choice as an identity signal}},
  author       = {Nils Hossli & Martin Natter},
  journal      = {Journal of Wine Economics},
  year         = {2026},
  doi          = {https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1017/jwe.2025.10095},
}

Paste directly into BibTeX, Zotero, or your reference manager.

Flag this paper

Decanting value priorities: Wine choice as an identity signal

Flags are reviewed by the Arbiter methodology team within 5 business days.


Evidence weight

0.50

Balanced mode · F 0.40 / M 0.15 / V 0.05 / R 0.40

F · citation impact0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20
M · momentum0.50 × 0.15 = 0.07
V · venue signal0.50 × 0.05 = 0.03
R · text relevance †0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20

† Text relevance is estimated at 0.50 on the detail page — for your query’s actual relevance score, open this paper from a search result.