Psychmusiclgy, 16,2-16 1997 Psychmusiclgy MUSICAL ABILITY IN A NEW KEY: EXPLRING THE EXPRESSIVE EAR FR MUSIC Dina Kirnarskaya Mscw Cnservatry, Prject Zer Harvard Graduate Schl f Educatin Ellen Winner Department f Psychlgy, Bstn Cllege, Prject Zer Harvard Graduate Schl f Educatin We investigated the rle f age, frmal music training, scial class, intensive expsure t classical music, and chice f musical prfessin (music educatr vs. cncert perfrmer) in the tendency t listen t music expressively rather than analytically. Three hundred and ninety-seven participants, ranging in age frm six years t adulthd, listened t six musical excerpts varying in style (flk, ppular, classical) and timbre (vcal, wind, string, pian). The excerpts cnveyed ne f three kinds f cmmunicative archetypes (expressive qualities): Invitatin, Request, and Play. Subjects were asked t grup the excerpts int three matched pairs n the basis f their musical expressin. Subjects then were classified as expressive, frmal, r randm depending n whether they classified the six excerpts accrding t their archetypes (expressive qualities), by frmal prperties (style, timbre, temp), r randmly (neither by expressin nr by frmal prperties). Results shw that frequency f expressive respnses was relatively unaffected by age and was independent f musical training and scial class. The nly tw grups f subjects wh shwed a strng tendency t grup the excerpts expressively were cncert perfrmers and untrained adults with a strng lve f classical music. It is hypthesized that the tendency t listen t music with an expressive rather than an analytic ear is a marker f musical talent. Such sensitivity might be useful in identifying children wh demnstrate strng ptential fr success in music. The rigin f musical talent is a subject f cnsiderable debate. Many musicians, music teachers, and lay peple believe that musical ability is innate: Sme individuals simply are brn with a prclivity t be musical, and hence can learn quickly and easily (Kirnarskaya, 1995; Winner, 1996). Music teachers ften say they can tell immediately when a student has inbrn ability: These are the students wh learn quickly, can self-crrect errrs, and have high self-cnfidence when they perfrm (Walters, Krechevsky, & Gardner, 1985). Nt all music educatrs subscribe t this nativist view, hwever. Perhaps the mst famus exceptin was Shinichi Suzuki, the funder f the Suzuki methd f music teaching: "Every child is brn with the capacity fr becming richly musical s lng as he r she is brught up prperly... There is n inbrn talent fr music ability" (Herman, 1981, p. 36). Recently, sme cgnitive psychlgists have develped this envirnmentalist psitin, arguing 2 Psychmusiclgy Spring/Fall 1997
that all high achievement, including achievement in musical perfrmance, is due t hard wrk, perseverance, and what is termed "deliberate practice;" that is, gal-directed wrk n what is difficult (Ericssn & Faivre, 1988; Ericsn, Krampe, & Tesch-Rmer, 1993; Hwe, 1990; Hwe, Davidsn, Mre, & Slbda, 1995; Hwe, Davidsn, & Slbda, in press; Slbda, 1996; Slbda, Davidsn, & Hwe, 1984; Slbda, Davidsn, Hwe, & Mre, in press). Fr a critique f this envirnmental psitin, see Trff & Winner (1994) and Winner (1996, Chapter 6). The traditinal psitin in psychlgy is quite different frm the current envirnmentalist psitin. In the 1920s, Carl Seashre develped the Seashre Measures f Musical Talent (Seashre, 1967; Seashre, Lewis, & Saetveit, 1960), a test designed t identify thse with musical ability. The use f such a test presumes individual differences in inbrn ability. The Seashre measures, as well as mst ther musical aptitude tests (e.g., Bentley, 1966; Grdn, 1976; Shuter-Dysn & Gabriel, 1981; Stankv & Hrn, 1980), are based n the assumptin that individuals with musical talent have an excellent "analytical ear" fr music. The Seashre measures assess analytical skills-such as the ability t make fine differentiatins between tnes and musical structures. Individuals are asked t listen t pairs f chrds, intervals, rhythms, and brief meldies and t decide if they are the same r different. Cultures in which children are selected fr musical training rely n these same kinds f measures. Children are given brief tunes and patterns t recall and sing back. The mre accurate their perfrmance, the mre musical they are cnsidered (this has been the practice f music schls in Russia fr decades). Thus the cre f musical aptitude is assumed t be the ability t detect pitch, duratin f pitch, and rhythm. These are the aspects f music