CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 69Neuroscience and Music PerceptionAesthetic Perception and AnalysisCreativity in Education and Neuroscience

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

A Matter of Taste: Evaluating Improvised Music

Eisenberg, Jacob, Thompson, William Forde·2003·Creativity Research Journal
DOI 10.1207/s15326934crj152&3_19
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

We examined some of the factors that influence evaluations of improvised music. Using the Consensual Assessment Technique (CAT), 10 expert judges evaluated 16 pieces of music, improvised on an electronic keyboard. Overall evaluations of improvisations were associated with their perceived complexity, creativity, and technical goodness. These predictors accounted for 76% of the variance in preference judgments. The intrinsic motivation of improvisers was also assessed, and was correlated with overall evaluations. No support was found for a nonlinear relation between the perceived complexity of the music and its aesthetic appeal, as suggested by Berlyne's optimal-complexity model. We outline a model linking characteristics of improvisers and their improvisations to judges' overall liking for the music. The benefits of using the CAT to assess music are also discussed.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1207/s15326934crj152&3_19

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

No references could be resolved yet.

Research works printed but not linked: 44

  1. Abeles, H. F. (1980). Responses to music. In D. A. Hodges (Ed.), Handbook of music psychology (pp. 105-140). Lawrence, KS: National Association for Music Therapy.
  2. Aldrich, V. C. (1963). Philosophy of art. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
  3. Amabile, T. M. (1983). The social psychology of creativity. New York: Springer-Verlag. · DOI
  4. Amabile, T. M. (1996). Creativity in context. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
  5. Amabile T. M., 1990, Creativity Research Journal, 3, 6, 10.1080/10400419009534330 · DOI
  6. Balkwill L. L., 1999, Music Perception, 17, 43, 10.2307/40285811 · DOI
  7. Belgrad, D. (1988). The culture of spontaneity: Improvisation and the arts in post-war America. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
  8. Berlyne, D. E. (1960). Conflict, arousal, and curiosity. New York: McGraw-Hill. · DOI
  9. Berlyne, D. E. (1974). Novelty, complexity, and interestingness. In D. E. Berlyne (Ed.), Studies in the new experimental aesthetics: Steps toward an objective psychology of aesthetic comparison (pp. 175-180). Washington: Hemisphere.
  10. Bragg, B. W. E. & Crozier, J. B. (1974). The development with age of verbal and exploratory responses to sound sequences varying in uncertainty level. In D. E. Berlyne (Ed.), Studies in the new experimental aesthetics: Steps toward an objective psychology of aesthetic comparison (pp. 91-108). Washington: Hemisphere.
  11. Brownell, J. (1994). Drum set improvisation: Towards a conceptual model. Unpublished master's thesis, York University.
  12. Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1988). Society, culture, and person: A systems view of creativity. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), The nature of creativity (pp. 325-339). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  13. Crozier, B. J. (1974). Verbal and exploratory responses to sound sequences varying in uncertainty level. In D. E. Berlyne (Ed.), Studies in the new experimental aesthetics: Steps toward an objective psychology of aesthetic comparison (pp. 27-90). Washington: Hemisphere.
  14. Deci, E. L. & Ryan, R. M. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human behavior. New York: Plenum. · DOI · Paper page
  15. Dissanayake, E. (1995). Homo aestheticus: Where art comes from and why. Washington: University of Washington Press.
  16. Dowling, W. J. & Harwood, D. L. (1986). Music cognition. Orlando: Academic Press.
  17. Dufrenne, M. (1979). Artistic creation. In M. Dufrenne (Ed.), Main trends in aesthetics and the sciences of art (pp. 202-236). New York: Holmes & Meier.
  18. Frances, R. (1979). The experimental approach. In M. Dufrenne (Ed.), Main trends in aesthetics and the sciences of art (pp. 104-113). New York: Holmes & Meier.
