See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/258285502

Book Review: Patrik Juslin & John Sloboda, Handbook of Music and Emotion:
Theory, Research, Application

Article  in  Psychology of Music · July 2013

DOI: 10.1177/0305735613484668

CITATIONS READS
0 1,008

2 authors, including:

Karim Weth
University of Salzburg
3 PUBLICATIONS   21 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Karim Weth on 16 June 2014.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

522 Psychology of Music 41(4)

More work is needed on this quite important second sense of “musical consciousness” (the
music of consciousness), which has been available since its classic articulation in Husserl’s
work on time consciousness, for which the paradigm was famously musical melody. Quite a lot
is riding on this, and much has already been invested in this volume in the idea that both senses
of the term are always in play, on the basis that “What music is capable of providing, rather
than communication, is communion – an intimately shared experience between listener and
listener and between listener and performer” (p. 245).
There is not much discussion of the future of musical consciousness: such topics as the role
of virtuality, the impact of prosthetics, and whether musical thought can survive without a
body (the latter having been defined hitherto by its terrestrial existence). Elliott writes of politi-
cal futures. DeNora writes of the way in which “Music offers us an ally for new or emerging
values or action plans” (p. 323). Both hark back to Jacques Attali a generation ago. Gallope and
Biddle engage with the general conditions for consciousness in relation to technicity and
humanity and question the anthropological function of consciousness. Other chapters seem to
assume that the current neuro-biological embodiments of consciousness and its cultural repre-
sentations will remain as they are forever.
In conclusion, Music and Consciousness is a worthy and well constructed volume to add to the
growing library of research into consciousness studies, and it deserves repeated reading. It
presents work at the early stages of development of a subject area, so understandably there is a
certain amount of theorising ab nihilo. When all is said and done, despite the sometimes legalis-
tic desire for truth and objectivity, there remains plenty of space for a much needed sequel vol-
ume that will open up additional paths of enquiry and follow up threads understandably left
hanging or cut short here. Consciousness still presents something of a mystery, and it remains
not fully amenable to measurement and control; Heisenberg is its natural patron saint. Yet it
also remains an inescapable part of life and musical practice, as this volume amply documents.
With its massive and unavoidable pull over homo sapiens, we should probably ask whether con-
sciousness even needs to exist for us to believe in it.

References
Lewin, D. (1986). Music theory, phenomenology, and modes of perception. Music Perception, 3(4), 327–392.
Ricoeur, P. (1981). Hermeneutics and the human sciences: Essays on language, action and interpretation
(J. Thompson, Trans.). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Anthony Gritten
Royal Academy of Music, London, UK

Patrik Juslin & John Sloboda. Handbook of Music and Emotion:Theory, Research, Application (reprinted
ed). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press, 2011. 992 pp. ISBN-13: 978-0199604968 (pbk)

Research on music and emotion fell on hard times in the second half of the twentieth century.
The interest in emotion was overpowered by research about its big brother, cognition. The infor-
mation-processing paradigm smothered interest in emotion research for decades, brandmarking
emotions as too “fuzzy”, as they would “. . . unnecessarily complicate the cognitive-scientific
enterprise” (Gardner, 1987, p. 6). To make matters worse, music has often been called “the lan-
guage of emotion” (Cooke, 1959). To combine music and emotion into one project in the heyday
Book reviews 523

of cognitive psychology (1970s) was tantamount to academic suicide. As a consequence, “. . .

