Graphics Reference
In-Depth Information
Table 1.
Percentage of label attribution to each emotional Text (T), Melody, and Text (T)-
Melody (M) stimulus pair (unpublished data).
Mode
Stimuli
Happy
Anger
Sad
Another emotion
I don't know
80
Single
Happy (T)
na
na
na
na
90
Single
Happy (M)
na
na
na
na
1
Happy (T)
Happy (M)
92.90
0.00
0.00
2.38
4.76
38.10
31.00
2
Happy (T)
Anger (M)
4.75
9.52
16.70
3
Happy (T)
Sad (M)
30.95
2.38
35.71
26.19
4.76
Single
Anger (T)
na
76.6
na
na
na
Single
Anger (M)
na
72.2
na
na
na
4
Anger (T)
Anger (M)
2.38
69.00
11.90
7.14
9.52
5
Anger (T)
Sad (M)
0.00
26.20
54.80
9.52
9.52
31.00
9.52
6
Anger (T)
Happy (M)
7.14
16.70
35.70
Single
Sad (T)
na
na
76.6
na
na
90
Single
Sad (M)
na
na
na
na
78.60
7
Sad (T)
Sad (M)
2.38
0.00
16.70
2.38
8
Sad (T)
Anger (M)
4.76
47.62
23.81
16.67
7.14
9
Sad (T)
Happy (M)
47.62
2.38
11.90
9.52
28.57
play a role in such assessments, as for example individual differences
among subjects in personality and experience.
To evaluate the effects of the text on the assessment of the melody,
an ANOVA analysis was performed for each mismatched stimulus
pair with gender as a between subject variable and emotional labels
(congruent melody label, congruent text label, and a label named
“other” that grouped all the remaining subject's response) as a within
subject variable. No significant effects of the text and/or the melody
were found for the paired stimuli
Happy(T)Angry(M)
(
F
2,80
= .208,
p
=
.8130),
Happy(T)Sad(M)
(
F
2,80
= .068,
p
= .9339), and
Sad(T)Angry(M)
(
F
2,80
= 2.059,
p
= .1343). Significant effects were found for the stimuli
Sad(T)Happy(M)
(
F
2,80
= 5.294,
p
= .0069),
Angry(T)Happy(M
) (
F
2,80
= 9.823,
p
= .0002) and
Angry(T)Sad(M)
(
F
2,80
= 4.884,
p
= .01). Post-
hoc tests revealed that the significant differences were due to a
Search WWH ::
Custom Search