Restricted accessResearch articleFirst published online 2022-10
The Effect of Register,Direction,and Magnitude on Musicians’ Evaluations of Chamber Ensemble Intonation: A Within-Study Comparison for Analysis of Repeated Measures
This study had two primary purposes: (1) to investigate the effect of register, direction, and magnitude on musicians’ evaluation of chamber ensemble intonation, and (2) determine whether a novel nonparametric technique, ordinal pattern analysis (OPA), was a viable alternative to repeated-measures analysis of variance (rANOVA). I digitally mastered a recording of a string quartet performing a phrase from Capriol Suite by altering the intonation of the violin or cello voice ±20 and 30 cents sharp and flat. Participants (N = 72) completed a discrimination task and an evaluation task with the recordings, with task order, and within-task item order presented in a random order. Analysis using rANOVA revealed significant differences due to register, direction, and magnitude: Excerpts with cello errors were rated as more in tune than excerpts with violin errors; excerpts with flat errors were rated as more in tune than excerpts with sharp errors, and excerpts with 20-cent magnitude errors were rated as more in tune than excerpts with 30-cent magnitude errors. OPA results were consistent with rANOVA results. Substantive implications for music teaching and learning are discussed alongside methodological considerations and implications for music education research using repeated-measures designs.
BakermanR. (2005). Recommended effect size statistics for repeated measures designs. Behavior Research Methods, 37, 379–384. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03192707
2.
BallardD. L. (2011). Relationships between college-level wind instrumentalists’ achievement in intonation perception and performance. Bulletin of the Council for Research in Music Education, 187, 19–32. https://www.jstor.org/stable/41162321
3.
BergeeM. J. (2003). Faculty interjudge reliability of music performance evaluation. Journal of Research in Music Education, 51(2), 137–150. https://doi.org/10.2307/3345847
4.
BergeeM. J. (2015). A theoretical structure of high school concert band performance. Journal of Research in Music Education, 63(2), 145–161. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022429415585959
5.
BergeeM. J.RossinE. G. (2019). Development and validation of a scale assessing midlevel band performance: A mixed methods study. Journal of Research in Music Education, 67(2), 214–232. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022429418825144
6.
BifulcoR. (2012). Can nonexperimental estimates replicate estimates based on random assignment in evaluations of school choice? A within-study comparison. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 31(3), 1–23. https://doi.org/10.1002/pam.20637
7.
BrittinR. V. (1993). Effects of upper and lower-register accompaniment on intonation. Journal of Band Research, 29(1), 43–50.
8.
ByoJ. L.SchlegelA. L. (2016). Effects of stimulus octave and timbre on the tuning accuracy of advanced college instrumentalists. Journal of Research in Music Education, 64(3), 344–359. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022429416662451
9.
ByoJ. L.SchlegelA. L.ClarkN. A. (2011). Effects of stimulus octave and timbre on the tuning accuracy of secondary school instrumentalists. Journal of Research in Music Education, 58(4), 316–328. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022429410386230
CohenB. (2013). Explaining psychological statistics (4th ed.). John Wiley.
12.
ElyM. C. (1992). Effects of timbre on college woodwind players’ intonation performance and perception. Journal of Research in Music Education, 40(2), 158–167. https://doi.org/10.2307/3345565
13.
GeringerJ. M. (1978). Intonational performance and perception of ascending scalar patterns. Journal of Research in Music Education, 26(1), 32–40. https://doi.org/10.2307/3344787
14.
GeringerJ. M. (2018). Eight artist-level violinists performing unaccompanied Bach: Are there consistent tuning patterns?String Research Journal, 8, 51–61. https://doi.org/10.1177/1948499218769657
15.
GeringerJ. M.MacLeodR. B.MadsenC. K.NapolesJ. (2014). Perception of melodic intonation in performances with and without vibrato. Psychology of Music, 43(5), 675–685. https://doi.org/10.1177/0305735614534004
16.
GeringerJ. M.MacLeodR. B.SasanfarJ. K. (2012). High school string players’ perception of violin, trumpet, and voice intonation. String Research Journal, 3, 81–96. https://doi.org/10.1177/194849921200300106
17.
GeringerJ. M.MacLeodR. B.SasanfarJ. K. (2015). In tune or out of tune: Are different instruments and voice heard differently?Journal of Research in Music Education, 63(1), 89–101. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022429415572025
18.
GeringerJ. M.MadsenC. K. (1998). Musicians’ ratings of good versus bad vocal and string performances. Journal of Research in Music Education, 46(4), 522–534. https://doi.org/10.2307/3345348
GeringerJ. M.WorthyM. D. (1999). Effects of tone-quality changes on intonation and tone-quality ratings of high school and college instrumentalists. Journal of Research in Music Education, 47(2), 135–149. https://doi.org/10.2307/3345719
GriceJ. W. (2011). Observation oriented modeling: Analysis of cause in the behavioral sciences. Academic Press.
23.
GriceJ. W. (2014). Observation oriented modeling: Preparing students for the research in the 21st century. Innovative Teaching, 3, Article 3. https://doi.org/10.2466/05.08.IT.3.3
24.