the field [of music & emotion] barely survived until the 80s . . .” (Juslin & Sloboda, 2011, p. 934).
When interest in the psychology of emotion gradually returned the late 1980s, it happened
in a new guise, still heavily dependent on the cognitive paradigm – as evidenced by the success
of the cognitive appraisal theory of emotion. The revised interest in emotion trickled down to
the field of music and emotion, which has been blossoming for the past two decades.
This new trend became apparent in 2001, when Oxford University Press published a volume
entitled Music and Emotion, edited by Juslin and Sloboda (Juslin & Sloboda, 2001). Less than a
decade later, the authors have released a new, expanded edition. Its new status (“handbook”) is
a reflection of the increasing acceptance of music and emotion as a mainstream sub-discipline
of both music research and psychology. Slowly but surely, other fields of research are beginning
to grow aware of music as a powerful instrument to influence emotions, for example as a tech-
nique of mood induction in different branches of psychology, or as an antidote for pain and
anxiety in medicine and biology (Bernatzky, Presch, Anderson, & Panksepp, 2011).
Compared with the previous volume, the new handbook contains nearly twice the number
of pages (976 vs. 498). It consists of 33 chapters, 11 of which are (major) revisions of chapters
in the first volume, and 22 being entirely new contributions. All of the authors of the individ-
ual chapters are well-recognized experts in their respective fields.
The book is divided into 8 broad sections. “Part I Overture” and “Part VIII Encore” are writ-
ten by the editors. The middle six sections consist of five chapters each: “Multidisciplinary
Perspectives” (Part II),”Measurement” (Part III), “Music Making” (Part IV), “Music Listening”
(Part V), “Development, Personality, and Social Factors” (Part VI), and “Applications” (Part
VII). The organization of chapters into sections seems more coherent and natural than in the
preceding volume.
In Part I Overture, the editors introduce the aims and organization of the book. This is fol-
lowed by a list of working definitions of key terms to which all contributing authors were
requested to refer to throughout their chapters. This intervention is a sensible if not necessary
precaution to ensure some internal consistency of the volume. The attempt to share key termi-
nology facilitated cross-referencing between chapters, as well as building bridges for the reader
(who doesn’t have to adapt to new definitions in each chapter). The distinction of terms such as
affect, mood, and emotions, and also concepts like perception vs. induction of emotion is
observed in many chapters. The editors also conclude the book with a commentary in PART
VIII Encore, in which they first present a short summary of the history of the field before iden-
tifying the major challenges for the future.
In Part II Multidisciplinary Perspectives, the relationship between music and emotion is
discussed from different viewpoints: philosophy (Davies), musicology (Cook & Dibben), psychol-
ogy (Juslin & Sloboda), neurobiology (Peretz), anthropology (Becker) and sociology (DeNora).
In order to address a broad range of readers, every chapter in Part II begins with a short intro-
duction to the respective discipline’s approach to music and emotion. After that, every chapter
addresses strikingly different phenomena. This section lives up to its name “multidisciplinary”
(rather than “interdisciplinary”) by presenting who does what in a set of juxtaposed disciplines,
rather than exchanges between them. While the advantages of a multidisciplinary approach
and disciplinary cross-fertilization are clear, many questions remain to be answered. The pre-
sented approaches are still remarkably distinct and it is unclear how (or if) the presented
approaches will benefit from one another in concrete ways in future. Hopefully, time and the
common platform provided by this handbook will allow these disciplines grow closer together
to achieve the maximum benefit for all.
524 Psychology of Music 41(4)

In Part III Measurement, the focus moves to more empirical and technical issues sur-
rounding the measurement of musical emotions. In total, the section provides a good coverage
of both well-established methods (“Self-report measures and models”, “Psychophysiological
measures”, “Functional neuroimaging”) and newer, more exploratory methods (“Continuous
self-report methods”, “Indirect perceptual, cognitive, and behavioural measures”). The latter
two chapters are particularly interesting.
Schubert’s review of continuous self-response methods is a thorough introduction to the
benefits and shortcomings of various methodological possibilities including technical aspects,
data analysis, and relationships with common theories of emotion. Shortcomings include the
cognitive overload to which subjects are exposed and the problem of time synchronization. If
these problems can be solved, continuous self-report methods can play a central role in future
research, especially when combined with other time-sensitive methods, such as neuroimaging
techniques. Such multi-measurement approaches could provide synchronized data and enable
direct comparison between objective neurological data and subjective measures.
The chapter by Västfjäll, on indirect measures of emotions, is a refreshing introduction to
techniques which have not yet been broadly implemented into research on music and emo-
tion, but are already being used in affective science. These methods seem to have several ben-
efits. Indirect measures enable the researcher to conceal the aim of an experiment from the
participants in an appropriate way and therefore to reduce bias. They also offer insights into
changes in the mentioned psychological dimensions (perception, cognition, behaviour) while
or after listening to music. The significance of indirect data may go well beyond merely identi-
fying a specific emotion. Such data can additionally provide insights into the accompanying
psychological changes, which can help us understand motivations for music consumption:
listeners may want to experience these changes in perception, cognition or behaviour, so they
can be regarded as implicit goals. In other words, it is not necessarily the specific emotion that
listeners strive for, but possibly the concrete perceptual, cognitive or behavioural change that
accompanies the emotion. Of course, activity in other emotional components such as physiol-
ogy may occur at the same time, yet in this account they do not play an essential role.
The remaining chapters in the section, as listed above, deal with more established methods
of measurement. Subjective self-report methods (Chapter 8, Zentner & Eerola) have the longest
history in research, beginning with the classical studies in the early twentieth century (Hevner,
Seashore etc.). The variety of self-report measures is accordingly large, ranging from the use of
different scale-types, verbal vs. non-verbal evaluations, similarity tasks, etc. The need for a
standard instrument to measure musical emotions is still current and discussed by the authors,
and Zentner himself has presented a substantial contribution on this topic (Zentner, Grandjean,
& Scherer, 2008): the GEMS (Geneva Emotional Music Scales).
The chapters in Part IV Music Making are concerned with emotions from the perspective
of the performer, while composing (“Emotion and composition in classical music: historiomet-
ric perspectives” by Simonton; “The role of structure in the musical expression of emotions” by
Gabrielsson & Lindström), in daily life and practice (“Emotion and motivation in the lives of
performers” by Wood & MacPherson), and in the performance situation (“The role of negative
emotions in performance anxiety” by Kenny; “Expression and communication of emotion in
music performance” by Juslin and Timmers).
Simonton opens his chapter by summarizing his extensive research from the 1980s, in
which he analysed the “originality” of a huge database of classical compositions and found a
systematic relationship between originality and popularity: an inverted U-shape curve, compa-
rable to the Wundt curve. Simonton’s results suggest that a moderate amount of melodic
Book reviews 525

