 What is NOT a recommendation they make in future experiments?
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. This was similar in most ways to the experimental approach of Round 1. The A-to-J labeling scheme was the same for all testers. To include one holdover from the previous test, as a scientific control on our tasters' preferences.
 Give the test subjects a palette cleanser (they didn't and it would make the data a lot cleaner in future studies)
 If you're going to test a certain type of beer, they recommended specific brands to try and one to avoid  Give the test subjects a palette cleanser (they didn't and it would make the data a lot cleaner in future studies)  Provide the test subjects with different information  If you're running the experiment, you can't participate as well