| Literature DB >> 34789746 |
Anna Czepiel1, Lauren K Fink2,3, Lea T Fink2, Melanie Wald-Fuhrmann2,3, Martin Tröndle4, Julia Merrill2,5.
Abstract
While there is an increasing shift in cognitive science to study perception of naturalistic stimuli, this study extends this goal to naturalistic contexts by assessing physiological synchrony across audience members in a concert setting. Cardiorespiratory, skin conductance, and facial muscle responses were measured from participants attending live string quintet performances of full-length works from Viennese Classical, Contemporary, and Romantic styles. The concert was repeated on three consecutive days with different audiences. Using inter-subject correlation (ISC) to identify reliable responses to music, we found that highly correlated responses depicted typical signatures of physiological arousal. By relating physiological ISC to quantitative values of music features, logistic regressions revealed that high physiological synchrony was consistently predicted by faster tempi (which had higher ratings of arousing emotions and engagement), but only in Classical and Romantic styles (rated as familiar) and not the Contemporary style (rated as unfamiliar). Additionally, highly synchronised responses across all three concert audiences occurred during important structural moments in the music-identified using music theoretical analysis-namely at transitional passages, boundaries, and phrase repetitions. Overall, our results show that specific music features induce similar physiological responses across audience members in a concert context, which are linked to arousal, engagement, and familiarity.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2021 PMID: 34789746 PMCID: PMC8599424 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-021-00492-3
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Rep ISSN: 2045-2322 Impact factor: 4.379
Figure 1Inter-subject correlation (ISC) across concerts and bars of high- and low-synchrony. (a) ISC time courses for heart rate (HR, row 1), respiration rate (RR, row 2), skin conductance response (SCR, row 3), and electromyography activity of zygomaticus major (‘smiling’) muscle (EMG, row 4) for concert 1. Moments of high and low synchrony are marked with red and black dots, respectively. Red lines signify the 20th percentile threshold, while black lines signify the 20th percentile centred around r = 0. (b) Average high synchrony (HS) versus low synchrony (LS) of each physiological measure and concert. Moments of high and low synchrony are marked with solid and dotted lines, respectively. Four musical bars precede (− 4 to 0) and follow (4–8) correlation windows (highlighted in blue box) with high ISC value starting from the first bar of correlation (bar0) to last bar of correlation window (bar4).
ANOVA tests for linear models comparing physiology in 5 bar windows for Synchrony (HS/LS) across correlation windows in terms of Bar (0–4), calculated with the Anova function from the car package in R.
| Concert | df | HR | RR | SCR | EMG | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| F | F | F | F | ||||||
| Synchrony | 1 | 5.146 | 0.023 | ||||||
| Bar | 4 | ||||||||
| Synch. × Bar | 4 | 3.336 | 0.010 | 2.190 | 0.068 | ||||
| Synchrony | 1 | 8.045 | 0.005 | ||||||
| Bar | 4 | 1.743 | 0.137 | ||||||
| Synch. × Bar | 4 | 0.846 | 0.495 | ||||||
| Synchrony | 1 | ||||||||
| Bar | 4 | 3.739 | 0.005 | ||||||
| Synch. × Bar | 4 | ||||||||
Bonferroni-corrected threshold for significant effect was 0.05/12 = 0.004. Values highlighted in bold are statistically significant after Bonferroni corrections for multiple comparisons.