captured by musical ntatin, hence we refer t them here as ntatinal aspects f music. We refer t sensitivity t ntatinal aspects as what is made pssible by having an analytical ear fr music. Sme psychlgists have argued that musical aptitude tests shuld assess nt analytic ability but rather ther qualities that wuld be mre clsely predictive f high creative achievement in music. Davies (1978), fr example, suggests that aptitude tests shuld assess musical reasning. He argues that the pssessin f a sharp ear fr music may be n mre predictive f musicality than pssessin f gd eyesight is predictive f gd reading ability. Similarly, Teplv (1966) argued that musical aptitude shuld nt be equated with having a gd musical memry and an ability t differentiate chrds and meldies. Rather, he argued, the ability t respnd emtinally t music is the cre f musicality. Teplv reflects the traditinal Russian musiclgical interest in expressin and affect in music, and in the nnntatinal aspects f music making (Asafiev, 1947; Medushevsky, 1983). Sensitivity t expressin in music means sensitivity t the perfrmed qualities f sund, such as intensity, register, articulatin, timbre, accentuatin, and phrasing. Nte that these aspects f music are nt captured by ntatin. We refer, thus, t sensitivity t nn-ntatinal aspects f music as what is made pssible by having an expressive ear fr music. An individual Kirnarskaya & Winner 3
with a heightened expressive ear fr music may nt be able t fllw the details f musical structure, but can hear and respnd t the emtinal message f the music. Sme research has examined sensitivity t expressive aspects f music, but nly at the mst basic level. Fr instance, researchers have asked their subjects t listen t music and then decide if it expresses anger, fear, jy, r srrw (Brwn, 1981; Cunningham & Sterling, 1988; Rajnikv, 1983; Winner, Rsenblatt, Windmueller, Davidsn, & Gardner, 1986). Research f this nature has demnstrated that individuals are able t d this task very well. Children are as able t perfrm well pn this task as adults. Thus, the ability t recgnize basic emtins in music appears t be nearly universal, and present at a very early age. In this type f research, subjects are asked t apply verbal labels t music. And the verbal labels map quite clearly nt bvius prperties f music such as fast (happy) vs. slw (sad) temp, r high (happy r gentle) vs. lw pitch (angry). Thus it is nt surprising that all individuals perfrm well. These tasks measure the mst basic and simple aspects f musical expressin; and they can be slved by attending t unidimensinal aspects f music such as fast r slw, high r lw, etc. In the present research, we examined sensitivity t the mre subtle aspects f musical expressin. ur research grew ut f ethnmusiclgical studies f the scial cntext f music making, studies which stress the imprtance f nn-ntatinal aspects f music (Alexeev, 1986; Ames & King, 1971;Ellis, 1985;Hambly, 1974; Weber, 1961). These studies have allwed us t identify fur basic types f musical expressin that nearly are universal (Kirnarskaya, 1997). We refer t these fur ways f expressin as Cmmunicative Archetypes. Invitatin. Music can invite the listener t jin in a scially imprtant activity, r t share the music-maker's attitude abut smething significant. Examples include music as a call t war, an invitatin t celebrate, t jin in praise, r t jin in prayer. In this type f music, the addresser, r music maker, cnveys a sense f superirity t the audience, and speaks t the audience with frcefulness. A gesture f claim, with hands held up in energetic mvement, can be cnsidered the bdily equivalent f this type f musical cmmunicatin. Request. Music can make a pleading request. Examples include music which cnveys lve and respect t gd, r t a lved ne. In this type f music, the addresser cnveys a sense f humility t the audience and seeks mercy, grace, r frgiveness. A gesture f bwing with hands dwn, r a curtsy, can be cnsidered the bdily equivalent here. Play. Music can be playful. Examples include music that accmpanies childrens' games, carnivals, and the music f flk runds. In this type f music, the addresser cnveys a sense f equality with the audience, and seeks tgetherness. Gestures f small, light jumps, and hlding hands in a circle, might be the apprpriate bdily equivalent. Psychmusiclgy Spring/Fall 1997
