Ethos Theory of Music: Toward An Empirical Confirmation Through Moral Foundations Theory
Bibliographic record
Abstract
As an advocate of the Ethos Theory of Music, Herbert Spencer argues that sharing in a wide range of musically aroused emotions promotes fellow-feeling thanks to which humans behave considerately toward each other. Here we attempt to provide empirical evidence for this claim. We identified Spencer's fellow-feeling as an instantiation of the concerns for Harm and Fairness Moral Foundations; thus, we predicted that musical expertise, and specifically long-term listening to and playing classical music, would lead to favoring individualizing moral foundations and opposing the binding ones. A cross-national questionnaire (US, Canada, and Italy) was conceived ( N = 330), and the data were analyzed through a parallel mediation Structural Equation Model. Results confirm that musical expertise is associated with lower proclivity toward the binding moral foundations. Conversely, it is connected with an embracement of individualizing moral foundations. Coherently with Spencer's view, such an effect is fully mediated by the emotional way of listening to music.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".