Pairwise comparisons of linear models comparing physiology in 5 bar windows for Synchrony (HS/LS) across correlation windows in terms of Bar (0–4).
| Pairwise comparison | HR | RR | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Estimate | Estimate | |||||||||
| HS–LS | − 0.010 | 0.007 | 4000 | − 1.504 | 0.133 | |||||
| HS: bar0–bar4 | − 0.052 | 0.016 | 4220 | − 3.315 | 0.042 | |||||
| LS: bar0–bar4 | 0.016 | 0.016 | 4220 | 0.997 | 1.00 | − 0.004 | 0.015 | 4000 | − 0.273 | 1.00 |
| HS–LS | 0.002 | 0.006 | 3705 | − 0.256 | 0.798 | |||||
| HS: bar0–bar4 | − 0.040 | 0.015 | 4225 | − 2.415 | 0.710 | |||||
| LS: bar0–bar4 | − 0.003 | 0.015 | 4225 | − 0.193 | 1.0000 | 0.013 | 0.015 | 3705 | 0.837 | 0.998 |
| HS–LS | ||||||||||
| HS: bar0–bar4 | − 0.062 | 0.012 | 4195 | − 3.217 | 0.060 | |||||
| LS: bar0–bar4 | 0.0170 | 0.019 | 4195 | 0.880 | 1.00 | 0.041 | 0.018 | 3810 | 2.248 | 0.424 |
HS–LS denotes the overall difference between HS and LS windows. Bar0–bar4 denotes the difference between the beginning and the end of the window separately in HS and LS windows. Contrasts (Bonferroni adjusted) were calculated with emmeans package in R. Values highlighted in bold are statistically significant after Bonferroni corrections for multiple comparisons.
Logistic regressions for single physiological measure of respiration rate, skin conductance and heart rate synchrony per piece across all concerts (C1, C2, and C3).
| Beethoven | Dean | Brahms | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Estimate | SE | Estimate | SE | Estimate | SE | ||||
| C1 | |||||||||
| (Intercept) | − 1.211 | 0.897 | 0.177 | 1.059 | 2.150 | 0.6222 | − 0.728 | 1.255 | 0.562 |
| Tempo | 0.003 | 0.009 | 0.707 | ||||||
| RMS | − 22.457 | 15.574 | 0.149 | − 6.563 | 15.577 | 0.673 | |||
| S. centroid | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.439 | − 0.000 | 0.006 | 0.559 | − 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.809 |
| Key clarity | − 0.151 | 1.114 | 0.891 | − 5.708 | 2.109 | 0.007 | − 1.218 | 1.569 | 0.438 |
| C2 | |||||||||
| (Intercept) | − 0.343 | 1.034 | 0.740 | 2.376 | 1.898 | 0.211 | − 1.451 | 1.297 | 0.263 |
| Tempo | − 0.006 | 0.009 | 0.502 | ||||||
| RMS | 0.610 | 17.630 | 0.972 | 58.895 | 39.231 | 0.133 | − 17.878 | 17.983 | 0.320 |
| S. centroid | − 0.001 | 0.000 | 0.047 | − 0.001 | 0.001 | 0.049 | − 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.495 |
| Key clarity | − 0.371 | 1.111 | 0.738 | − 0.305 | 2.017 | 0.880 | − 1.089 | 1.713 | 0.525 |
| C3 | |||||||||
| (Intercept) | − 1.614 | 0.953 | 0.090 | − 0.320 | 1.521 | 0.833 | − 0.3972 | 1.134 | 0.726 |
| Tempo | 0.007 | 0.003 | 0.016 | 0.004 | 0.007 | 0.537 | 0.008 | 0.003 | 0.0188 |
| RMS | 23.926 | 15.481 | 0.122 | 33.370 | 34.602 | 0.335 | − 22.432 | 15.333 | 0.143 |
| S. centroid | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.618 | − 0.0002 | 0.001 | 0.628 | − 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.384 |
| Key clarity | 0.947 | 1.187 | 0.425 | − 0.478 | 1.685 | 0.777 | 0.929 | 1.415 | 0.511 |
Synchrony (HS = 1, LS = 0) was the dependent variable, and tempo, key clarity, loudness, and spectral centroid (s. centroid) from the HS and LS bars as continuous predictors. The Bonferroni-corrected critical p value is 05/36 = 0.0014. Values highlighted in bold are statistically significant after Bonferroni corrections for multiple comparisons.
