Sectional Versus Intact Evaluations of Four Versions of a Chopin Étude

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to determine how evaluations of four intact performances of a Chopin étude (Op. 25, No. 9, Butterfly ), differing in quality, related to evaluations of each performance’s sections. We presented each performance as five excerpts: (a) opening phrase, (b) first half, (c) second half, (d) coda, and (e) intact. We then presented 10 of the 20 excerpts a second time to assess listener reliability. Results revealed an interaction between performer and ratings: Ratings of intact performances were significantly higher than were ratings of component sections for the two best performances. For the other two performances, however, ratings of intact excerpts were significantly lower than ratings of component sections. Nonsignificant factors were sections and listener background. Data indicate that ratings of longer sections (first and second halves) were more closely tied to intact performance ratings than were shorter sections (opening phrase and coda). Correlational data revealed that piano majors were marginally more reliable than nonpiano majors.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 2 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.