Icmpc 12 earworm talk- Lassi Liikkanen

  • View
    219

  • Download
    1

Embed Size (px)

Text of Icmpc 12 earworm talk- Lassi Liikkanen

  • 1. From characterization to understanding involuntary musical imagery Lassi Al LiikkanenICMPC-ESCOM 2012 Helsinki Institute for26.7.2012. Information Technology Aalto University & University of HelsinkiFinland

2. Congratulations!C t l ti ! For all present in the worlds first scientific assembly on research on involuntary musical imagery, or earworms.Wishing a great start for INMIresearchers!Understanding Involuntary Musical Imagery ICMPC-ESCOM 2012 Lassi.Liikkanen@Hiit.fi 27.7.2012 http://hiit.fi/lassial #lassial 2 3. This talk: Music in Mind 2007 study Background Central findings Work in progress and future workp gUnderstanding Involuntary Musical Imagery 3 ICMPC-ESCOM 2012Lassi.Liikkanen@Hiit.fi 27.7.2012http://hiit.fi/lassial #lassial 4. Music in Mind 2007: Findings published Liikkanen L (2012) Musical ActivitiesL.Predispose to Involuntary Musical Imagery.Psychology of Music 40(2) 236-256.236 256. ICMPC 2008 Liikkanen L (2012) Inducing involuntaryL.musical imagery: an experimental study.Musicae Scientiae 16(2) 217 234 217-234. ESCOM 2009Understanding Involuntary Musical Imagery 4 ICMPC-ESCOM 2012Lassi.Liikkanen@Hiit.fi 27.7.2012http://hiit.fi/lassial #lassial 5. MiM 2007: background Design inspired by Kellaris 20012001,2003 and Bennett, 2003 Intention to replicate in aggeneralizable wayyUnderstanding Involuntary Musical Imagery 5 ICMPC-ESCOM 2012Lassi.Liikkanen@Hiit.fi 27.7.2012http://hiit.fi/lassial #lassial 6. MiM 2007: study concept Web-based data administration andWeb basedcollection Experiential web survey designUnderstanding Involuntary Musical Imagery 6 ICMPC-ESCOM 2012Lassi.Liikkanen@Hiit.fi 27.7.2012http://hiit.fi/lassial #lassial 7. Understanding Involuntary Musical Imagery ICMPC-ESCOM 2012Lassi.Liikkanen@Hiit.fi 27.7.2012http://hiit.fi/lassial #lassial 7 8. MiM 2007: recruitment 3 months online 3 record store online,certificates raffled From university, through emailreferencingg Before FacebookUnderstanding Involuntary Musical Imagery 8 ICMPC-ESCOM 2012Lassi.Liikkanen@Hiit.fi 27.7.2012http://hiit.fi/lassial #lassial 9. Results: ParticipantsN% Music listening frequency N %All respondents 12519 4.9 % Never38 0.3 %Qualified respondents 1191095.1 % Seldom 10 0.1 %Monthly or less frequent183 1.515%Sex Weekly, not daily167814.1 %Women 8144 68.4 % Daily, < 2 hours 343728.9 %Men 3766 31.6 % Daily, 2-6 h 526944.2 %Daily > 6 h129510.9 %Age Average gg 27.8 years ySt. Dev.8.48 years Activities: playing, singing or composing music Never 425035.7 %Age groups (N=11904) Seldom 190 1.6 % < 25 y 4822 40.5 %Monthly or less frequent152112.8 % 25 - 30 y4154 34.9 %Weekly, not daily y y 317326.6 % 31 - 40 y1892 15.9 %Daily, < 2 hours201516.9 % > 40 y 10368.7 %Daily, 2-6 h 700 5.9 % Daily > 6 h 61 0.5 %Handedness (N=11887)Right10633 89.5 %Length of active musical training in the pastLeft 8186.9 %None376731.6 %Ambidexterous4363.7 %< 1 year226419.0 % 1-3 years 293124.6 %University staff or students3795 31.9 %4-10 years124210.4 %Hearing defect, neurological 9107.6 %10-15 years558 4.7 %disorder, CNS medication >15 years 1148 9.6 %Understanding Involuntary Musical Imagery 9 ICMPC-ESCOM 2012 Lassi.Liikkanen@Hiit.fi 27.7.2012 