↓ Skip to main content

Modeling Music Emotion Judgments Using Machine Learning Methods

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, January 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (90th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (83rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
21 X users
patent
1 patent
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
22 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
57 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Modeling Music Emotion Judgments Using Machine Learning Methods
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, January 2018
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.02239
Pubmed ID
Authors

Naresh N. Vempala, Frank A. Russo

Abstract

Emotion judgments and five channels of physiological data were obtained from 60 participants listening to 60 music excerpts. Various machine learning (ML) methods were used to model the emotion judgments inclusive of neural networks, linear regression, and random forests. Input for models of perceived emotion consisted of audio features extracted from the music recordings. Input for models of felt emotion consisted of physiological features extracted from the physiological recordings. Models were trained and interpreted with consideration of the classic debate in music emotion between cognitivists and emotivists. Our models supported a hybrid position wherein emotion judgments were influenced by a combination of perceived and felt emotions. In comparing the different ML approaches that were used for modeling, we conclude that neural networks were optimal, yielding models that were flexible as well as interpretable. Inspection of a committee machine, encompassing an ensemble of networks, revealed that arousal judgments were predominantly influenced by felt emotion, whereas valence judgments were predominantly influenced by perceived emotion.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 21 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 57 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 57 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 12 21%
Student > Master 8 14%
Student > Bachelor 5 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 5%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 4%
Other 6 11%
Unknown 21 37%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 10 18%
Arts and Humanities 5 9%
Computer Science 4 7%
Engineering 4 7%
Social Sciences 3 5%
Other 8 14%
Unknown 23 40%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 19. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 04 July 2023.
All research outputs
#2,026,235
of 26,230,991 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#4,145
of 35,114 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#44,064
of 455,145 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#90
of 532 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,230,991 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 35,114 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.7. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 455,145 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 532 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.