The pleasurable urge to move to music is unchanged in people with musical anhedonia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In cognitive science, the sensation of "groove" has been defined as the pleasurable urge to move to music. When listeners rate rhythmic stimuli on derived pleasure and urge to move, ratings on these dimensions are highly correlated. However, recent behavioural and brain imaging work has shown that these two components may be separable. To examine this potential separability, our study investigates the sensation of groove in people with specific musical anhedonia. Individuals with musical anhedonia have a blunted ability to derive pleasure from music but can still derive pleasure from other domains (e.g., sex and food). People with musical anhedonia were identified as those with scores in the lower 10% of scores on the Barcelona Musical Reward Questionnaire, but who had no deficits in music perception, no symptoms of depression, average levels of physical and social anhedonia, and sensitivity to punishment and reward. We predicted that if the two components of groove are separable, individuals with musical anhedonia would experience lower levels of derived pleasure but have comparable ratings of wanting to move compared to controls. Groove responses were measured in an online study (N = 148) using a set of experimenter-generated musical stimuli varying in rhythmic and harmonic complexity, which were validated in several previous studies. Surprisingly, we found no significant differences in groove response between individuals with musical anhedonia (n = 17) and a matched control group (n = 17). Mediation analyses for the anhedonia sample found that wanting to move ratings fully mediated the effect of rhythmic and harmonic complexity on pleasure ratings. Taken together, these results indicate that the urge to move may compensate for the blunted pleasure sensation in those with musical anhedonia. More generally, these results suggest that the urge to move is a primary source of pleasure in the groove response.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".