Rethinking Wine Tasting for Chinese Consumers: A Service Design Approach Enhanced by Multimodal Personalization
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Wine tasting is a multimodal and culturally embedded activity that presents unique challenges when adapted to non-Western contexts. This paper proposes a service design approach rooted in contextual co-creation to reimagine wine tasting experiences for Chinese consumers. Drawing on 26 in-situ interviews and follow-up validation sessions, we identify three distinct user archetypes: Curious Tasters, Experience Seekers, and Knowledge Builders, each exhibiting different needs in vocabulary, interaction, and emotional pacing. Our findings reveal that traditional wine descriptors lack cultural resonance and that cross-modal metaphors grounded in local gastronomy (e.g., green mango for acidity) significantly improve cognitive and emotional engagement. These insights informed a partially implemented prototype, featuring AI-driven metaphor-to-flavour mappings and real-time affective feedback visualisation. A small-scale usability evaluation (n=10) confirmed improvements in engagement and comprehension. Our comparative analysis shows alignment with and differentiation from prior multimodal and affect-aware tasting systems. This research contributes to CBMI by demonstrating how culturally adaptive interaction systems can enhance embodied consumption experiences in physical tourism and beyond.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".