Meditatin. Finally, music can be meditative, as in the case f prayerful music, r lullabies. In this type f music, the addresser and addressee are ne and the same: The music-maker speaks t him/herself. This type f music seeks t preserve balance rather than t alter it. The bdily equivalent here might be a pendulum mvement r even a mtinless equilibrium. These fur Cmmunicative Archetypes f music can be identified in the mst ancient f musical frms and can be fund tday in all styles f music, frm classical t flk t jazz t rck music. They cannt be equated with basic emtins: All fur types culd be happy r sad, fr instance. Nr d they map nt bvius prperties f music such as lud vs. quiet, r high vs. lw. Thus, sensitivity t these fur archetypes may be a different and mre highly develped ability than the ability t identify musical excerpts as happy r sad. The ability t detect such archetypes may be a marker f musical talent. In the present study, we explred the pssibility that the ability t detect these archetypes is independent f level f musical training, and that this ability differentiates thse wh achieve the highest levels in music frm thse wh drp ut, r never take up musical study in the first place. It was ur hpe that the measure we devised ultimately culd be used t identify children with the greatest ptential fr musical achievement. Methd Subjects We tested eight grups f subjects, fur grups with n musical training, and fur with musical training. It must be nted that the grups f subjects were chsen smewhat pprtunistically. The first researcher tested subjects wh fell int ne f these eight grups whenever pssible, resulting in different numbers f subjects in each grup. Untrained children. Grup 1 cnsisted f 129 children; ages 6 thrugh 8. f these, 87 children came frm a public schl serving a predminantly lwer middle-class minrity ppulatin (mst f the children were African- American). The remaining 42 came frm a Mntessri private schl serving a predminately upper middle-class, white ppulatin. Untrained pre-teen/teenagers. Grup 2 cnsisted f 63 pre-teen/teenagers, ages 11 thrugh 13. All came frm a public schl serving a predminantly middle-class, white ppulatin. Untrained adults. Grup 3 cnsisted f 94 adults. f these, 72 were prfessinals (teachers, cmputer engineers, etc.), and 22 were nn-prfessinals (hairdressers, seamstresses, etc.). f this grup, 64% reprted that they had had a maximum f a few years f music lessns as children, and were able t read music. We cnsider this grup "untrained," hwever, because f the minimal nature f their training. Trained children. Grup 4 cnsisted f 23 children, ages 7 thrugh 9, taking music lessns after schl at a private music schl in Cambridge, Massachusetts. Students at this music schl are serius students f music. Kirnarskaya & Winner
Trained pre-teen/teenagers. Grup 5 cnsisted f 26 pre-teen/teenagers, ages 11 thrugh 15, als taking music lessns seriusly at the same music schl as thse in Grup 4. Trained adult music educatrs. Grup 6 cnsisted f 26 adult music educatrs, all f whm had had training at a music cnservatry. Untrained adult music lvers. Grup 7 cnsisted f 14 adults with a strng lve f classical music. These adults reprted ften attending classical music perfrmances, and they had extensive classical CD cllectins at hme. These individuals had n mre than the minimal music training characteristic f Grup 3. Seventy-ne percent reprted that they had a maximum f a few years f instrumental training as children, and were able t read music. Trained cncert perfrmers. Grup 8 cnsisted f 22 cncert perfrmers (all adults except fr three teenagers and ne 10-year-ld child). Materials and Prcedure Subjects listened t six 2 min musical excerpts. They were asked t grup these passages int three pairs accrding t the emtinal message f the music. The actual instructins were: Yu're ging t listen t six musical fragments. Find the clsest expressive match fr each f them, dividing these fragments int three pairs. (Fr children, we added: Put tgether the excerpts s that they culd be musical brthers r sisters. Put them tgether accrding t what the music makes yu feel like r what the music says t yur feelings.) T remember the music better while yu listen, yu can make ntes r drawings n yur paper. Tw pieces expressed each archetype (Invitatin and Request). We did nt examine sensitivity t the Meditatin mde. All pieces initially were played t three musicians wh were asked t determine the cmmunicative archetype expressed by each ne. These judges were given all three verbal labels fr the archetypes and were tld that each piece expressed ne f these. There was 100% agreement amng the judges. The archetypes (expressive) and frmal prperties f the musical