↓ Skip to main content

Music Communicates Affects, Not Basic Emotions – A Constructionist Account of Attribution of Emotional Meanings to Music

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, February 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 (87th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (84th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
26 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
79 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
229 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
Music Communicates Affects, Not Basic Emotions – A Constructionist Account of Attribution of Emotional Meanings to Music
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, February 2018
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00215
Pubmed ID
Authors

Julian Cespedes-Guevara, Tuomas Eerola

Abstract

Basic Emotion theory has had a tremendous influence on the affective sciences, including music psychology, where most researchers have assumed that music expressivity is constrained to a limited set of basic emotions. Several scholars suggested that these constrains to musical expressivity are explained by the existence of a shared acoustic code to the expression of emotions in music and speech prosody. In this article we advocate for a shift from this focus on basic emotions to a constructionist account. This approach proposes that the phenomenon of perception of emotions in music arises from the interaction of music's ability to express core affects and the influence of top-down and contextual information in the listener's mind. We start by reviewing the problems with the concept of Basic Emotions, and the inconsistent evidence that supports it. We also demonstrate how decades of developmental and cross-cultural research on music and emotional speech have failed to produce convincing findings to conclude that music expressivity is built upon a set of biologically pre-determined basic emotions. We then examine the cue-emotion consistencies between music and speech, and show how they support a parsimonious explanation, where musical expressivity is grounded on two dimensions of core affect (arousal and valence). Next, we explain how the fact that listeners reliably identify basic emotions in music does not arise from the existence of categorical boundaries in the stimuli, but from processes that facilitate categorical perception, such as using stereotyped stimuli and close-ended response formats, psychological processes of construction of mental prototypes, and contextual information. Finally, we outline our proposal of a constructionist account of perception of emotions in music, and spell out the ways in which this approach is able to make solve past conflicting findings. We conclude by providing explicit pointers about the methodological choices that will be vital to move beyond the popular Basic Emotion paradigm and start untangling the emergence of emotional experiences with music in the actual contexts in which they occur.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 26 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 229 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 229 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 28 12%
Student > Bachelor 27 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 25 11%
Student > Master 25 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 11 5%
Other 39 17%
Unknown 74 32%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 50 22%
Arts and Humanities 31 14%
Neuroscience 17 7%
Social Sciences 15 7%
Medicine and Dentistry 9 4%
Other 24 10%
Unknown 83 36%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 18. 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 08 November 2021.
All research outputs
#1,966,999
of 25,027,251 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#3,973
of 33,814 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#41,337
of 336,005 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#91
of 567 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,027,251 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 33,814 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.1. 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 336,005 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 567 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its contemporaries.