  19. Farnsworth, P. R. (1969). Social psychology of music. Ames: The Iowa State University Press.
  20. Gabrielsson, A. (1999). The performance of music. In Diana Deutsch (Ed.). The psychology of music (2nd ed., pp. 501-602). New York: Academic Press. · DOI
  21. Gridley, C. M. (1985). Jazz styles: History and analysis. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
  22. Hedenius, I. (1980). On the musically beautiful. In L. Aagaard-Mogensen & G. Hermeren (Eds.), Contemporary aesthetics in Scandinavia (pp. 57-80). Lund: Bokforlaget Doxa.
  23. Hennessey B. A., 1994, Creativity Research Journal, 7, 193, 10.1080/10400419409534524 · DOI
  24. Hodges, D. A. (1980). Neuropsychology and musical behavior. In D. A. Hodges (Ed.), Handbook of music psychology (pp. 195-224). Lawrence, KS: National Association for Music Therapy.
  25. 10.1037//0021-9010.69.2.307 · DOI
  26. Konecni, V. J. (1982). Social interaction and musical preference. In D. Deutsch (Ed.), The psychology of music (pp. 497-516). New York: Academic Press. · DOI
  27. McPherson G. E., 1993, Bulletin of the Council for Research in Music Education, 119, 11
  28. McPherson G. E., 1998, Research Studies in Music Education, 10, 12, 10.1177/1321103X9801000102 · DOI
  29. North A. C., 1996, Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 24, 491, 10.1111/j.1559-1816.1996.tb02727.x · DOI
  30. Nunnally, J. C. (1978). Psychometric theory (2nd ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
  31. Palmer, C. (1992). The role of interpretive preferences in music performance. In M. R. Jones & S. Holleran (Eds.), Cognitive bases of musical communication (pp. 249-262). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. · DOI
  32. 10.1146/annurev.psych.48.1.115 · DOI
  33. Pressing, J. (1984). Cognitive processes in improvisation. In W. R. Crozier & A. J. Chapman (Eds.), Cognitive processes in the perception of art (pp. 345-363). Amsterdam: Elsevier. · DOI
  34. Pressing J., 1987, Music Perception, 5, 133, 10.2307/40285390 · DOI
  35. Pressing, J. (1988). Improvisation: Methods and models. In J. A. Sloboda (Ed.), Generative processes in music: The psychology of performance, improvisation, and composition (pp. 129- 178). Oxford: Clarendon Press.
  36. Rentschler, I., Herzberger, B. & Epstein, D. (1988). Introduction. In I. Rentschler, B. Herzberger, & D. Epstein (Eds.), Beauty and the brain (pp. 9-11). Basel: Birkhauser Verlag. · DOI
  37. 10.1037//0003-066X.55.1.68 · DOI · Paper page
  38. Sawyer R. K., 1992, Creativity Research Journal, 5, 253, 10.1080/10400419209534439 · DOI
  39. 10.1037//0033-2909.86.2.420 · DOI · Paper page
  40. Simonton, D. K. (1988). Creativity, leadership, and chance. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), The nature of creativity (pp. 386-426). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  41. 10.1111/1467-9280.00345 · DOI
  42. Thompson W. F., 1998, Psychology of Music, 26, 154, 10.1177/0305735698262004 · DOI
  43. Wellek, A. (1979). The psychology of music hearing. In M. Dufrenne (Ed.), Main trends in aesthetics and the sciences of art (pp. 115-120). New York: Holmes & Meier.
  44. Yerkes R. M., 1908, Journal of Comparative Neurology and Psychology, 18, 459, 10.1002/cne.920180503 · DOI · Paper page

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Eisenberg, J., & Thompson, W. F.
ORCID
Venue
Creativity Research Journal
Publisher
Informa UK Limited
Published
2003-07-01
Volume
15
Issue
2
Pages
287-296
ISSN
1040-0419 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1207/s15326934crj152&3_19
OpenAlex
W2163248945
Cited by
69
References
0
Citations by year
2023: 33 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 3 · 2013: 2 · 2012: 3
FWCI
0.00
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Creativity Research Journal (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neuroscience and Music Perception
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Aesthetic Perception and Analysis
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Creativity in Education and Neuroscience
Keywords
musical improvisation, music assessment, aesthetic preference, perceived complexity, creativity, technical skills, intrinsic motivation, expert judges, Consensual Assessment Technique

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review