excerpts are shwn in Table I. Scring Pairings were scred as expressive, frmal, r randm. There were three pssible expressive pairings: Wagner-Piaf (Invitatin), Franck-Bichet (Request), and ScarlattiRussian flk sng (Play). (See Table 1.) Frmal pairings were based n style (classical vs. ppular), timbre (vcal vs. instrumental), and temp (fast vs. slw). There were six pssible frmal pairings: Wagner/ Scarlatti (bth fast temp, classical), Piaf/Russian flk sng (bth allegr mderat temp, nnclassical, female vcal, majr mde), Franck/Scarlatti (bth classical, keybard, minr mde), Piaf/Bichet (bth nn-classical, ppular), Wagner/Russian flk sng (bth allegr, majr mde), and Bichet/Wagner (bth wind). Randm pairings, based n neither expressive nr frmal prp- 6 Psychmusiclgy Spring/Fall 1997
>. ^ W P 'Z? G s s 2»-i 5 S I H <D U i W) n> < V CD T) <» CJ T-J < (D P3 > 2 l ^ 9 G ^ 2 > > <D C H X 00 > ^5 S3 6 *^,3 3 H H c S & 'c/5 C is N CD it! PQ 13 ^ Is ^ CD C cu.g I g < pq > > 0> cr <D? &0 ex, X <: 5-1 AS «W S CD ^ <D i< a U H.J* (D S C3 s.s PQ C/3 ^ I c a 3 & Kirnarskaya & Winner
erties, had n clear musical lgic. There were six pssible randm pairings: Frank/Piaf, Frank/Russian flk sng, Piaf/Scarlatti, Scarlatti/Bichet, Bichet/ Russian flk sng, and Wagner/Franck. As can be seen in Table 1, bth the Wagner and the Franck are in classical style. Hwever, they differ strikingly in temp, timbre (rchestra vs. vilin and pian), mde, and expressin. Hence, this was cnsidered a randm pairing. The items were designed s that it was nt pssible t grup expressively using a frmal strategy. The musical styles included classical, ppular, jazz, and flk. Pairing by expressin required that listeners cmpletely ignre r verride style and timbre. Fr example, t match the tw Invitatin pieces, the listener had t pair a classical rchestral piece with a ppular vcal piece. Listeners als culd nt make expressive pairings based nly n matching by mde (majr r minr) since there were six such matches. Thus there were three pssible pairs in majr mde, but nly ne f these was scred as expressive; likewise, there were three pssible pairs in minr mde, but nly ne f these was expressive. In additin, in the Play archetype, the crrect match linked ne majr and ne minr piece. Even the frmal prperty f temp did nt prvide much f a clue t expressive gruping. The temps f the tw Invitatin pieces were allegr and allegr mderat; the temps f the tw Play pieces were vivace and allegr mderat; and the temps f the tw Request pieces were mderat and andante. Based n the pairings they made, subjects were scred as expressive, frmal, r randm. If subjects made tw expressive pairings, the third had t be expressive: N ther pairings were pssible. Therefre subjects wh received a classificatin f expressive had three expressive pairings. If subjects made either tw r three frmal pairings, they were scred as frmal classifiers. Similarly, subjects wh made either tw r three randm pairings were scred as randm classifiers. Hyptheses This study allwed us t examine the relatinship between expressive respnse t music and five factrs: age, music training, scial class, intensive expsure t classical music, and chice f musical prfessin (music educatr vs. cncert perfrmer). In the analyses that fllw, we treat each f these as cmparable t planned cmparisns. We predicted that nly tw factrs shuld relate t frequency f expressive gruping: intensive expsure t classical music and chice f musical prfessin. We made this predictin because we suggest, tentatively, that these tw factrs are markers f "musical talent." We hypthesized that adults with a special interest in classical music (Grup 7) wuld tend t grup expressively, despite the fact that this grup had n (r minimal) frmal music training. We hypthesized that individuals wh chse t becme cncert perfrmers (Grup 8) wuld tend t grup expressively. All ther grups were predicted t grup frmally mre ften than expressively. We expected that even thse with music training wuld tend t grup frmally because sensitivity t frmal prperties f music is precisely what is typically taught in music educatin. We made this 8 Psychmusiclgy Spring/Fall 1997