Figure 2Logistic regression models with all music features (RMS, tempo, spectral centroid and key clarity) predicting high (1) versus low (0) synchrony across listeners, with probability curve of predictor tempo. Columns indicate physiological measures of interest. Rows indicate each piece performed in each of the three concerts (indicated by line style). Here, we highlight the ability of tempo to predict synchrony. For full model results for all acoustic features, see Tables 3 and 4.
Logistic regressions for combined respiration rate and skin conductance response synchrony per piece across all concerts.
| Beethoven | Dean | Brahms | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Estimate | SE | Estimate | SE | Estimate | SE | ||||
| (Intercept) | − 0.880 | 2.106 | 0.676 | 12.646 | 11.099 | 0.254 | − 6.255 | 4.129 | 0.130 |
| Tempo | 0.014 | 0.007 | 0.039 | − 0.036 | 0.049 | 0.461 | |||
| RMS | 82.658 | 39.948 | 0.038 | 535.054 | 277.231 | 0.054 | − 7.109 | 36.676 | 0.8463 |
| S. centroid | 0.000 | 0.001 | 0.600 | − 0.001 | 0.002 | 0.508 | 0.001 | 0.002 | 0.323 |
| Key clarity | − 2.644 | 2.559 | 0.302 | − 18.948 | 9.346 | 0.043 | − 2.956 | 3.566 | 0.407 |
| (Intercept) | 0.935 | 2.486 | 0.707 | − 5.708 | 7.048 | 0.418 | − 13.149 | 7.235 | 0.069 |
| Tempo | 0.014 | 0.006 | 0.030 | 0.006 | 0.034 | 0.859 | |||
| RMS | 26.386 | 42.095 | 0.530 | 145.701 | 151.755 | 0.337 | 37.250 | 60.587 | 0.538 |
| S. centroid | 0.000 | 0.001 | 0.759 | 0.002 | 0.0028 | 0.549 | − 0.001 | 0.002 | 0.407 |
| Key clarity | − 4.533 | 3.077 | 0.141 | 3.612 | 6.376 | 0.571 | − 16.208 | 9.469 | 0.087 |
| (Intercept) | − 9.744 | 3.155 | 0.002 | 27.244 | 22.265 | 0.221 | − 4.988 | 3.006 | 0.097 |
| Tempo | 0.027 | 0.011 | 0.013 | 0.001 | 0.0212 | 0.943 | 0.025 | 0.011 | 0.031 |
| RMS | 36.114 | 37.380 | 0.334 | − 193.756 | 194.915 | 0.320 | 27.009 | 42.694 | 0.527 |
| S. centroid | 0.002 | 0.001 | 0.010 | − 0.0146 | 0.011 | 0.174 | 0.000 | 0.001 | 0.904 |
| Key clarity | 4.609 | 3.127 | 0.140 | − 11.609 | 12.505 | 0.353 | 2.445 | 2.863 | 0.393 |
Synchrony (HS = 1, LS = 0) was the dependent variable, and tempo, key clarity, loudness, and spectral centroid (s. centroid) from the HS and LS bars as continuous predictors. The Bonferroni-corrected critical p value is 0.05/27 = 0.0019. Values highlighted in bold are statistically significant after Bonferroni corrections for multiple comparisons
Demographic information about participants in the current study, showing distribution of age, gender, and musical sophistication (general and emotions) across concerts.
| Concert | Total | Gender | Age | Gold-MSI: emotion | Gold-MSI: general |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mean score (SD) | Mean score (SD) | ||||
| C1 | 36 | F = 15, M = 17, | 50% < 50 years old | 33.53 (4.75) | 69.84 (22.01) |
| C2 | 41 | F = 16, M = 17, | 50% < 55 years old | 31.17 (6.85) | 71.61 (21.97) |
| C3 | 21 | F = 9, M = 12 | 50% < 40 years old | 33.24 (5.45) | 70.76 (19.33) |
Participants were asked to report their age by selecting age group (within a 5-year range from 18 to 99, i.e., 18–22, 23–27, 28–32, etc.).