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.