predictin even f adults wh have becme music educatrs (Grup 6): These adults are individuals with a high levels f frmal training, just like the cncert perfrmers. Hwever, these are individuals wh, we suggest, may have less "musical talent" than thse wh g n t becme cncert perfrmers. Results The number and percentage f expressive, frmal, and randm respnders fr each grup is shwn in Table 2. As can be seen frm this table, Grup 1 (untrained children) was the nly grup with an appreciable number f participants wh made randm pairings. We excluded frm analysis all individuals wh made randm pairings because the small number f randm respnders in all grups (except Grup 1) made analysis difficult. In additin, randm respnders may nt have understd the task, r may nt have paid attentin. Finally, ur primary interest was in the cntrast between expressive and frmal respnses. The Rle f Age We first examined the effect f age in musically untrained respnders. A 3 (Age) x 2 (Respnse) cntingency table chi-square analysis was carried ut. The three age grups were untrained children (Grup 1), untrained preteen/teenagers (Grup 2), and untrained adults (Grup 3). A near-significant chi-square was btained, % 2 (2) = 5.743, p =.056. As shwn in Figure 1, expressive grupings ranged frm 21 % (children) t 30% (adults), with teens in the middle (14%). (Nte: All percentages frm this pint frward reflect grups with randm respnders excluded; hence the percentages d nt crrespnd precisely t thse in Table 2, which reflect all respnders.) This analysis suggests that, cntrary t the hypthesis, expressive respnses increase smewhat with age. It is wrthy f nte, hwever, althugh the adults made mre such grupings than the tw yunger grups, fewer than nethird f the adults respnded expressively. Separate 2 x 2 analyses revealed that nly the difference between teenagers and adults was significant, % 2 (1) = 5.419, p <.05. The difference between children and adults was nt significant, % 2 ( 1) = 1.923, p =. 17 nr was the difference between children and teenagers, % 2 (1) = 1.37,/? =.24. The Rle f Music Training We examined the effect f music training n grupings by cmparing trained vs. untrained individuals f the same age. A 2 (Training) x 2 (Respnse) chi-square analysis was carried ut. The tw grups were untrained children (Grup 1) and trained children (Grup 4). As hypthesized, there was n effect f training, % 2 (l) =.044, p =.83. Twenty-ne percent f the untrained children gruped expressively, as did 19% f the trained children. Recall, hwever, that the untrained children the grup mst likely t grup randmly. The abve analysis was carried ut nly n thse children wh gruped either expressively r frmally. We can cnclude that fr children Kirnarskaya & Winner 9
Table 2 Number f Individuals in Each Grup Classified as Archetype (Expressive), Frmal and Randm Archetype Grup Frmal Randm (Expressive) Grup 1 (n = 129) Untrained Children 19(15) a 71(55) 39(30) Grup 2 (n = 63) Untrained Pre-teen/Teens 8(13) 51(80) 4(6) Grup 3 (n = 94) Untrained Adults 26(28) 60(64) 8(9). Grup 4 (n = 23) Trained Children 4(17) 17(74) 2(9) Grup 5 (n = 26) Trained Pre-teen/Teens 6(23) 18(69) 2(8) Grup 6 (n = 26) Music Educatrs 5(19) 20(77) 1(4) Grup 7 (n = 14) Music Lvers 13(93) 1(7) 0(0) Grup 8 (n = 22) b Cncert Perfrmers 17(77) 5(23) 0(0) a Numbers in parentheses are percentages. b The three teenagers in this grup were scred as expressive; the child was scred as frmal. with music training, randm grupings decline in frequency, while frmal nes increase. Hwever, n change ccurs in frequency f expressive grupings. The same analyses were perfrmed fr teenagers and fr adults. N differences were fund between Grup 2, untrained teens, and Grup 5, trained 10 Psychmusiclgy Spring/Fall 1997
teens, (X 2 (l) = 1.592,/? =.21), and between Grup 3, untrained adults, and Grup 6, trained adults, x 2 (l)= 1.008,/? =.32, in the frequency f expressive vs. frmal grupings. Nte that ur sample f trained adults were music educatrs with cnservatry training. We find it particularly remarkable that this grup f adults was n mre likely t grup expressively than were adults with n music training at all. This finding supprts ur hypthesis that music training des nt lead t a tendency t listen t music expressively. 30% 11 Children B Teenagers Adults Expressive (p =.056) Figure 1. Percentage f expressive grupings by musically untrained children, teenagers, and adults. The Rle f Scial Class We next examined the rle f scial class n respnses (first in the children, then in the adults) t test the hypthesis that class shuld be unrelated t the tendency t respnd expressively t music. (A scial class analysis culd nt be cnducted with the teenagers, as they were all drawn frm a middle-class ppulatin.) T examine whether scial class played a rle in children's grupings, we cmpared upper middle (n = 28) and lwer middle (n = 62) class untrained children in Grup 1. Scial class was identified by the schl frm which the children were drawn. Sme came frm a primarily upper middle-class private schl; thers came frm a primarily lwer middle-class urban public schl. A 2 (Class) x 2 (Respnse) chi-square analysis revealed n effect f class, X 2 ( 1) = 3.69, p =.54. Twenty-five percent f the middle-class children gruped expressively, as did 19% f the lwer middle-class children. T examine the rle f scial class in adults' grupings, we cmpared prfessinal (n = 70) and nnprfessinal (n = 16) adults in Grup 3. A 2 Kirnarskaya & Winner 11
