Analysis from multiple perspectives (AMP): Applying decision hygiene to analysis of musical structure.

IF 1.7 3区 心理学 0 MUSIC
Musicae Scientiae Pub Date : 2025-12-28 eCollection Date: 2026-03-01 DOI:10.1177/10298649251385727
Max Delle Grazie, Cameron J Anderson, Jonathan De Souza, Michael Schutz
{"title":"Analysis from multiple perspectives (AMP): Applying decision hygiene to analysis of musical structure.","authors":"Max Delle Grazie, Cameron J Anderson, Jonathan De Souza, Michael Schutz","doi":"10.1177/10298649251385727","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Music analysis is a complex and subjective task requiring a considerable degree of judgment on questions often lacking verifiable answers. In many cases, this subjectivity leads to seemingly intractable disagreements. Although disagreements can offer useful insight, whether they represent genuine differences in perspective is not always clear. To contribute to this challenging aspect of music analysis, here we introduce a procedure inspired by recommendations for improving decision making in other domains lacking verifiable answers, such as judicial sentencing. Our approach involves a 3-phase procedure, combining independent analyses with information sharing and re-evaluation among five graduate-level music analysts. We show that this procedure reduces self-identified errors/oversights in music analysis while preserving meaningful differences in perspective. As a proof of concept, we apply this procedure to 381 excerpts from 16 historic sets of preludes to assess <i>relative mode</i>, a complex musical property alluded to in previous scholarship but never formally explored in theoretical applications. This procedure (yielding complementary qualitative and quantitative data) demonstrates how a new, group-based approach to music analysis can offer insights unavailable from more traditional single-scholar approaches.</p>","PeriodicalId":47219,"journal":{"name":"Musicae Scientiae","volume":"30 1","pages":"27-50"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-12-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12981565/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Musicae Scientiae","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10298649251385727","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/3/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"0","JCRName":"MUSIC","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Music analysis is a complex and subjective task requiring a considerable degree of judgment on questions often lacking verifiable answers. In many cases, this subjectivity leads to seemingly intractable disagreements. Although disagreements can offer useful insight, whether they represent genuine differences in perspective is not always clear. To contribute to this challenging aspect of music analysis, here we introduce a procedure inspired by recommendations for improving decision making in other domains lacking verifiable answers, such as judicial sentencing. Our approach involves a 3-phase procedure, combining independent analyses with information sharing and re-evaluation among five graduate-level music analysts. We show that this procedure reduces self-identified errors/oversights in music analysis while preserving meaningful differences in perspective. As a proof of concept, we apply this procedure to 381 excerpts from 16 historic sets of preludes to assess relative mode, a complex musical property alluded to in previous scholarship but never formally explored in theoretical applications. This procedure (yielding complementary qualitative and quantitative data) demonstrates how a new, group-based approach to music analysis can offer insights unavailable from more traditional single-scholar approaches.

多角度分析(AMP):将决策卫生学应用于音乐结构分析。
音乐分析是一项复杂而主观的任务,需要对缺乏可证实答案的问题进行相当程度的判断。在许多情况下,这种主观性导致了看似棘手的分歧。尽管分歧可以提供有用的见解,但它们是否代表观点上的真正差异并不总是很清楚。为了对音乐分析的这一具有挑战性的方面做出贡献,我们在这里引入了一个程序,该程序的灵感来自于在缺乏可验证答案的其他领域(如司法量刑)改进决策的建议。我们的方法包括三个阶段的程序,将独立分析与信息共享和五位研究生级别的音乐分析师的重新评估相结合。我们表明,这一过程减少了音乐分析中自我识别的错误/疏忽,同时保留了观点上有意义的差异。作为概念证明,我们将这一过程应用于16组历史前奏曲的381个节选,以评估相对模式,这是一种复杂的音乐属性,在以前的学术研究中提到过,但从未在理论应用中正式探索过。这一过程(产生互补的定性和定量数据)展示了一种新的、基于群体的音乐分析方法是如何提供传统的单一学者方法所无法获得的见解的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Musicae Scientiae
Musicae Scientiae Multiple-
CiteScore
4.50
自引率
8.30%
发文量
21
期刊介绍: MUSICAE SCIENTIAE is the trilingual journal, official organ of ESCOM, published with the financial support of the Belgian Science Policy.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书