Cross-modal integration: Alignment of auditory and visual accent structures in motion pictures

1. Cross-modal integration:Alignment of auditory and visualaccent structures in motion pictures Dr. Scott D. Lipscomb Institute for Music Research University of Texas at San Antonio SMPC Conference '99

2. Acknowledgments • University of California, Los Angeles • Dr. Roger A. Kendall & Dr. Ed Carterette • University of Texas at San Antonio • Institute for Music Research • Dr. Don Hodges, Director • Fellow Music Researchers SMPC Conference '99

3. Film Music Literature • past studies deal almost exclusively with the referential aspect of musical sound • “cognitive congruency” (Marshall & Cohen, 1988) • selected others: Tannenbaum (1956), Thayer & Levenson (1984) • special issue of Psychomusicology (vol. 13, 1994) • vs. accent structure alignment • i.e., how often important events in the music coincide with important events in the visual scene SMPC Conference '99

4. Film Music Perception Paradigm(Lipscomb & Kendall, 1995) Aural Stimulus Visual Stimulus SMPC Conference '99

5. Alignment Conditionsafter Yeston (1975) Consonant Out-of-phase Dissonant SMPC Conference '99

6. Subject Responses …two VAME ratings • synchronization: “… how often important events in the music coincide with important events in the visual scene” • effectiveness: “… simply concerns [the observer’s] subjective evaluation of how well the two go together” SMPC Conference '99

7. Results of Previous Study (1997)presented at Penn State ASA Conference SMPC Conference '99

8. Problems with Dissonant Stimuli Solution Found SMPC Conference '99

9. Revised Stimulus Preparation • A-V alignment conditions were created using Media 100 software on a Macintosh G3 computer • sound files were manipulated in Sonic Foundry’s Sound Forge 4.0, using the Time Compress/Expand Sonic Foundry plug-in • completed A-V composites were recorded directly from Media 100 onto VHS tape SMPC Conference '99

10. Consonant Alignment Condition aligned as intended by the composer (visual & music only) SMPC Conference '99

11. Out-of-phase Alignment Conditionalignment conditions based on Preliminary Study SMPC Conference '99

12. Dissonant Alignment Conditions • audio tracks for the McLaren animations were “time expanded” by 115% • audio tracks for the “Obsession” excerpts were “time expanded” by 110% • since these excerpts were longer, the gradual misalignment could occur at a slower pace SMPC Conference '99

13. Subject Info & Method • N = 135 UTSA students taking music classes • musical training n (high = 17, mod = 31, low = 87) • gender n (female = 82, male = 53) • stimuli presented to groups of subjects • stimuli were presented to subjects using a Samsung VR 5855 video cassette recorder and a ProScan PS80690 80” big screen television • VAME ratings were provided on a continuous line response anchored by either “not synchronized - synchronized” or “ineffective - effective” • each subject was assigned to one of three random stimulus presentation orders • response forms were generated so that order of VAME responses was also randomized into three versions not synchronized synchronized SMPC Conference '99

14. Video excerpts SMPC Conference '99

15. Statistical Analysis - Between(SPSS’s “General Linear Model - Repeated Measures”) • repeated measures, fully-factorial ANOVA • three repeated measures: 2 VAME ratings x 6 AV combinations x 3 alignment conditions • Tests of Between-Subjects Effects • no significant between-groups variation • musical training: p = 0.090; f(2,129) = 2.457 • gender: p = 0.549; f(1, 129) = 0.361 • interaction between AV combination & musical training is not statistically significant • p = 0.622; f(2,129) = 0.477 SMPC Conference '99

16. Statistical Analysis - Within(SPSS’s “General Linear Model - Repeated Measures”) • Tests of Within-Subjects Effects • within-groups, ratings were significantly different depending upon the AV combinations • p < .0005; f(5) = 20.5 • within-groups, ratings were significantly different depending upon the alignment condition • p < .0005; f(2) = 173.036 • Within-Subjects Interaction Effects • alignment condition x VAME • p < .0005; f(2) = 3.906 • AV combination x alignment condition • p < .0005; f(10) = 48.720 SMPC Conference '99

17. Statistical Analysis - Within(SPSS’s “General Linear Model - Repeated Measures”) • Within-Subjects Effects - complex interactions • AV combination x VAME x musical training • p = .006; f(10) = 2.517 • AV combination x alignment condition x VAME • p < .0005; f(10) = 3.885 SMPC Conference '99

18. Experimental Results(r = .997) SMPC Conference '99

19. Experimental Results(r = .977) SMPC Conference '99

20. Experimental ResultsSubject Ratings Collapsed (n=3) Results of Previous Study SMPC Conference '99

21. Conclusions • accent structure alignment does, in fact, play an important role in subject ratings of both “synchronization” and “effectiveness” • ANOVA & Pearson correlation coefficient • based on the results of the present & previous investigations, there appears to be a dynamic relationship between the “association judgment” and “accent structure alignment” aspects of the model of Film Music Perception Revised Model SMPC Conference '99

22. Contact Info Dr. Scott D. LipscombUTSA Division of Music6900 N. Loop 1604 WestSan Antonio, TX 78249(210) 458-4354(210) 458-4381 FAXlipscomb@utsa.eduhttp://music.utsa.edu/~lipscomb SMPC Conference '99

23. Perception Accent Structure Alignment Association Judgment AV combination perceived as Effective AV combination perceived as Ineffective Film Music Paradigm(revised) Aural Stimulus Visual Stimulus Audio-Visual Congruence Implicit Processes No Yes SMPC Conference '99