http://hiit.fi/lassial #lassial 10. Part I: Characterizing How common is INMI whatINMI,influences its frequency and what isthe experience alike?Understanding Involuntary Musical Imagery 10 ICMPC-ESCOM 2012Lassi.Liikkanen@Hiit.fi 27.7.2012http://hiit.fi/lassial #lassial 11. Frequency of INMI experiences35% 91%ofrespondents Men(N=3766)*30% atleastweeklydents Women(N=8144) ofallrespond25%20%33% 33% 33% 32%15%Proportiono 27% 24%*10%5%* 7%5% 3% 2% 0% 0%0%Severaltimesaday EverydayWeekly MonthlyMoreseldom NeverUnderstanding Involuntary Musical Imagery11 ICMPC-ESCOM 2012 Lassi.Liikkanen@Hiit.fi 27.7.2012 http://hiit.fi/lassial #lassial 12. What influences INMI frequency? Partial correlationsVariable p NPractice activity0.233 < .001 11904Listening activity 0.188 < .001 11899Length of musical practice * 0.036.001 8608Age -0.099 < .001 11899Self-assessed musicality 0.148 < .0012968Ease of foreign pronounciation 0.119 < .0012968Portable music player0.022>.05 2968*excluding musicians Controlling for music practice, listening, length of practice, and age groupUnderstanding Involuntary Musical Imagery 12 ICMPC-ESCOM 2012Lassi.Liikkanen@Hiit.fi 27.7.2012http://hiit.fi/lassial #lassial 13. Phemenology 100% Nonmusicianfemale 90% Musicianfemale 80% ndendts Nonmusicanmale 70% Musicianmale ofallrespon 60% 50%91% 92% 91% 91% 40%79% 77% 76% 75% 80% 80%Proportiono69% 70% 30%49% 20%34% 31% 33%P 25% 10% 16%16%9% 0% Unfamiliar,novel Unfamiliar, novel Instrumentalmusic Musicsanginnative Musicsanginforeign Familiar,previously Instrumental music Music sang in native Music sang in foreign Familiar, previously music(N=2967) (N=11845)language(N=11855) language(N=11857) headmusic(N=2970) Understanding Involuntary Musical Imagery13 ICMPC-ESCOM 2012 Lassi.Liikkanen@Hiit.fi 27.7.2012 http://hiit.fi/lassial #lassial 14. Part I More results in the POM paper Comparison to Semantic Involuntary memories Details about the phenomenologyUnderstanding Involuntary Musical Imagery 14 ICMPC-ESCOM 2012Lassi.Liikkanen@Hiit.fi 27.7.2012http://hiit.fi/lassial #lassial 15. Part II: Induction experiment QQuestions: ti1. Can you evoke INMI experiencesypwith an experimental manipulation?2.2 Is an earworm just a temporalextension of external stimulus?Understanding Involuntary Musical Imagery 15 ICMPC-ESCOM 2012Lassi.Liikkanen@Hiit.fi 27.7.2012http://hiit.fi/lassial #lassial 16. Greene (1986) J. Exp. Psy: LMC Hypotheses Recency hypothesisrelevant to INMIa) the most recent cfthe recent cf. recency effectb) Longer term recency ~ repeated musicalp primingUnderstanding Involuntary Musical Imagery 16 ICMPC-ESCOM 2012Lassi.Liikkanen@Hiit.fi 27.7.2012http://hiit.fi/lassial #lassial 17. Experimental method INMI i d ti using a cued-recall induction i d llmusical imagery task Variation of musical image scanning task (Halpern, 1988)( p)Understanding Involuntary Musical Imagery17 ICMPC-ESCOM 2012Lassi.Liikkanen@Hiit.fi 27.7.2012http://hiit.fi/lassial #lassial 18. Method 5 song lyric completion tasks Obla di, obla da, Rudolf the red-nosed reindeerUnderstanding Involuntary Musical Imagery 18 ICMPC-ESCOM 2012Lassi.Liikkanen@Hiit.fi 27.7.2012http://hiit.fi/lassial #lassial 19. Experimental Setup (most-) Recency manipulation:(most ) Order of song cues Long-term recency manipulation 2 sets of song cues: contemporary vs. classics Controlling