Your Wine Glass and Whether You Hold it Determines How Much Your Pour
To prevent over-serving wine, choose narrower glasses, pour wine when the glass is on the table rather than in your hand, and select a wine that does not match your glass
Without monitoring alcohol consumption accurately, you may serve yourself 12% more alcohol than you originally plann
Tools & Resources
Feel free to download and use any of the graphics, illustrations, videos, and resources on this page for educational purposes. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
After a long week, you relax and pour yourself a glass of wine—but could the wine glass you choose cause you to pour more than you think? After witnessing how environmental cues like plate size and food labels impact eating behaviors, researchers decided to take a look at how similar factors impact drinking experiences. In a new study by Doug Walker, Laura Smarandescu, and Brian Wansink, drinkers unintentionally poured larger servings when their glasses were wider, when the pourers held them in their hands, and when the glassware matched the wine.
For this study, the researchers recruited 73 students (all of legal drinking age) who drank at least one glass of wine a week. The students were brought to several different stations and were asked to pour themselves a normal serving of wine. At each of these stations, the researchers manipulated environmental cues to measure their effects.
They used three different types of wine glasses to test the effect of size and shape: Large, Wide, or Standard. To see if participants subconsciously drank more when they anticipated a meal, some stations featured a large or small place setting. To examine the effects of pouring position, students either poured their wine into a glass they were holding or into glass placed on a table. To examine the visual effects of color contrast, there was either low contrast between the wine and the glass (white wine in a clear glass) or high contrast (red wine in a clear glass).
As the researchers suspected, several environmental cues lead to over-pouring. When glasses were wider, participants poured 11.9% more wine. The students poured 12.2% more wine when they were holding their glasses, compared to pouring into glasses placed on a table. When there was low contrast between the glass and the wine (white wine in a clear glass), participants poured 9.2% more wine than when there was high contrast (red wine in a clear glass).
Now you know that you’re likely to over-pour if you choose a wide glass, hold your glass while serving, or select a wine that matches your glass—but the good news is that, retrospectively, people seem to be aware of how these cues influence their pours.
After each student finished the study, researchers asked them to rate the degree to which they felt each element impacted them. Overall, the students were highly accurate; they rated glass width, color contrast, and glass-holding as most influential, and those three factors had indeed lead to the most significant over-pouring.
Being aware of the wine cues that impact pouring can help drinkers monitor their intake. However, knowing that you’ll pour more into a wide glass is different than knowing just how many ounces you’ll pour. When trying to monitor your alcohol consumption accurately, realize that you may be serving yourself 12% more alcohol than you originally planned. When given the option, choose a narrower glass, place your glass on a table before pouring, and select a wine that does not match your glass to avoid unintentionally over-serving!
Summary by Kelsey Gatto
• Download paper from the SSRN (the Social Science Research Network)
Walker, Doug, Laura Smarandescu, & Brian Wansink (2014). Half full or empty: Cues that lead wine drinkers to unintentionally overpour. Substance Use & Misuse, 49(3), 295-302. doi:10.3109/10826084.2013.832327.
Other Interesting Articles on Compensation
Dijksterhuis, A. (2004). Think Different: The Merits of Unconscious Thought in Preference Development and Decision Making. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 87, 586-598.
Dijksterhuis, A., Bos, M. W., Nordgren, L. F., & Van Baaren, R. B. (2006). On Making the Right Choice: The Deliberation-Without-Attention Effect. Science, 311, 1005-1007.
Fillingim, R. B., Roth, D. L., & Haley, W. E. (1989). The effects of distraction on the perception of exercise-induced symptoms. Journal of Psychosomatic Research, 33, 241-248.
Fishbach, A., & Dhar, R. (2005). Goals as Excuses or Guides: The Liberating Effect of Perceived Goal Progress on Choice. Journal of Consumer Research, 32, 370-377.
Karageorghis, C. I., & Terry, P. C. (1997). The psychophysical effects of music in sport and exercise: A review. Journal of Sport Behavior, 20, 54.
Khan, U., & Dhar, R. (2006). Licensing Effect in Consumer Choice. Journal of Marketing Research, 43, 259-266.
King, N. A. (1999). What processes are involved in the appetite response to moderate increases in exercise-induced energy expenditure? Proceedings of the Nutrition Society, 58, 107-113.
King, N. A., Snell, L., Smith, R. D., & Blundell, J. E. (1996). Effects of short-term exercise on appetite responses in unrestrained females. European Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 50, 663-667.
Kivetz, R., & Zheng, Y. (2006). Determinants of justification and self-control. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 135, 572-587.
Lerouge, D. (2009). Evaluating the Benefits of Distraction on Product Evaluations: The Mind-Set Effect. Journal of Consumer Research, 36, 367-379.
Lichtman, S.W., Pisarska, K., Berman, E.R., Pestone, M., Dowling, H., Offenbacher, E., Weisel, H., Heshka, S., Matthews, D.E., & Heymsfield, S.B. (1992). Discreptency between self-reported and actual caloric intake and exercise in obese subjects. New England Journal of Medicine, 327 (27), 1893-1898.
Martins, C., Morgan, L. M., Bloom, S. R., & Robertson, M. D. (2007). Effects of exercise on gut peptides, energy intake and appetite. Journal of Endocrinology, 193, 251-258.
Nowlis, S. M., & Shiv, B. (2005). The Influence of Consumer Distractions on the Effectiveness of Food-Sampling Programs. Journal of Marketing Research (JMR), 42 (2), 157-168.
Okada, E.M. (2005). Justification Effects on Consumer Choice of Hedonic and Utilitarian Goods. Journal of Marketing Research (JMR), 42, 43-53.
Learn more . . .