Sound: Neuendorf Research. Dr. N’s Research on Sound/Music Effects of Music Score Type on...
-
Upload
brendan-darren-carpenter -
Category
Documents
-
view
215 -
download
0
Transcript of Sound: Neuendorf Research. Dr. N’s Research on Sound/Music Effects of Music Score Type on...
Sound: Neuendorf Research
Dr. N’s Research on Sound/Music Effects of Music Score Type on Spectator Response
With FRAMES members Andrew Scheid, Matt Egizii, Alex Farmer, & others
Documentary Impact: Moving Image vs. Sound Only vs. Text With Dr. Jill Rudd and FRAMES members Matt Egizii and Rachel Campbell
Audio-visual Translation (AVT): Subtitling vs. Dubbing With FRAMES members Kara Rader and the late Dr. Paul Skalski
Effects of a Laugh Track on Spectator Response With colleagues at Michigan State and at Cleveland State
Contradictory Sound (planned) With FRAMES members Alex Farmer and Tara Burns
Music Scoring Study #1 Paper presented to the International Society for Presence Research,
Philadelphia, PA, in 2012
“Sunset Gates” short film, with three different scores: Version 1: Rock music compilation score Version 2: Orchestral score Version 3: No music
n = 101 CSU students
Generally, the “rock music” condition resulted in depressed (lower) emotional responses, regardless of positive/negative tone, when asked whether the film “made you feel…”
Angryp < .10 overall
Post hocs: Rock vs. Orchestral
0-10 response scale
1-Rock Music 2-Orchestral Music 3-No Music
Music Experiment Condition
3.5
4
4.5
5
5.5
Mea
n o
f E
3_1_
SG
_Ext
entY
ou
Fel
tAn
gry
Surprisedp < .10 overall
Post hocs: Rock vs. No
1-Rock Music 2-Orchestral Music 3-No Music
Music Experiment Condition
3.5
4
4.5
5
Mea
n o
f E
3_2_
SG
_Ext
entY
ou
Fel
tSu
rpri
sed
Aggressivep < .10 overall
Post hocs: Rock vs. No
1-Rock Music 2-Classical Music 3-No Music
Music Experiment Condition
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
Mea
n o
f E
3_5_
SG
_Ext
entY
ou
Fel
tAg
gre
ssiv
e
Tenderp < .10 overall
Post hocs: Rock vs. No
1-Rock Music 2-Orchestral Music 3-No Music
Music Experiment Condition
2
2.5
3
3.5
Mea
n o
f E
3_7_
SG
_Ext
entY
ou
Fel
tTen
der
Fearfulp < .10 overall
Post hocs: Rock vs. Orchestral/No
1-Rock Music 2-Orchestral Music 3-No Music
Music Experiment Condition
1.4
1.6
1.8
2
2.2
2.4
2.6
2.8
3
Mea
n o
f E
3_9_
SG
_Ext
entY
ou
Fel
tFea
rfu
l
Sadp < .05 overall
Post hocs: Rock vs. Orchestral
1-Rock Music 2-Orchestral Music 3-No Music
Music Experiment Condition
3.5
4
4.5
5
5.5
6
Mea
n o
f E
3_12
_SG
_Ext
entY
ou
Fel
tSad
Awestruckp < .05 overall
Post hocs: Rock vs. Orchestral/No
1-Rock Music 2-Orchestral Music 3-No Music
Music Experiment Condition
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
Mea
n o
f E
3_14
_SG
_Ext
entY
ou
Fel
tAw
estr
uck
Disappointedp < .05 overall
Post hocs: Rock vs. Orchestral
1-Rock Music 2-Orchestral Music 3-No Music
Music Experiment Condition
5
5.5
6
6.5
7
7.5
Mea
n o
f E
3_1
5_S
G_E
xte
ntY
ou
Fe
ltD
isa
pp
oin
ted
Remorsefulp < .10 overall
Post hocs: Rock vs. Orchestral/No
1-Rock Music 2-Orchestral Music 3-No Music
Music Experiment Condition
2.5
3
3.5
4
4.5
Mea
n o
f E
3_1
6_S
G_E
xte
ntY
ou
Fe
ltR
em
ors
efu
l
Anticipationp < .05 overall
Post hocs: No vs. Rock/Orchestral
1-Rock Music 2-Orchestral Music 3-No Music
Music Experiment Condition
2.5
3
3.5
4
4.5
5
Mea
n o
f E
3_21
_SG
_Ext
entY
ou
Fel
tAn
tici
pat
ion
Happyp = n.s.
Other n.s.:
Joyful
Loving
Optimistic
Amused
1-Rock Music 2-Orchestral Music 3-No Music
Music Experiment Condition
1.4
1.5
1.6
1.7
1.8
Mea
n o
f E
3_11
_SG
_Ext
entY
ou
Fel
tHap
py
Music Score Type (Rock vs. Orchestral vs. None) did not relate to: Presence
Social Richness (TPI)
Social Presence-Passive interpersonal (TPI)
Engagement/Mental immersion (TPI)
Situational spatial (MEC)
Spatial presence-self location (MEC)
General evaluations of the film, e.g., Good/Bad
Interesting/Boring
Strong/Weak
Music Scoring Study #2--planned “Chase Her” short film shot and edited
Three genre music types to be produced by composer James Newberry:
Version 1 = Romantic
Version 2 = Noir/Mystery
Version 3 = Action
AVT Study (Dubbing vs. Subtitling) Paper to be presented to the International
Communication Association in Puerto Rico in May 2015
FILM: “Life is Beautiful” (1997) Version 1: Dubbed to English
Version 2: Italian with English subtitles
n = 168 CSU students
Dubbing vs. Subtitling NO simple, main effects differences in:
Recall
Visual
Dialogue
Narrative
Enjoyment
However, interactions were found with certain intercultural experience indicators...
