One problem with this whole study:
Laying hands on a musical instrument and playing it for an hour is as much a kinesthetic experience as an auditory experience.
As others above have noted. It is entirely expected and not particularly difficult for an experienced, professional, instrumentalist to be able to identify an instrument from the combination of sound AND feel. Even if they cannot name it reliably. They know if what they are experiencing is better or worse relative to some internal standard.... probably their own favorite instrument....
Now a can of worms has been opened. Asking a subject who is capable of identifying an instrument maker based on the combination of sound AND feel which instrument they liked the best does not tell you anything about the overall quality of the instrument.
It doesn't tell you how well an instrument behaves as it wears. It does not tell you how well it behaves after it travels. It does not tell you how well it behaves when it is subjected to an unexpected change in ambient temperature, or humidity during a performance. after the strings are replaced, after it is cleaned..... after it is dropped.... or otherwise mechanically stressed....
String instruments are fickle beasts, and have a lot of subtle traits that experienced players can detect, even if they cannot reliably tell you who made the instrument. I am sure if they were asked to tell you in each case if the instrument was made by the same or a different maker, the results would have been much more consistent, and more useful.