Collective music listening: Movement energy is enhanced by groove and visual social cues
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
; the higher the groove, the more it induces the desire to move. We investigated questions related to collective music-listening among 33 participants in an experiment conducted in a naturalistic yet acoustically controlled setting of a research concert hall with motion tracking. First, does higher groove music induce (1) movement with more energy and (2) higher interpersonal movement coordination? Second, does visual social information manipulated by having eyes open or eyes closed also affect energy and coordination? Participants listened to pieces from four categories formed by crossing groove (high, low) with tempo (higher, lower). Their upper body movement was recorded via head markers. Self-reported ratings of grooviness, emotional valence, emotional intensity, and familiarity were collected after each song. A biomechanically motivated measure of movement energy increased with high-groove songs and was positively correlated with grooviness ratings, confirming the theoretically implied but less tested motor response to groove. Participants' ratings of emotional valence and emotional intensity correlated positively with movement energy, suggesting that movement energy relates to emotional engagement with music. Movement energy was higher in eyes-open trials, suggesting that seeing each other enhanced participants' responses, consistent with social facilitation or contagion. Furthermore, interpersonal coordination was higher both for the high-groove and eyes-open conditions, indicating that the social situation of collective music listening affects how music is experienced.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it