SMAKO™ is not a horoscope. The six dimensions that define your SMAKO type are grounded in 30+ years of peer-reviewed sensory science. The same biological mechanisms that govern wine preference govern coffee preference and food preference. This is not a coincidence — it's the same system.
The Foundation
You are not bad at choosing wine. You are not indecisive at restaurants. You have a taste personality — a stable, heritable profile of sensory preferences that shapes how you experience every flavour, every drink, every meal.
The evidence is unambiguous. Bitter taste receptor gene variants (TAS2R38) are among the most studied in human genetics. PROP taster status — your genetic sensitivity to certain bitter compounds — directly predicts whether you prefer high-acid wines or low-acid wines, light-body or full-body, structured or smooth. This is not learned. It is encoded.
More importantly: the same biological mechanism that governs wine preference governs coffee preference and food preference. Polyphenol binding creates astringency in wine, in tea, in dark chocolate, and in certain vegetables — through identical chemistry. The dimension that separates people who love grippy tannic reds from people who find them unbearable is the same dimension that separates espresso lovers from milk coffee drinkers.
SMAKO™ maps this unified system. Your type is not wine-specific. It is you.
The 6 Dimensions
The six SMAKO™ dimensions are not invented categories. They map to documented, measurable physiological differences between people.
Dimension 1
Bright · Cozy
Your preference for acidity and perceived freshness versus warmth and roundness. People with higher PROP taster sensitivity experience acidity more intensely — they prefer lower-acid, rounder profiles. Non-tasters can handle and often prefer high-acid, crisp profiles.
What it explains
Why some people love crisp, acidic drinks and others find them harsh. Why some prefer cold brew (lower acidity) to espresso (high acidity). Why a squeeze of lemon "brightens" a dish for some people and "ruins" it for others.
See citations: 1, 7
Dimension 2
Light · Rich
Your tolerance for and preference toward body, intensity, and fat richness. Fat taste sensitivity is governed by CD36 gene variants. PROP non-tasters (who experience less bitterness) systematically select higher-fat, richer options — they find them satisfying rather than overwhelming.
What it explains
Why some people find rich, full-bodied drinks satisfying while others find them heavy. Why some want the most generous thing on the menu and others prefer dishes that are light and precise. Why cream-based coffees feel indulgent to some and "the whole point" to others.
See citations: 7, 8
Dimension 3
Velvety · Grippy
Your preference for smooth, plush mouthfeel versus structured, astringent, tannic mouthfeel. This is the #1 wine differentiator — and it applies equally to coffee, tea, dark chocolate, and certain vegetables. Polyphenols bind to salivary proteins and create the drying "grip" sensation. Individual sensitivity to this varies significantly and is tied to PROP taster status, food neophobia, and disgust sensitivity.
The cross-category finding
De Toffoli et al. (2019, N=1,200) showed the same people who avoid high-astringency wines also avoid high-astringency coffee/tea AND bitter vegetables. This is one unified biological trait — not separate wine, coffee, and food preferences.
See citations: 3, 9
Dimension 4
Savory · Juicy
Your orientation toward herbal, mineral, earthy, umami-adjacent flavours versus ripe, fruit-forward, lush, floral flavours. Pyrazine sensitivity (herbal/mineral) varies individually. Ester preference (fruit/floral) is documented. A twin study by Törnwall et al. (2014) identified genetically influenced flavour preference subgroups based on liking for savory/sour versus fruit-forward profiles.
What it explains
Why some people gravitate toward earthy, herbal, mineral flavours and others toward ripe, fruity, lush ones. Why some always finish a meal wanting cheese or olives while others always want something sweet. Why certain people find green herbal flavours exciting and others find them off-putting.
See citations: 6, 7
Dimension 5 — New in v3
Fine · Tolerant
Your overall sensitivity threshold across bitter, astringent, and warning-sensation compounds. Fine palates (supertaster-tendency) experience bitter and astringent flavours at higher intensity — not because they are more sophisticated, but because their biology encodes more sensation per molecule. Tolerant palates have wider acceptance windows and can enjoy a broader range of intensities without discomfort.
What it explains
Why some people find espresso intolerably bitter while others find it perfectly balanced. Why certain people avoid cruciferous vegetables, dry tannic reds, and black tea not out of pickiness — but because they genuinely taste more. Pierguidi et al. (2023) confirmed anxiety traits and heightened bitter/astringent sensitivity co-occur in the same individuals, creating consistent avoidance patterns across all categories.
