Relationship between complexity and liking as a function of expertise

Music Perception

Volumn 22, Issue 4, 2005, Pages 583-611

  Orr, Mark G ^a   Ohlsson, Stellan ^b  

^a ALBERT EINSTEIN COLLEGE OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^b NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 33845273573     PISSN: 07307829     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1525/mp.2005.22.4.583     Document Type: Article

References (62)

1. Abeles, H. F., & Chung, J. W. (1996). Response to music. In D. A. Hodges (Ed.), Handbook of music psychology (2nd ed., pp. 285-342). San Antonio, TX: Institute for Music Research.
2. Arnheim, R. (1986). The other Gustav Theodor Fechner. In S. Koch & D. E. Leary (Eds.), A century of psychology as a science (pp. 855-865). New York: McGraw-Hill.
3. Berlyne, D. E. (1971). Aesthetics and psychobiology. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.
4. Berlyne, D. E. (Ed.). (1974). Studies in the new experimental aesthetics. Washington, DC: Hemisphere.
5. Birkhoff, G. D. (1933). Aesthetic measure. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
6. Burke, M. J., & Gridley, M. C. (1990). Musical preferences as a function of stimulus complexity and listeners' sophistication. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 71, 687-690.
7. Chandler, A. R. (1934). Beauty and human nature. New York: D. Appleton-Century Company.
8. Chi, M. T. H., Glaser, R., & Farr, M. J. (Eds.). (1988). The nature of expertise. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
9. Clarke, E. F. (1993). Imitating and evaluating real and transformed musical performances. Music Perception, 10, 317-341.
10. Conley, J. K. (1981). Physical correlates of the judged complexity of music by subjects differing in musical background. British Journal of Psychology, 72, 451-464.
11. Crozier, J. B. (1974). Verbal and exploratory responses to sound sequences varying in uncertainty level. In D. E. Berlyne (Ed.), Studies in the new experimental aesthetics (pp. 27-90). Washington, DC: Hemisphere.
12. Davies, J. B. (1978). The psychology of music. London: Hutchinson.
13. Davis, R. C. (1936). An evaluation and test of Birkhoff's aesthetic measure formula. Journal of General Psychology, 15, 231-240.
14. Day, H. Y. (1967). Evaluations of subjective complexity, pleasingness and interestingness for a series of random polygons varying in complexity. Perception and Psychophysics, 2, 281-286.
15. Dember, W. N., & Earl, R. W. (1957). Analysis of exploratory, manipulatory, and curiosity behaviors. Psychological Review, 64, 91-96.
16. Dorfman, D. D. (1965). Esthetic preference as a function of pattern information. Psychonomic Science, 3, 85-86.
17. Dorfman, D. D., & McKenna, H. (1966). Pattern preference as a function of pattern uncertainty. Canadian Journal of Psychology, 20, 123-153.
18. Eckblad, G. (1963). The attractiveness of uncertainty. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 4, 1-13.
19. Eckblad, G. (1964). The attractiveness of uncertainty: II. The effects of different rates of reduction in the level of subjective uncertainty. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 5, 33-49.
20. Efron, B., & Tibshirani, R. J. (1993). An introduction to the bootstrap. New York: Chapman & Hall.
21. Ericsson, K. A., Krampe, R. T., & Tesch-Romer, C. (1993). The role of deliberate practice in the acquisition of expert performance. Psychological Review, 100, 363-406.
22. Ericsson, K. A. & Simon, H. A. (1984). Protocol analysis: Verbal reports as data. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
23. Ericsson, K. A., & Smith, J. (Eds.). (1991). Toward a general theory of expertise: Prospects and limits. New York: Cambridge University Press.
24. Eysenck, H. J. (1941). The empirical determination of an aesthetic formula. Psychological Review, 48, 83-92.
25. Eysenck, H. J. (1942). The experimental study of the 'Good Gestalt': A new approach. Psychological Review, 49, 344-364.
26. Eysenck, H. J. (1968). An experimental study of aesthetic preference for polygonal figures. The Journal of General Psychology, 79, 3-17.
27. Gabrielsson, A. (2001). Emotions in strong experiences with music. In P. N. Juslin & J. A. Sloboda (Eds.), Music and emotions: Theory and research (pp. 431-449). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
28. Gobet, F., & Simon, H. A. (2000). Five seconds or sixty? Presentation time in expert memory. Cognitive Science, 24, 651-682.
29. Guilford, J. P. (1934). The affective value of color as a function of hue, tint and chroma. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 17, 342-370.
30. Heyduk, R. G. (1975). Rated preference for musical composition as it relates to complexity and exposure frequency. Perception and Psychophysics, 17, 84-91.
31. Kamman, R. (1966). Verbal complexity and preference in poetry. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 5, 536-540.
