MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4324378980 · doi:10.1177/03057356221141735

Reminiscence bump invariance with respect to genre, age, and country

2023· article· en· W4324378980 on OpenAlexafffund
James Renwick, Matthew Woolhouse

Bibliographic record

VenuePsychology of Music · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeuroscience and Music Perception
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityMcGill University
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsReminiscencePsychologyMusicalRecallPhenomenonPreferenceDevelopmental psychologyCognitive psychologyVisual artsArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We report a cross-cultural study investigating musical reminiscence bumps, the phenomenon whereby adults remain emotionally invested in the music they preferentially listened to in adolescence. Using a crowdsourcing service, 4,824 participants from 102 countries were each required to recall five songs (titles and artist names), resulting in a 24,120-song study. In addition, participants provided demographic information and answered questions relating to the songs they recalled, such as age first listened to, levels of nostalgia, and associated emotions. Song titles and artist names were cleaned and genre information established through fuzzy matching recalled information to songs within an open-source music encyclopedia. These data, plus participants' demographic information, allowed reminiscence bumps differentiated by age, sex, country, and genre preference to be explored. Recency-bias effects of recalled songs were also investigated. Results demonstrated that the musical reminiscence bump phenomenon is common to all age groups and both sexes, pervasive across all countries, and is not restricted to particular genres. In sum, musical reminiscence bumps appear to be biologically and culturally ubiquitous.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.954
Threshold uncertainty score0.393

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.092
GPT teacher head0.349
Teacher spread0.257 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations6
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePsychology of MusicSame topicNeuroscience and Music PerceptionFrench-language works237,207