See citations: 3, 7, 9
Dimension 6
Adventurous · Loyal
Your orientation toward novelty-seeking and discovery versus comfort-driven loyalty to proven favourites. This is the most scientifically grounded dimension. The Food Neophobia Scale (Pliner & Hobden 1992) is a validated, widely-cited psychometric instrument. Food neophobia scores are stable over time, partially heritable, and predict real choices across all food and drink categories.
The key finding
Ong et al. (2018, N=438,870) showed bitter taste genetics causally determine coffee intake patterns — not just preference. De Toffoli et al. showed food neophobia predicts novel food and beverage choices independently of taste sensitivity. This is a personality trait with real behavioural consequences at every menu and every wine shop.
See citations: 1, 3, 4, 5
The Unified System
SMAKO™'s second words — BLOOM, STEEP, PRESS, SMOKE, DRIFT, VEIL, CHALK, GRAIN — are rooted in the physical language of flavour and texture. BLOOM, STEEP, PRESS, and SMOKE are all real coffee terms. This is not an accident. The same polyphenol mechanism that determines whether you love or hate grippy tannic reds determines whether you love or hate dark roast espresso. The same gene variants that make some people crave acidity make others prefer round, cozy warmth.
🍷
Wine
Tannin, acidity, body, mineral vs. fruit
☕
Coffee
Astringency, acidity, body, roast character
🍽
Food
Richness, texture, savory vs. sweet, intensity
Same polyphenol mechanism. Same receptor genes. Same personality trait. Different category.
SMAKO™ vs. MBTI
"Your taste preferences are more stable and more predictable than your Myers-Briggs type. Sensory science has documented the biological mechanisms. The dimensions we measure are not arbitrary categories — they are the dimensions that nature already built into you."
Quiz Design
24 questions. 6 dimensions. Behavioural framing — not momentary cravings.
Every question uses "usually," "in general," or "you tend to" framing. We are measuring your stable taste personality — not what sounds good tonight. A quiz that asks what you feel like eating right now measures hunger, not personality.
Energy, Weight, Texture, Flavour, Palate, and Choice are each measured independently with 5 questions drawn from multiple contexts — restaurants, home, supermarkets, sensory memories. Convergent questions across contexts increase reliability.
The quiz never asks about wine varieties, regions, or terminology. It asks about flavours, textures, and choices that everyone has experience with — regardless of whether they drink wine. Your type is derived from who you already are, not what you already know.
Your initial quiz result is a strong first read. Like all personality profiles, accuracy improves as you accumulate more data points. The app tracks your actual tastings over time and refines your profile continuously.
Bibliography
All citations are real, verified papers. We do not cite papers we have not read. We do not misrepresent findings.
Ong et al. (2018)
Scientific Reports, N=438,870. Bitter taste genetics causally determine coffee intake patterns — the largest sensory genetics study ever conducted.
PMC6237869
Cornelis & van Dam (2021)
Scientific Reports. Same sensory calibration drives coffee, tea, and dark chocolate preference — demonstrating the unified cross-category system.
PMC8669025
De Toffoli et al. (2019)
Nutrients, N=1,200. PROP taster status and food neophobia independently predict choices across coffee/tea AND vegetables — the same biological trait, multiple categories.
PMC6627839
Pliner & Hobden (1992)
Appetite. Food Neophobia Scale canonical foundation — establishes novelty-seeking vs. loyalty as a stable, measurable personality trait with real predictive validity.
PMID 1489209
Pliner & Melo (1997)
Physiology & Behavior. Sensation-seeking predicts novel food choices independently of other personality variables.
PMID 9035266
Törnwall et al. (2014)
Appetite. Twin study: genetically influenced flavour preference subgroups based on liking for savory/sour versus fruit-forward profiles. Heritability of flavour preference clusters established.
PMID 24361469
Robino et al. (2019)
Nutrients. Genetic variation in taste receptor genes shapes preferences across all 5 basic tastes. Comprehensive review of TAS2R genetic architecture and its phenotypic consequences.
PMC6723706
Spence (2020)
Foods. Flavour integrates taste, smell, and texture independently — validates multi-dimensional profiling as the correct scientific approach to flavour personality.
PMC7230494
Pierguidi et al. (2023)
Food Research International. Anxiety traits drive avoidance of bitter and astringent flavours — psychophysiological basis for individual astringency sensitivity differences.
PMID 37803693
Mahmud et al. (2020)
Comprehensive Reviews in Food Science. Acidity, body, bitterness, and mouthfeel formally established as independent coffee sensory dimensions — confirming the cross-category validity of SMAKO™'s framework.
PMID 33336982
3 minutes. No food knowledge. No account needed. Just you and 24 questions about how you actually eat and drink.
Discover My TypeFree · smakotest.com