 Why are the experimental results somewhat irrelevant?
The point of the second test was not to find the difference between cheap and expensive beers but instead to compare a variety of top-of-the-line beers. One aspect of the reward was that they would presumably enjoy the actual testing more--fewer rueful beer descriptions along the lines of "urine" or "get it away!" were expected than in the first round. The other aspect of anticipated reward was the panelists' unspoken but obvious assumption that this time they would "do better" on the test. Here is what happened and what it meant: 1. Procedure. The A-to-J labeling scheme was the same for all testers.
 Part of what matters is the label itself
 The experimenters were unqualified  The experiment subjects were unqualified  The sample size was too small  Part of what matters is the label itself