32. Madsen, C. K., & Brittin, R. V., & Capperella-Sheldon, D. A. (1993). An empirical method for measuring the aesthetic response to music. Journal of Research in Music Education, 41, 57-69.
33. Martin, L. J. (1906). An experimental study of Fechner's principles of aesthetics. Psychological Review, 13, 142-219.
34. Martindale, C. (1984). The pleasures of thought: A theory of cognitive hedonics. Journal of Mind and Behavior, 5, 49-80.
35. Martindale, C. (1988). Cognition, psychobiology, and aesthetics. In F. Farley & R. Neperud (Eds.), The foundation of aesthetics, art, and art education (pp. 7-42). New York: Praeger.
36. McMullen, P. T. (1996). The musical experience and affective/aesthetic responses: A theoretical framework for empirical research. In D. A. Hodges (Ed.), Handbook for music psychology (2nd ed., pp. 387-400). San Antonio, TX: Institute for Music Research.
37. McMullen, P. T., & Arnold, M. J. (1976). Preference and interest as functions of distributional reduandancy in rhythmic sequences. Journal of Research in Music Eduaction, 24, 22-31.
38. Moreland, R. L., & Zajonc, R. B. (1976). A strong test of exposure effects. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 12, 170-179.
39. Munsinger, H., & Kessen, W. (1964). Uncertainty, structure, and preference. Psychological Monographs, 78, 1-24.
40. North, A. C., & Hargreaves, D. J. (1995). Subjective complexity, familiarity, and liking for popular music. Psychomusicology, 14, 77-93.
41. North, A. C., & Hargreaves, D. J. (1996a). Responses to music in a dining area. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 26, 491-501.
42. North, A. C., & Hargreaves, D. J. (1996b). Responses to music in aerobic exercise and yogic relaxation classes. British Journal of Psychology, 87, 535-547.
43. Orr, M. G., & Miller, L. K. (1997, August). Continuous measurement of the aesthetic response to music: Genre and training effects. Paper presented at the Semi-Annual Conference of the Society for Music Perception and Cognition, Cambridge, MA.
44. Orr, M. G., & Ohlsson, S. (2001). The relationship between musical complexity and liking in jazz and bluegrass. Psychology of Music, 29, 108-127.
45. Pierce, E. (1894). The aesthetics of simple forms. Psychological Review, 1, 483-495.
46. Pierce, E. (1896). The aesthetics of simple forms. Psychological Review, 3, 270-282.
47. Radocy, R. E. (1982). Preference for classical music: A test for the hedgehog. Psychology of Music, Special Issue, 91-95.
48. Repp, B. H. (1992). A constraint on the expressive timing of a melodic gesture: Evidence from performance and aesthetic judgment. Music Perception, 10, 221-242.
49. Rump, E. E. (1968). Relative preference as a function of the number of elements in abstract designs. Australian Journal of Psychology, 27, 39-48.
50. Russell, P. A. (1982). Relationships between judgements of the complexity, pleasingness and interestingness of music. Current Psychological Research, 2, 195-202.
51. Scherer, K. R., & Zentner, M. R. (2001). Emotional effects of music: Production rules. In P. N. Juslin & J. A. Sloboda (Eds.), Music and emotion: Theory and research (pp. 361-392). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
52. Simon, C. R., & Wohlwill, J. F. (1968). An experimental study of the role of expectation and variation in music. Journal of Research in Music Education, 16, 227-238.
53. Sluckin, W., Hargreaves, D. J., & Colman, A. M. (1983). Novelty and human aesthetic preferences. In J. Archer & L. Birke (Eds.), Exploration in animals and humans. London: Van Nostrand.
54. Smith, J. D., & Melara, R. J. (1990). Aesthetic preference and syntactic prototypicality in music: 'Tis the gift to be simple.' Cognition, 34, 279-298.
55. Stimson, J. A., Carmines, E. G., & Zeller, R. A. (1981). Interpreting polynomial regression. In P. V. Marsden (Ed.), Linear models in social research (pp. 88-96): Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
56. Vitz, P. C. (1964). Preference for rates of information presented by sequences of tones. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 68, 176-183.
57. Vitz, P. C. (1966a). Affect as a function of stimulus variation. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 71, 74-79.
58. Vitz, P. C. (1966b). Preference for different amounts of visual complexity. Behavioral Science, 11, 105-114.
59. Walker, E. L. (1980). Psychological complexity and preference: A hedgehog theory of behavior. Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole.
60. Washburn, M. F. (1911). A note on the affective value of colors. American Journal of Psychology, 22, 114-115.
61. Wohlwill, J. F. (1968). Amount of stimulus exploration and preference as differential functions of stimulus complexity. Perception and Psychophysics, 4, 307-312.
62. Zajonc, R. B. (1968). Attitudinal effects of mere exposure. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 9(Monograph Suppl. 2, Pt. 2).