Icmpc 12 earworm talk- Lassi Liikkanen

From characterization to understanding involuntary

musical imagerymusical imagery

Lassi “Al” LiikkanenHelsinki Institute for

ICMPC-ESCOM 2012 26.7.2012.

Helsinki Institute for Information Technology Aalto University & University of Helsinki

Finland

C t l ti !Congratulations!For all present in the world’s first scientific assembly on research on involuntary musical imagery, or earworms.

Wishing a great start for INMIWishing a great start for INMI researchers!

Understanding Involuntary Musical ImageryUnderstanding Involuntary Musical ImageryICMPC-ESCOM 2012 27.7.2012

[email protected] http://hiit.fi/lassial #lassial 2

This talk:This talk: • Music in Mind 2007 studyMusic in Mind 2007 study

– Background– Central findings

• Work in progress and future workp g


[email protected] http://hiit.fi/lassial #lassial

3

Music in Mind 2007:Findings published

• Liikkanen L (2012) Musical ActivitiesLiikkanen L. (2012) Musical Activities Predispose to Involuntary Musical Imagery. Psychology of Music 40(2) 236-256.Psychology of Music 40(2) 236 256. – ICMPC 2008

• Liikkanen L (2012) Inducing involuntary• Liikkanen L. (2012) Inducing involuntary musical imagery: an experimental study. Musicae Scientiae 16(2) 217 234Musicae Scientiae 16(2) 217-234.– ESCOM 2009



4

MiM 2007: backgroundMiM 2007: background• Design inspired by Kellaris 2001Design inspired by Kellaris 2001,

2003 and Bennett, 2003• Intention to replicate in a

generalizable wayg y



5

MiM 2007: study conceptMiM 2007: study concept• Web-based data administration andWeb based data administration and

collection• “Experiential” web survey design



6


[email protected] http://hiit.fi/lassial #lassial 7

MiM 2007: recruitmentMiM 2007: recruitment• 3 months online 3 record store3 months online, 3 record store

certificates raffled• From university, through email

referencingg– Before Facebook

Understanding Involuntary Musical ImageryUnderstanding Involuntary Musical [email protected]

http://hiit.fi/lassial #lassial

8ICMPC-ESCOM 2012 27.7.2012

Results: ParticipantsResults: ParticipantsN % Music listening frequency N %

All respondents 12519 4.9 % Never 38 0.3 %Qualified respondents 11910 95.1 % Seldom 10 0.1 %

Monthly or less frequent 183 1 5 %Monthly or less frequent 183 1.5 %Sex Weekly, not daily 1678 14.1 %

Women 8144 68.4 % Daily, < 2 hours 3437 28.9 %Men 3766 31.6 % Daily, 2-6 h 5269 44.2 %

Daily > 6 h 1295 10.9 %Age Average 27.8 yearsg g y

St. Dev. 8.48 years Activities: playing, singing or composing musicNever 4250 35.7 %

Age groups (N=11904) Seldom 190 1.6 %< 25 y 4822 40.5 % Monthly or less frequent 1521 12.8 %25 - 30 y 4154 34.9 % Weekly, not daily 3173 26.6 %y y y31 - 40 y 1892 15.9 % Daily, < 2 hours 2015 16.9 %> 40 y 1036 8.7 % Daily, 2-6 h 700 5.9 %

Daily > 6 h 61 0.5 %Handedness (N=11887)

Right 10633 89.5 % Length of active musical training in the pastLeft 818 6.9 % None 3767 31.6 %Ambidexterous 436 3.7 % < 1 year 2264 19.0 %

1-3 years 2931 24.6 %University staff or students 3795 31.9 % 4-10 years 1242 10.4 %

910 7.6 % 10-15 years 558 4.7 %Hearing defect, neurological

Understanding Involuntary Musical Imagery

>15 years 1148 9.6 %disorder, CNS medication

Understanding Involuntary Musical [email protected]


9ICMPC-ESCOM 2012 27.7.2012

Part I: CharacterizingPart I: Characterizing• How common is INMI whatHow common is INMI, what

influences its frequency and what is the experience alike?the experience alike?

Understanding Involuntary Musical ImageryUnderstanding Involuntary Musical [email protected]


10ICMPC-ESCOM 2012 27.7.2012

Frequency of INMI experiencesFrequency of INMI experiences

30%

35%

dents

Men (N=3766)

Women (N=8144)

*91% of respondents at least weekly

33% 33%33% 32%15%

20%

25%

of all respon

d

24%

7%

27%

5%

10%

15%

Prop

ortio

n o

*

*7%

3% 0%5% 2% 0%0%

Several times a day Every day Weekly Monthly More seldom Never



11

What influences INMI frequency? Partial correlations

Variable ρ p NPractice activity 0.233 < .001 11904Listening activity 0.188 < .001 11899Length of musical practice * 0.036 .001 8608Age -0.099 < .001 11899Self-assessed musicality 0.148 < .001 2968Ease of foreign pronounciation 0.119 < .001 2968Portable music player 0.022 >.05 2968