GriceJ. W.CraigD. P. A.AbramsonC. I. (2015). A simple and transparent alternative to repeated measures ANOVA. SAGE Open, 5(3), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244015604192
25.
GueorguievaR.KrystalJ. H. (2004). Move over ANOVA: Progress in analyzing repeated-measures data and its reflection in papers published in theArchives of General Psychiatry. Archives of General Psychiatry, 61(3), 310–317. https://doi.org/10.1001/archpsyc.61.3.310
26.
JohnsonC.GeringerJ. (2007). Predicting music majors’ overall ratings of wind band performances: Elements of music. Bulletin of the Council for Research in Music Education, 173, 25–38. http://www.jstor.org/stable/40319468
27.
KeselmanH. J.AlginaJ.KowalchukR. K. (2001). The analysis of repeated measures designs: A review. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 54(1), 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1348/000711001159357
28.
KeselmanH. J.HubertyC. J.LixL. M.OlejnikS.CribbieR. A.DonahueB.KowalchukR. K.LowmanL. L.PetoskeyM. D.KeselmanJ. C.LevinJ. R. (1998). Statistical practices of educational researchers: An analysis of their ANOVA, MANOVA, and ANCOVA analyses. Review of Educational Research, 68(3), 350–386. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543068003350
29.
KopiezR. (2003). Intonation of harmonic intervals: Adaptability of expert musicians to equal temperament and just intonation. Music Perception, 20(4), 383–410. https://doi.org/10.1525/mp.2003.20.4.383
30.
KrogerC.MargulisE. H. (2017). “But they told me it was professional”: Extrinsic factors in the evaluation of musical performance. Psychology of Music, 45(1), 49–64. https://doi.org/10.1177/0305735616642543
31.
KrumhanslC. L.IversonP. (1992). Perceptual interactions between musical pitch and timbre. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 18(3), 739–751. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1037/0096-1523.18.3.739
32.
LatimerM. E.Jr.BergeeM. J.CohenM. L. (2010). Reliability and perceived pedagogical utility of a weighted music performance assessment rubric. Journal of Research in Music Education, 58(2), 168–183. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022429410369836
33.
LeukelW.StofferT. (2004). The influence of harmonic context on the tuning of thirds played by professional flautists. Psychology of Music, 32(1), 75–88. https://doi.org/10.1177/0305735604039283
34.
LoosenF. (1995). The effect of musical experience on the conception of accurate tuning. Music Perception, 12(3), 291–306. https://doi.org/10.2307/40286185
35.
MacLeodR. B.GeringerJ. M.MillerD. S. (2022). The effect of wearing foam and etymotic earplugs on classical musicians’ pitch perception. Journal of Research in Music Education, 69(4), 444–456. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022429421989993
36.
MadsenC. K.GeringerJ. M. (1981). Discrimination between tone quality and intonation in unaccompanied flute/oboe duets. Journal of Research in Music Education, 29(4), 305–313. https://doi.org/10.2307/3345006
37.
MadsenC. K.GeringerJ. M. (1990). Differential patterns of music listening: Focus of attention of musicians versus nonmusicians. Bulletin of the Council for Research in Music Education, 105, 45–57. https://www.jstor.org/stable/40318390
38.
MadsenC. K.GeringerJ. M.FredricksonW. E. (1997). Focus of attention to musical elements in Haydn’s Symphony #104. Bulletin of the Council for Research in Music Education, 133, 57–63. https://www.jstor.org/stable/40318840
39.
MadsenC. K.GeringerJ. M.HellerJ. (1991). Comparison of good versus bad intonation of accompanied and unaccompanied vocal and string performances using a continuous response digital interface (CRDI). Canadian Music Educator: Special Research Edition, 33, 123–130.
40.
MadsenC. K.GeringerJ. M.HellerJ. (1993). Comparison of good versus bad tone quality of accompanied and unaccompanied vocal and string performances. Bulletin of the Council for Research in Music Education, 119, 93–100. https://www.jstor.org/stable/40318617
MasonJ. A. (1960). Comparison of solo and ensemble performances with reference to Pythagorean, just, and equi-tempered intonations. Journal of Research in Music Education, 8(1), 31–38. https://doi.org/10.2307/3344235
MaxwellS. E. (2004). The persistence of underpowered studies in psychological research: Causes, consequences, and remedies. Psychological Methods, 9(2), 147–163. https://doi.org/10.1037/1082-989X.9.2.147
45.
McCallR. B.AppelbaumM. I. (1973). Bias in the analysis of repeated-measures designs: Some alternative approaches. Child Development, 44(3), 401–415. http://www.jstor.org/stable/1127993
MelaraR. D.MarksL. E. (1990). Perceptual primacy of dimensions: Support for a model of dimensional interaction. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 16(2), 398–414. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-1523.16.2.398
48.
MicheylC.DelhommeauK.PerrotX.OxenhamA. J. (2006). Influence of musical and psychoacoustical training on pitch discrimination. Hearing Research, 219(1–2), 36–47. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heares.2006.05.004
49.