for song familiarity Open ended Open-ended INMI Probe after a distractor taskUnderstanding Involuntary Musical Imagery19 ICMPC-ESCOM 2012Lassi.Liikkanen@Hiit.fi 27.7.2012http://hiit.fi/lassial #lassial 20. Induction resultsPercent of participants reporting INMI80.0 %68.268 2 %Cued70.0 %song60.0 %Other 49.7 % song50.0 %None40.0 % 32.0 %30.0 %18.6 %18.3 %20.0 %13.2 %10.010 0 % 0.0 %Exp. 1 Contemporary (N=991)Exp. 2 Classics (N=6524)Understanding Involuntary Musical Imagery 20 ICMPC-ESCOM 2012 Lassi.Liikkanen@Hiit.fi 27.7.2012 http://hiit.fi/lassial #lassial 21. Recency effect35%Average hit rate30%25%INM probability20%MI15%10%5%123 4 5Serial positionUnderstanding Involuntary Musical Imagery 21 ICMPC-ESCOM 2012Lassi.Liikkanen@Hiit.fi 27.7.2012http://hiit.fi/lassial #lassial 22. Central findings from MM2007 in brief:1.1 Establishing the wide acknowledgment of the INMI phenomenon2. Observing some regularities in the g g frequency of INMI * Replicating earlier findingsUnderstanding Involuntary Musical Imagery 22 ICMPC-ESCOM 2012Lassi.Liikkanen@Hiit.fi 27.7.2012http://hiit.fi/lassial #lassial 23. Central findings contcont.3.3 Witnessing considerable inter-inter individual variation4. Demonstrating the bias for experiencing contemporary songspgpyg as INMI5.5 Songs causing INMI vary a lotUnderstanding Involuntary Musical Imagery 23 ICMPC-ESCOM 2012Lassi.Liikkanen@Hiit.fi 27.7.2012http://hiit.fi/lassial #lassial 24. Current and Future workICMPC-ESCOM 201226.7.2012. 25. ICMPC-ESCOM Proc. paper Proc Content analysis of MM2007 open ended answers M S i Silf b Ms. Suvi Silfverberg (MA) Focusing on implications of g p INMI 1229 open ended responsesopen-ended without particular focusUnderstanding Involuntary Musical Imagery25 ICMPC-ESCOM 2012Lassi.Liikkanen@Hiit.fi 27.7.2012http://hiit.fi/lassial #lassial 26. INMI and Social life Categories of findings: Collective contagion Intentional & susceptibility Locus of social attention UnwantedUnderstanding Involuntary Musical Imagery 26 ICMPC-ESCOM 2012Lassi.Liikkanen@Hiit.fi 27.7.2012http://hiit.fi/lassial #lassial 27. Read more from the Proceedings Available from the internetUnderstanding Involuntary Musical Imagery 27 ICMPC-ESCOM 2012Lassi.Liikkanen@Hiit.fi 27.7.2012http://hiit.fi/lassial #lassial 28. Future work Earworm clinic in Facebook https://apps.facebook.com/earwormclinic/Understanding Involuntary Musical Imagery 28 ICMPC-ESCOM 2012Lassi.Liikkanen@Hiit.fi 27.7.2012http://hiit.fi/lassial #lassial 29. Future themes Prevention & coping strategies Parallels to clinical phenomena Implications to life outside your head Theory of How and WhyUnderstanding Involuntary Musical Imagery 29 ICMPC-ESCOM 2012Lassi.Liikkanen@Hiit.fi 27.7.2012http://hiit.fi/lassial #lassial 30. Theoretical questions: What is it? Can we reduce it to to Expectations? Mind-pops or ISMs? Obsessions? Is it epiphenomenal What if we could stop it?Understanding Involuntary Musical Imagery 30 ICMPC-ESCOM 2012Lassi.Liikkanen@Hiit.fi 27.7.2012http://hiit.fi/lassial #lassial 31. My expectations To move from characterizationto understanding involuntary musicalimageryUnderstanding Involuntary Musical Imagery 31 ICMPC-ESCOM 2012Lassi.Liikkanen@Hiit.fi 27.7.2012http://hiit.fi/lassial #lassial 32. Answer three questions: o What is INMI? o Why is INMI? oHHow t stop INMI? t