Controlling for music practice, listening, length of practice, and age group

*excluding musicians



12

PhemenologyPhemenology90%

100%Non‐musician female

70%

80%

90%

nden

dts

Musician female

Non‐musican male

Musician male

79% 76%91%

77%92%

80%91%

80%91%

40%

50%

60%

of all respon

79% 76%

34%

77% 75%

31%

69%80%

33%

49%

70%80%

20%

30%

40%

Prop

ortio

n o

9% 16%16%25%

31%

0%

10%

Unfamiliar, novel Instrumental music Music sang in native Music sang in foreign Familiar, previously

P

Understanding Involuntary Musical Imagery

Unfamiliar, novel music (N=2967)

Instrumental music (N=11845)

Music sang in native language (N=11855)

Music sang in foreign language (N=11857)

Familiar, previously head music (N=2970)

Understanding Involuntary Musical ImageryICMPC-ESCOM 2012 27.7.2012


13

Part IPart I• More results in the POM paperMore results in the POM paper

– Comparison to Semantic Involuntary memoriesmemories

– Details about the phenomenology



14

Part II: Induction experiment

Q ti• Questions:1. Can you evoke INMI experiences y p

with an experimental manipulation?2 Is an earworm just a temporal2. Is an earworm just a temporal

extension of external stimulus?



15

HypothesesGreene (1986) J. Exp. Psy: LMC

Hypotheses• Recency hypothesis

relevant to INMIa) “the most recent” cfa) the most recent cf.

recency effectb) Longer term recency

~ repeated musical ppriming



16

Experimental methodExperimental methodINMI i d ti i d ll• INMI induction using a cued-recall musical imagery task– Variation of musical image scanning

task (Halpern, 1988)( p )



17

MethodMethod• 5 song lyric completion tasks5 song lyric completion tasks• “Obla di, obla da, …”• “Rudolf the red-nosed reindeer…”



18

Experimental SetupExperimental Setup• (most-) Recency manipulation:(most ) Recency manipulation:

• Order of song cues• Long-term recency manipulation• Long-term recency manipulation

– 2 sets of song cues: contemporary vs. classicsclassics

• Controlling for song familiarityOpen ended– Open-ended

• INMI Probe after a distractor task



19

Induction resultsPercent of participants reporting INMI

68 2 %80.0 %

Cued68.2 %

49.7 %60.0 %

70.0 %Cuedsong

Othersong49.7 %

32.0 %40.0 %

50.0 %song

None

13.2 %18.3 %18.6 %

10 0 %

20.0 %

30.0 %

0.0 %

10.0 %

Exp. 1 Contemporary (N=991) Exp. 2 Classics (N=6524)



20

Recency effectRecency effect35%

25%

30%

35%Average hit rate

15%

20%

25%

MI p

roba

bilit

y

5%

10%

15%

INM

5%1 2 3 4 5

Serial position



21

Central findings from MM2007in brief:

1 Establishing the wide1. Establishing the wide acknowledgment of the INMI phenomenonphenomenon

2. Observing some regularities in the g gfrequency of INMI* Replicating earlier findings Replicating earlier findings



22

Central findings contCentral findings cont. 3 Witnessing considerable inter-3. Witnessing considerable inter

individual variation 4. Demonstrating the bias for

experiencing contemporary songs p g p y gas INMI

5 Songs causing INMI vary a lot5. Songs causing INMI vary a lot



23

Current and Future work

ICMPC-ESCOM 2012 26.7.2012.

ICMPC-ESCOM Proc paperICMPC-ESCOM Proc. paper• Content analysis of MM2007Content analysis of MM2007

open ended answers M S i Silf b (MA)– Ms. Suvi Silfverberg (MA)

• Focusing on implications of g pINMI

• 1229 open ended responses• 1229 open-ended responses without particular focus



25

INMI and Social lifeINMI and Social life• Categories of findings:Categories of findings:• Collective contagion

– Intentional & susceptibility • Locus of social attentionLocus of social attention

– Unwanted



26

Read more from the Proceedings

• Available from the internetAvailable from the internet



27

Future workFuture work• Earworm clinic in FacebookEarworm clinic in Facebook

https://apps.facebook.com/earwormclinic/



28

Future themesFuture themes• Prevention & coping strategiesPrevention & coping strategies• Parallels to clinical phenomena• Implications to life outside your head• Theory of How and Why• Theory of How and Why



29

Theoretical questions: What is it?

• Can we reduce it toCan we reduce it to…• Expectations?• Mind-pops or ISMs?• Obsessions?• Obsessions?• Is it epiphenomenal

– What if we could stop it?



30

My expectationsMy expectations• To move from characterizationTo move from characterization

to understanding involuntary musical imageryimagery



31

Answer three questions:Answer three questions:o What is INMI?o What is INMI?o Why is INMI?

H t t INMI?o How to stop INMI?



32

Thank you!Thank you!• Lassi Liikkanen@Hiit [email protected]

http://hiit.fi/lassial #lassial#lassial

https://apps.facebook.com/earwormclinic/ http://tinyurl.com/INMIworldp y



33

Health & Medicine

Icmpc 12 earworm talk- Lassi Liikkanen