MikszaP.RoederM.BiggsD. (2010). Surveying Colorado band directors’ opinions of skills and characteristics important to successful music teaching. Journal of Research in Music Education, 57(4), 364–381. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022429409351655
50.
NápolesJ.SpringerD. G.SilveyB. A.AdamsK. (2019). Effects of pitch source on pitch-matching and intonation accuracy of collegiate singers. Journal of Research in Music Education, 67(3), 270–285. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022429419863034
51.
NickersonJ. F. (1949). Intonation of solo and ensemble performance of the same melody. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 21, 593–595. https://doi.org/10.1121/1.1906555
52.
O’BrienR. G.KaiserM. K. (1985). MANOVA method for analyzing repeated measures designs: An extensive Primer. Psychological Bulletin, 97(2), 316–333. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.97.2.316
53.
OlejnikS.AlginaJ. (2003). Generalized eta and omega squared statistics: Measures of effect size for some common research designs. Psychological Methods, 8(4), 434–447. https://doi.org/10.1037/1082-989X.8.4.434
54.
OverlandC. T. (2014). Statistical power in the Journal of Research in Music Education (A retrospective power analysis. Bulletin of the Council for Research in Music Education, 201, 43–59. https://doi.org/10.5406/bulcouresmusedu.201.0043
55.
PittM. A. (1994). Perception of pitch and timbre by musically trained and untrained listeners. The Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 20(5), 976–986. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-1523.20.5.976
56.
PlattJ. R.RacineR. J. (1985). Effect of frequency, timbre, experience, and feedback on musical tuning skills. Perception & Psychophysics, 38, 543–553. https://doi.org/10.3758/bf03207064
57.
RaschR. A. (1985). Perception of melodic and harmonic intonation of two-part musical fragments. Music Perception, 2(4), 441–458. https://doi.org/10.2307/40285312
58.
RussoF.ThompsonW. F. (2005). An interval size illusion: The influence of timbre on the perceived size of melodic intervals. Perception & Psychophysics, 67, 559–568. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03193514
59.
St. ClairT.CookT. D.HallbergK. (2016). The validity and precision of the comparative interrupted time-series design: Three within-study comparisons. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 41(3), 269–299. https://doi.org/10.3102/1076998616636854
60.
SchlegelA. L.SpringerD. G. (2018). Effects of accurate and inaccurate visual feedback on the tuning accuracy of high school and college trombonists. International Journal of Music Education, 36(3), 394–406. https://doi.org/10.1177/0255761418763914
61.
SmithB. P.BarnesG. V. (2007). Development and validation of an orchestra performance rating scale. Journal of Research in Music Education, 55(3), 268–280. https://doi.org/10.1177/002242940705500307
62.
SpringerD. G.SchlegelA. L.LewisA. J. (2021). Effects of dark and bright timbral instructions on the production of pitch and timbre. Journal of Research in Music Education, 68(4), 482–498. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022429420944347
63.
SpringerD. G.SilveyB. A. (2018). The role of accompaniment quality in the evaluation of solo instrumental performance. Journal of Research in Music Education, 66(1), 92–110. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022429418761044
TrendlerG. (2009). Measurement theory, psychology and the revolution that cannot happen. Theory & Psychology, 19(5), 579–599. https://doi.org/10.1177/0959354309341926
66.
ValentineK. D.BuchananE. M.ScofieldJ. E. (2019). Beyond p values: Utilizing multiple methods to evaluate evidence. Behaviormetrika, 46, 121–144. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41237-019-00078-4
67.
VaseyM. W.ThayerJ. F. (1987). The continuing problem of false positives in repeated measures ANOVA in. Psychophysiology: A Multivariate Solution. Psychophysiology, 24(4), 479–486. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8986.1987.tb00324.x
68.
VurmaA.RajuM.KuudaA. (2012). Does timbre affect pitch? Estimations by musicians and non-musicians. Psychology of Music, 39(3), 291–306. https://doi.org/10.1177/0305735610373602
69.
WapnickJ.FreemanP. (1980). Effects of dark-bright timbral variation on the perception of flatness and sharpness. Journal of Research in Music Education, 28(3), 176–184. https://doi.org/10.2307/3345235
70.
WarrierC. M.ZatorreR. J. (2002). Influence of tonal context and timbral variation on perception of pitch. Perception & Psychophysics, 64, 198–207. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03195786
71.
WassersteinR. L.LazarN. A. (2016). The ASA statement on p-values: Context, process, and purpose. The American Statistician, 70(2), 129–133. https://doi.org/10.1080/00031305.2016.1154108
WorthyM. D. (2000). Effects of tone-quality conditions on perception and performance of pitch among selected wind instrumentalists. Journal of Research in Music Education, 48(3), 222–236. https://doi.org/10.2307/3345395
74.
YarbroughC.MorrisonS. J.KarrickB. (1997). The effect of experience, private instruction, and knowledge of directional mistunings on the tuning performance and perception of high school wind players. Bulletin of the Council for Research in Music Education, 134, 31–42. https://www.jstor.org/stable/40318878
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
