人工智能表演者偏见:当听众认为音乐是由人工智能演奏时,他们就不那么喜欢音乐了

IF 1.5 4区 心理学 0 HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY Empirical Studies of the Arts Pub Date : 2025-01-15 DOI:10.1177/02762374241308807
Alessandro Ansani, Friederike Koehler, Lisa Giombini, Matias Hämäläinen, Chen Meng, Marco Marini, Suvi Saarikallio
{"title":"人工智能表演者偏见:当听众认为音乐是由人工智能演奏时,他们就不那么喜欢音乐了","authors":"Alessandro Ansani, Friederike Koehler, Lisa Giombini, Matias Hämäläinen, Chen Meng, Marco Marini, Suvi Saarikallio","doi":"10.1177/02762374241308807","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Contextual information can shape the aesthetic judgements of music compositions. Recently, a study proposed the existence of an AI composer bias; namely, listeners tend to like music less when they think (or are told) that it was composed by an AI. In this online study ( N = 120), we used a cross-over experimental design to verify whether such bias extends to audiovisual music performance. The participants rated three videos of classic piano music performances in two versions with identical audio: one with a professional pianist who pretended to play, and one with the piano playing automatically, allegedly thanks to an AI. As hypothesised, the participants rated the performances as more likeable, engaging, higher in emotional valence, and of higher quality when the pieces were “performed” by the pianist. Notably, these effects were insensitive to the participants’ musical expertise but moderated by their attitudes toward AI. Interestingly, when asked what differences they had found between the two renditions, the participants confabulated about differences in rhythm, tempo variations, dynamics, and dissonances, pointing to underlying psychological processes, such as expectations and beliefs about humanness. Implications for Aesthetics and the Psychology of Art are discussed.","PeriodicalId":45870,"journal":{"name":"Empirical Studies of the Arts","volume":"49 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"AI Performer Bias: Listeners Like Music Less When They Think it was Performed by an AI\",\"authors\":\"Alessandro Ansani, Friederike Koehler, Lisa Giombini, Matias Hämäläinen, Chen Meng, Marco Marini, Suvi Saarikallio\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/02762374241308807\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Contextual information can shape the aesthetic judgements of music compositions. Recently, a study proposed the existence of an AI composer bias; namely, listeners tend to like music less when they think (or are told) that it was composed by an AI. In this online study ( N = 120), we used a cross-over experimental design to verify whether such bias extends to audiovisual music performance. The participants rated three videos of classic piano music performances in two versions with identical audio: one with a professional pianist who pretended to play, and one with the piano playing automatically, allegedly thanks to an AI. As hypothesised, the participants rated the performances as more likeable, engaging, higher in emotional valence, and of higher quality when the pieces were “performed” by the pianist. Notably, these effects were insensitive to the participants’ musical expertise but moderated by their attitudes toward AI. Interestingly, when asked what differences they had found between the two renditions, the participants confabulated about differences in rhythm, tempo variations, dynamics, and dissonances, pointing to underlying psychological processes, such as expectations and beliefs about humanness. Implications for Aesthetics and the Psychology of Art are discussed.\",\"PeriodicalId\":45870,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Empirical Studies of the Arts\",\"volume\":\"49 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-01-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Empirical Studies of the Arts\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/02762374241308807\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Empirical Studies of the Arts","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/02762374241308807","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

语境信息可以塑造音乐作品的审美判断。最近,一项研究提出了人工智能作曲家偏见的存在;也就是说,当听众认为(或被告知)这首歌是由人工智能创作的时候,他们往往不那么喜欢这首歌。在这项在线研究中(N = 120),我们采用交叉实验设计来验证这种偏见是否延伸到视听音乐表演。参与者将三段经典钢琴音乐表演视频分为两种版本,音频相同:一种是由专业钢琴家假装演奏,另一种是钢琴自动演奏,据称这要归功于人工智能。正如假设的那样,参与者认为由钢琴家“演奏”的作品更讨人喜欢、更吸引人、更有情感价值、质量也更高。值得注意的是,这些影响对参与者的音乐专业知识不敏感,但受到他们对人工智能的态度的影响。有趣的是,当被问及在两种演奏中发现了什么差异时,参与者虚构了节奏、节奏变化、动态和不和谐的差异,指出了潜在的心理过程,比如对人性的期望和信念。对美学和艺术心理学的启示进行了讨论。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
AI Performer Bias: Listeners Like Music Less When They Think it was Performed by an AI
Contextual information can shape the aesthetic judgements of music compositions. Recently, a study proposed the existence of an AI composer bias; namely, listeners tend to like music less when they think (or are told) that it was composed by an AI. In this online study ( N = 120), we used a cross-over experimental design to verify whether such bias extends to audiovisual music performance. The participants rated three videos of classic piano music performances in two versions with identical audio: one with a professional pianist who pretended to play, and one with the piano playing automatically, allegedly thanks to an AI. As hypothesised, the participants rated the performances as more likeable, engaging, higher in emotional valence, and of higher quality when the pieces were “performed” by the pianist. Notably, these effects were insensitive to the participants’ musical expertise but moderated by their attitudes toward AI. Interestingly, when asked what differences they had found between the two renditions, the participants confabulated about differences in rhythm, tempo variations, dynamics, and dissonances, pointing to underlying psychological processes, such as expectations and beliefs about humanness. Implications for Aesthetics and the Psychology of Art are discussed.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
14
期刊介绍: Empirical Studies of the Arts (ART) aims to be an interdisciplinary forum for theoretical and empirical studies of aesthetics, creativity, and all of the arts. It spans anthropological, psychological, neuroscientific, semiotic, and sociological studies of the creation, perception, and appreciation of literary, musical, visual and other art forms. Whether you are an active researcher or an interested bystander, Empirical Studies of the Arts keeps you up to date on the latest trends in scientific studies of the arts.
期刊最新文献
Artists and Mate Preferences: The Effects of Being a Painter and Intellectuality Audiovisual Associations in Saint-Saëns’ Carnival of the Animals: A Cross-Cultural Investigation on the Role of Timbre The Cultural-Match Effect on Art Appreciation in Adolescents AI Performer Bias: Listeners Like Music Less When They Think it was Performed by an AI Examining the Ability of Digital Visual Art Engagement to Cultivate Empathy and Social Connection
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1