(Class) x 2 (Respnse) chi-square analysis again revealed n effect f class % 2 (1) =.255, p =.61. Thirty-ne percent f the middle-class adults gruped expressively, as did 25% f the lwer middle-class adults. Thus, as hypthesized, scial class had n effect n the tendency t grup expressively. The Rle f Music Interest and Chice f Prfessin Finally, we tested the hypthesis that the nly tw factrs predictive f a tendency t grup expressively are music interest and chice f prfessin. We predicted that adults wh cnsider themselves classical music lvers (Grup 7), and wh thus listen t classical music n a near-daily basis, shuld grup expressively, despite the fact that (r perhaps because f the fact that) these were peple withut any extensive frmal training in music. We made this predictin n the assumptin that peple wh describe themselves as classical music lvers are individuals with musical talent, despite the fact that these peple have little r n musical training and thus d nt perfrm music. We als predicted that individuals wh had chsen t becme cncert perfrmers (Grup 8) will grup expressively. We cmpared Grups 7 and 8 t adults wh had chsen t becme music educatrs rather than cncert perfrmers (Grup 6). The music educatrs in ur sample had as much frmal musical training as the cncert perfrmers: Bth were cnservatry trained. Hwever, if chice f prfessin (perfrmer rather than educatr) is sme rugh marker f musical talent, and if musical talent is what really predicts the tendency t grup expressively, then we shuld expect the cncert perfrmers t grup expressively, but nt the music educatrs. A 3 (Grup) x 2 (Respnse) chi-square revealed a significant effect f Grup, % 2 (2) = 25.049, p.001. This ccurred because bth music lvers and cncert perfrmers had a strng tendency t grup expressively (93% and 77%, respectively, see Figure 2). In cntrast, and as we shwed abve, music educatrs had a strng tendency t grup frmally (nly 20% f the music educatrs gruped expressively). T determine whether a difference existed between the tw grups with a tendency t grup expressively, we cmpared the music lvers and the cncert perfrmers. A 2 (Grup) x 2 (Respnse) chi-square revealed n effect, % 2 (1) = 1.496, p =.22. While we d nt wish t make t much f a null finding, we d feel it is ntewrthy that music lvers, with little r n frmal training, were just as likely t grup expressively as were thse with cnservatry training wh had gne n t becme cncert perfrmers. Discussin These results demnstrate that sensitivity t expressin as measured by ur task is unrelated t level f frmal musical training. Tw grups f subjects respnded with a high level f sensitivity t expressin: cncert perfrmers and adults with a strng lve f classical music. All ther grups, 12 Psychmusiclgy Spring/Fall 1997
H Music Educatrs m Music Lvers Cncert Perfrmers Expressive (p <.001) Figure 2. Percentage f expressive grupings by adult music educatrs, music lvers, and cncert perfrmers. irrespective f level f training, shwed a strng preference t grup frmally rather than expressively. N grup arrived at expressive pairings using a chance strategy. Given the fact that there were six excerpts t be made int three pairs, the prbability f making any cmbinatin f three pairs was 1/15 (r 6.7%). There was nly ne pssible cmbinatin f three pairs that resulted in an expressive scre, while there were numerus cmbinatins f three pairs that resulted in frmal and randm scres. Thus a chance strategy shuld nly yield 6.7% expressive scres. Nte that all grups, even untrained children, made cnsiderably mre than a chance percentage f expressive grupings, as shwn in Table 2. ur results als shw that sensitivity t expressin is weakly related t age. Children and teens lacking music training were less likely t respnd expressively than were adults lacking music training, althugh this finding did nt quite reach statistical significance. Sme sensitivity t expressin in music may develp spntaneusly as ne gains familiarity with music. But even amng adults, expressive respnses were never the mst cmmn. Sensitivity t expressin was als shwn t be independent f scial class. Thus higher levels f educatin did nt affect the respnse t expressin in music. As hypthesized, nly tw factrs predict expressive respnding n ur task: intense expsure t and lve f classical music, and the chice f cncert perfrmer as a prfessin. Whether these factrs are a cnsequence f inbrn talent r scial factrs (r bth) remains t be determined. Hwever, Kirnarskaya & Winner 13