Visual Recall: Condition x Foreign Language Exposure
p < .05
.00 1.00
Dubbed=0 Subtitled=1
2.40
2.60
2.80
3.00
3.20
Vis
ua
l Re
cal
l Es
tim
ate
d M
arg
inal
Me
ans
Does anyone in
your immediate or
extended family
speak a language
other than English?
No
Yes
Dialogue Recall: Condition x Foreign Language Exposure
p < .10
.00 1.00
Dubbed=0 Subtitled=1
2.20
2.40
2.60
2.80
3.00
3.20
Dia
log
ue
Rec
all E
sti
ma
ted
Ma
rgin
al M
ea
ns
Does anyone in
your immediate or
extended family
speak a language
other than English?
No
Yes
Enjoyment: Condition x Intercultural Exposure
p < .01
.00 1.00
Dubbed=0 Subtitled=1
50.00
52.50
55.00
57.50
60.00
62.50
65.00
En
joy
me
nt
Es
tim
ate
d M
arg
ina
l M
ea
ns
Intercultural
Exposure
Low Exposure
High Exposure
Documentary Modality Study:
Paper presented to the National Communication Association, Orlando, FL, 2012
200 participants recruited from introductory courses in Communication at CSU, randomly assigned to four online conditions:
Version 1: Video (n=69)
Version 2: Sound-only (n=43)
Version 3: Transcript (n=52)
Version 4: Control Group (n=36)
Footage of first-person source:
“B” roll/cutaway images:
Documentary:NO Differences among the Three Delivery Modes (Video vs. Sound Only vs. Transcript):
ATP – Attitudes Toward Prisoners (17 item scale; Melvin et al.)
ATP Women – Attitudes Toward Women Prisoners (17 item scale)
Narrative Transportation (10 item scale; Green & Brock)
Presence of several types (scales for TPI Active Interpersonal, TPI Engagement, TPI Social Richness, MECA Attention Allocation)
Documentary:Key Differences among the Three Delivery Modes
Enjoyment (13 item scale, adapted from Krcmar & Renfro) (p = .059)
Video = 29.98 Sound only = 34.78 Transcript = 33.42
Total Knowledge (11 item scale) (p = .040) Video = 8.54 Sound only = 8.19 Transcript = 9.23
Effects of a Laugh Track on Spectator Response—Two Studies
Study #1—Published in 1988 in Central States Speech Journal
Study #2—Published in 2009 in Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media
Still almost the only studies published on this topic
Laugh Track Study #1 Segment of film Nobody’s Perfekt (1981) was used in two versions:
Version 1: No laugh track
Version 2: Laugh track (added, edited from comedy albums by Richard Pryor)
n = 94 students at Michigan State University, in groups of 3-5
Participants were video recorded as they viewed, and their “mirth behaviors” were coded
Laugh Track Study #1--Results Impact on Perceived Funniness Ratings:
Laugh Track vs. No Laugh Track had no impact
Group membership had a significant impact
Scene (n=6) had a significant impact
Impact on Mirth Behaviors: Laugh Track produced significantly more mirth than No Laugh Track
Group membership had a significant impact
Scene (n=6) had a significant impact
Also, there was a positive correlation (r = .66) between Scene funniness and Scene behavioral effect (effect of laugh track)
30
Laugh Track Study #2
Experimental design: 4 episodes of Andy Griffith Each in two versions
Version 1: No laugh track (serendipitous acquisition by co-investigator Jim Denny)
Version 2: Laugh track
Subjects = 114 students at CSU, in groups of 2-5
Subjects were video recorded as they watched the episode
31
Total perceived funniness scores (across 20 comic points) by condition and episode
6574
127
8376
94
62 65
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
Opie theBirdman
Black Dayfor
Mayberry
Opie's I ll-GottenGains
Up inBarney's
Room
No LaughTrack
LaughTrack
Main effect for laugh track: ns
Main effect for episode: F(3,106)=5.32, p=.002
Interaction effect: F(3,106)=3.06, p=.031
32
Social presence/active interpersonal by condition
7.1
10.3
15.9
8.4
10.8
12.6
7.6
10.8
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
Opie theBirdman
Black Dayfor
Mayberry
Opie's I ll-GottenGains
Up inBarney's
Room
No LaughTrack
LaughTrack
Main effect for laugh track: F(1,106)=0.01, p=.91
Main effect for episode: F(3,106)=1.95, p=.13
Interaction effect: F(3,106)=4.49, p=.005
33
Engagement Presence by condition
20.923.7
31.3
17.7
24.827.3
18.9 18.5
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
Opie theBirdman
Black Dayfor
Mayberry
Opie's I ll-GottenGains
Up inBarney's
Room
No LaughTrack
LaughTrack
Main effect for laugh track: F(1,106)=0.86, p=.36
Main effect for episode: F(3,106)=1.79, p=.15
Interaction effect: F(3,106)=2.78, p=.045
Contradictory Sound (planned)
A most BASIC test of whether we believe our ears or our eyes
Footage shot and edited; instrument prepared
Examples: Running man steps on metal plate, we hear splash
Running man steps on plastic bottle, we hear glass breaking
Car drives away, we hear a bus
Man runs into boxes, we hear bottles
end