Skip to main content
. 2023 Apr 29;12(9):1844. doi: 10.3390/foods12091844

Table 1.

Grouping according to frequency of consumption of each type of wines, means (±standard deviations) of liking and familiarity of different wine types in the online questionnaire (n = 234).

Liking (1–5) Familiarity (1–5)
Fruit Wine type Users
(n = 89)
Non-
Users
(n = 145)
Significance t Overall Participants
(n = 234)
Users
(n = 89)
Non-Users
(n = 145)
Significance t Overall
Participants
(n = 234)
Grape 3.91 ± 0.83 3.47 ± 0.87 *** 3.83 3.64 ± 0.80 3.87 ± 0.88 3.35 ± 1.03 *** 4.05 3.55 ± 1.01
Blueberry 3.93 ± 0.69 3.42 ± 0.85 *** 5.05 3.62 ± 0.83 3.25 ± 0.82 2.38 ± 0.96 ** 7.39 2.71 ± 1.00
Hawthorn 3.60 ± 0.95 3.20 ± 0.95 ** 3.10 3.35 ± 0.97 3.11 ± 0.98 2.23 ± 0.95 *** 6.84 2.56 ± 1.05
Goji berry 3.10 ± 1.00 2.84 ± 0.91 * 2.04 2.94 ± 0.95 3.09 ± 0.97 2.19 ± 0.97 *** 6.90 2.53 ± 1.07
Rosa roxburghii 3.26 ± 0.89 2.88 ± 0.79 *** 3.43 3.02 ± 0.85 2.33 ± 0.90 1.81 ± 0.70 *** 4.58 2.01 ± 0.82
Apricot 3.43 ± 0.78 2.97 ± 0.84 *** 4.20 3.14 ± 0.84 2.42 ± 0.90 1.88 ± 0.73 *** 4.76 2.08 ± 0.84

Users (total consumption frequency score of six fruit wines ≥ 10) and non-users (total consumption frequency score of six fruit wines < 10). Independent samples t-test was used to check the difference between users and non-users. ‘*’ represents p < 0.05, ‘**’ represents p < 0.01, and ‘***’ represents p < 0.001.