the fact that neither musical training nr scial class predicted frequency f expressive respnses lends supprt t ur suggestin that these factrs are markers f inbrn talent. It is pssible that the cncert perfrmers and music educatrs differed in the amunt f time spent playing and practicing music and if s, that time spent playing music is what actually accunts fr the fact that cncert perfrmers grup mre expressively than music educatrs. We have n measures f practicing time, but we d have measures f age. The cncert perfrmers had a mean age f 32, while the music educatrs had an lder mean age f 41. Thus, the music educatrs had mre years f music experience than the cn- ' cert perfrmers, and yet were less likely t grup expressively. But the strngest argument against the pssibility that time spent playing/practicing is what leads t sensitivity t expressin is the fact that the music lvers, wh did nt play an instrument, were far mre likely t grup expressively than were the music educatrs. It is ur cautius suggestin that high expressivity scres n the present task may be a marker f "musical talent." Music lvers may well have musical talent which they simply have never develped. Cncert perfrmers, f curse, have exceptinal talent, prbably mre than adults wh becme music educatrs. Cncert perfrmers respnded very differently frm music educatrs, bth f whm had had cnservatry training. Thus it appears that training is neither necessary nr sufficient fr the demnstratin f an expressive ear fr music. The pssessin f an expressive ear fr music may require an inbrn musical aptitude. Several ntes f cautin are in rder. First, the task used here is a new ne, but we d have sme infrmal evidence fr its reliability. In pilt studies, we administered the test twice t 12 untrained adults and 6 trained children, with a time interval f tw mnths fr the adults and three weeks fr the children. Test-retest reliability fr this small sample was 100%. Secnd, it is pssible that ur findings demnstrate individuals' preferences rather than basic capacities. Despite the fact that ur instructins asked subjects t grup by expressin, they may nt have understd these instructins. Hwever, many subjects wrte reminders n the margins f their paper that included "emtinal message, nt style r instruments," r they underlined the wrd "expressin." Thus we believe that ur subjects did understand the task. It is pssible that if we had demnstrated expressive grupings and given time fr subjects t practice making such classificatins, all subjects culd have gruped by expressin at a much higher level. Hwever, we were interested in the grupings peple make intuitively, rather than thse they are capable f making with explicit training. The expressive ear fr music lng has been ignred in favr f the analytical ear. The analytical ear hears ntatinal characteristics f music, while the expressive ear hears the nn-ntatinal aspects. The analytical ear fcuses n structural relatins in music; that is, recgnitin f musical ele- 14 Psychmusiclgy Spring/Fall 1997
ments and themes, hierarchical structure, develpment f structural themes, transfrmatin f themes, etc. The expressive ear fcuses n perfrming qualities f music: register, timbre, ludness, articulatin, and phrasing. It is these features which carry the emtinal and dramatic message f music. The fact that even individuals with high levels f training respnded frmally rather than expressively suggests that musical training fcuses ne's attentin n frmal rather than expressive aspects f music. It is certainly pssible that given a different kind f training, many mre individuals culd respnd with high levels f expressive sensitivity. ur results demnstrate that the predminant, mst likely respnse f mst peple is t listen frmally rather than expressively t music. nly thse subjects wh chse music as a career, r wh chse listening t music as a serius "hbby," shwed a strng tendency t listen t music expressively. It is ur cntentin that this tendency is an indicatr and a predictr f