Music Preference 1 - Brent Hugh's personal and business web pages

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Music Preference 42 who know relatively little about music and to musicians uncomfortable with public speaking. Such individuals should not let these deficiencies dissuade them from giving introductions to musical selections. If the educator or musician can create a brief informational introduction that engages and interests the audience, this introduction is likely to have a positive influence on the audience's preference for the musical work introduced. Question 3: Are music preferences of younger audience members affected in a different way by informational presentations than music preferences of older audience members? Recital Audiences Method. Respondents from group RA (n = 234) were divided into four age groups: RA1: age 6 through 20 (n = 74) RA2: age 21 through 40 (n = 54) RA3: age 41 through 60 (n = 72) RA4: age 61 through 80 (n = 34) Within each age group, the size of the subgroups receiving different treatments was equalized by randomly removing respondents from larger groups, so that the latin-square design of the experiment was valid for each age group. Results. Analyzing these age subgroups using repeated measures ANOVA with two-way interaction showed that there was a significant difference in response to treatment ID from different age groups (see Table 10). The ages 6-20 showed a strong increase in preference ratings due to treatment ID, ages 21-40 showed an increase just slightly less, age 41-60 showed a fairly strong decrease in preference ratings, and ages 61-80 showed a slight decrease in preference ratings (see Table 11 and Figure 2).
School audiences. Music Preference 43 The responses from the school groups (LE, UE, MS, and HS) were analyzed by age. Treatment ID increased mean preference ratings of younger students more than those of older students (see Table 13 and Figure 3). However, analysis of the school group data using repeated measures ANOVA with two-way interaction indicates the age differences among the school groups do not rise to the level of significance (see Table 12). Discussion Recital Audiences. The results support the aging stability model of attitude change for the type of music preference measured in this study and for the recital audiences (group RA). Music preference attitudes seem to be more amenable to change for younger subjects and, with age, attitudes become gradually more hardened and difficult to influence. This finding is in contrast to finding of previous research, which suggested that the impressionable years model of music preference holds in all areas of musical preference. The impressionable years model clearly does not hold for group RA: Audience members age 21-40 are not set in their preferences; their preference rating rose by 0.26 (6.5%) as a result of the treatment, which is greater than the mean rise in preference ratings for the community concert audience as a whole and greater than the mean rise in preference ratings for the school groups as a whole. The negative response of group RA3 (age 41-60) to treatment ID is perhaps due to the change the treatment introduces to the usual routine of recitals, which normally include music only and no discussion. This age group may be socialized to expect a kind of classical music recital that includes music only and no other interaction of the audience with the performer and may have rather set attitudes about this format. Interestingly, though, data from free-response
Page 1 and 2: Can Musicians Alter the Music Prefe
Page 3 and 4: The Musician Introduction Why Influ
Page 5 and 6: Music Preference 5 across musical g
Page 7 and 8: Music Preference 7 easier to manipu
Page 9 and 10: Music Preference 9 training and hig
Page 11 and 12: Music Preference 11 listening group
Page 13 and 14: Music Preference 13 4. Are there mu
Page 15 and 16: Music Preference 15 Stipp (1990) ag
Page 17 and 18: Music Preference 17 Berkeley, 1997)
Page 19 and 20: Music Preference 19 is the hardenin
Page 21 and 22: Music Preference 21 less. It simply
Page 23 and 24: Music Preference 23 greater depth.
Page 25 and 26: Music Preference 25 may develop a d
Page 27 and 28: Music Preference 27 results in the
Page 29 and 30: Music Preference 29 Presentations i
Page 31 and 32: Music Preference 31 21-80, 53% indi
Page 33 and 34: Music Preference 33 Considering the
Page 35 and 36: Music Preference 35 applied to each
Page 37 and 38: Questions Music Preference 37 Quest
Page 39 and 40: Music Preference 39 "Performer was
Page 41: Music Preference 41 Equally remarka
Page 45 and 46: Music Preference 45 the students ar
Page 47 and 48: Music Preference 47 Question 4: Do
Page 49 and 50: Music Preference 49 concert was hel
Page 51 and 52: Music Preference 51 4. For some sub
Page 53 and 54: Music Preference 53 correct, audien
Page 55 and 56: Table 1 Age Distribution of Recital
Page 57 and 58: Table 3 Latin-Square Experimental D
Page 63 and 64: Table 9 Music Preference 63 Repeate
Page 65 and 66: Table 11 Preference Ratings by Age
Page 67 and 68: Table 13 Preference Ratings by Age
Page 69 and 70: Table 15 Music Preference 69 Elemen
Page 71 and 72: Table 17 Music Preference 71 Intera
Page 73 and 74: Preference Rating 4.4 4.2 4.0 3.8 3
Page 75 and 76: WORKS CITED Music Preference 75 Alp
Page 77 and 78: Music Preference 77 Fung, C. K. V.
Page 79 and 80: Music Preference 79 LeBlanc, A., Co
Page 81 and 82: Music Preference 81 Rubin D. C., Ra
Page 83 and 84: Appendix A Outlines of Information
Page 85 and 86: Outline of informational introducti
Page 87 and 88: Music Preference 87 The final movem
Page 89 and 90: Music Preference 89
Page 91 and 92: Music Preference 91
Page 93 and 94:
Music Preference 93
Page 95:
Appendix E Recital program used for
show all

Music Preference 1 - Brent Hugh's personal and business web pages

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?