talent. The next step wuld be t cnduct a lngitudinal study t test this hypthesis. f children given training in music, thse wh shw a tendency t listen expressively shuld be thse mst likely t stay with music, cntinuing t play thrughut adlescence and int adulthd. References Alexeev, E. (1986). Early flk intnatin. Mscw: Svetsky Kmpzitr. Ames, D., & King, A. (1971). Glssary f Hausa music and its scial cntexts. Evanstn: Nrthwestern University Press. Asafiev, B. (1947). Musical frm as aprcess. Leningrad: Musica. Bentley, A. (1966). Musical ability in children and its measurement. New Yrk: ctber Huse. Brwn, R. (1981). Music and language. In Dcumentary reprt f the Ann Arbr Sympsium: Applicatins f psychlgy t the teaching and learning f music. Restn, VA: Music Educatrs Natinal Cnference. Cunningham, J., & Sterling, R. (1988). Develpmental change in the understanding f affective meaning in music. Mtivatin andemtin. 12(4), 399-413. Davies, J. (1978). The psychlgy f music. Lndn: Hutchinsn. Ellis, C. (1985). Abriginal music. St. Lucia: University f Queensland Press. Ericssn, K. A., & Faivre, I. A. (1988). What's exceptinal abut exceptinal abilities? In L. K. bler & D. A. Fein (Eds.), The exceptinal brain: Neurpsychlgy f talent and special abilities (pp. 436-473). New Yrk: Guilfrd Press. Ericssn, K. A., Krampe, R. T., & Tesch-Rmer, C. (1993). The rle f deliberate practice in the acquisitin f expert perfrmance. Psychlgical Review. 100(3), 363-406. Grdn, E. (1987). The nature, descriptin, measurement, and evaluatin f music aptitudes. Chicag, IL: GIA. Hambly, W. (1974). Tribal dancing and scial develpment. Lndn: H. F. & G. Witherby. Herman, E. (1981). Shinichi Suzuki: The man and his philsphy. Athens, H: Ability Assciates. Hwe, M. J. A. (1990). The rigins f exceptinal abilities. xfrd: Blackwell. Hwe, M. J. A. (in press). Innate talents: Reality r myth? Brain and Behaviral Sciences. Kirnarskaya, D. (1995). Music-language ability as a cmpnent f musical talent. In Cnference Prceedings f the British and East Eurpean Psychlgy Grup, Banska Bystrica, 298-3. Kirnarskaya & Winner 15
Medushevsky, V. (1983). Intnatinal and plt in musical frm. Mscw: Musica. Rajnitv, V. (1983). The aesthetic respnse t music in schl students. Unpublished dctral dissertatin, Russinan Institute f Educatinal Psychlgy, Mscw. Seashre, C. (1967). Psychlgy f music. New Yrk: Dver. Seashre, C, Lewis, D., & Saetveit, J. (1960). Manual f instructins and interpretatins fr the Seashre measures f musical talents (2 nd rev.). New Yrk: The Psychlgical Crpratin. Shuter-Dysn, R., & Gabriel, C. (1981). The psychlgy f musical abilities. Lndn: Methuen. Slbda, J. A. (1996). The acquisitin f musical perfrmance expertise: Decnstructing the "talent" accunt f individual differences in musical expressivity. In K. A. Ericssn (Ed.), The rad t excellence: The acquisitin f expert perfrmance in the arts and sciences, sprts and games. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. Slbda, J. A., Davidsn, J. W., & Hwe, J. J. A. (1994). Is everyne musical? The Psychlgist, 7(8), 349-354. Slbda, J. A., Davisdn, J. W., Hwe, J. J. A., & Mre, D. G. (in press). The rle f practice in the develpment f perfrming musicians. British Jurnal f Psychl- gy- Stankv, L., & Hrn, J. (1980). Human abilities revealed thrugh auditry tests. Jurnal f Educatinal Psychlgy, 72, 19-42. Teplv, B. M. (1966). Psychlgie des aptitudes musicales. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France. Trff, B., & Winner, E. (1994). Dn't thrw ut the baby with the bathwater: n the rle f innate factrs in musical accmplishment. The Psychlgist, 7(8), 361-362. Walters, J., Krechevsky, M., & Gardner, H. (1985). Develpment f musical, mathematical, and scientific talents in nrmal and gifted children. Harvard University Graduate Schl f Educatin: Prject Zer Technical Reprt N. 31. Weber, J. P. (1961). La psychlgie de I'art. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France. Winner, E. (1996). Gifted children: Myths and realities. New Yrk: Basic Bks. Winner, E., Rsenblatt, E., Windmueller, G., Davidsn, L., & Gardner, H. (1986). Children's perceptin f "aesthetic" prperties f the arts: Dmain-specific r panartistic? British Jurnal f Develpmental Psychlgy, 4, 149-160. Zenatti, A. (1994). Psychlgie de la musique. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France. Authr Nte This research was supprted by a Fulbright Fellwship awarded t the first authr. We thank Hiram Brwnell and Marina Murzina fr statistical advice. 16 Psychmusiclgy Spring/Fall 1997