originality is a strong predictor for commercial success, compared with low and high extents of
originality. It would be interesting, but a major undertaking, to transfer these results to modern
musical genres or popular music, and evaluate if these widespread preferences for moderate
extents of complexity/originality are a timeless and “universally” applicable mechanism. To do
this we would need a large database of automatic transcriptions of sound files of popular music
– a task for the Music Information Retrieval community.
In Part V Music Listening, which constitutes the heart of the volume, the focus shifts to
the receiving end of music and emotion: the listener’s musical experience. The first chapter,
“Music in everyday life” by John Sloboda, summarizes the status quo in this young field by pre-
senting 10 propositions about music in everyday life. Each proposition is accompanied by sup-
porting literature and implications for emotion in general. Sloboda defines the term “everyday
music” by identifying 10 ways in which it differs from “non-everyday music”. In the discussion,
he raises fundamental issues about the future of music and emotion research. For example, “. . .
for the most of its short life, the psychological study of emotional responses to music has focused
primarily on the non-everyday . . . there is a strong cultural tendency to elevate the aesthetic
discourse of music over the practical” (p. 511). These claims are striking, especially in light of
the “everyday” nature of musical use throughout evolution. By paying the biggest importance
to the “non-everyday”, we treat minorities as if they were majorities. Results which should be
restricted to a small variety of people and situations are often interpreted as if they were appli-
cable to the general population. That suggests that the (still) popular tendency of favouring
classical Western music as musical stimuli in experiments has to be re-thought. The growing
tendency of people to record their daily activities in social networks is a promising new oppor-
tunity for research on music in everyday life (tip: Spotify is directly linked to Facebook).
In Chapter 20 “Strong Experiences with Music”, Alf Gabrielsson presents results of his well-
known long-term SEM project. The data, which he has been collecting for over two decades,
consists of more than 500 participants’ written reports or interviews on “the strongest, most
intense experience of music that they have ever had.” The reports cover a wide scope of (emo-
tional) reactions such as being touched or having transcendental sensations or changes in per-
ception. One group of reactions is physiological sensations, which often involve the phenomenon
of thrills. That topic is addressed in more detail in the following chapter by David Huron,
“Musical Expectancy and Thrills.” Huron bases his argument on theories of musical expec-
tancy and builds on the seminal work of Leonard Meyer before presenting his “ITPRA” theory.
The last chapter in this section, “How does music evoke emotion? Exploring the underlying
mechanisms” by Juslin, Liljeström, Västfjäll and Lundqvist, is relevant for many chapters in this
volume as well as future research. The centerpiece is a theoretical framework, the BRECVEM
model, which proposes seven independent mechanisms by which music is capable of evoking
genuine emotions in the listener. The seven proposed mechanisms are: Brain stem reflexes,
Rhythmic entrainment, Evaluative conditioning, Contagion, Visual Imagery, Episodic memory
and Musical Expectancy. Regardless of whether this list is complete or will be revised following
future research, it clearly will have (and has already had) a big impact on research about music
and emotion. Many of the chapters in this volume already refer to the BRECVEM framework
and try to orientate themselves to it. Some researchers in the past have proposed the several
emotion-eliciting mechanisms in response to music (e.g., Berlyne, 1971; Meyer, 1956), yet the
current framework is the first concrete effort in this respect. The existence of multiple mecha-
nisms for emotion can help us to explain different emotional reactions to the same pieces of
music as well as apparently contradictory research results, for example in neuroimaging when
different studies report different patterns of brain activity.
526 Psychology of Music 41(4)

Part VI deals with “Development, Personality, and Social Factors”. In Chapter 24,
“Preference, Personality, and Emotion”, Rentfrow and McDonald first offer a comprehensive
introduction to research on both music preference and the psychology of personality. They
then revisit their 2003 paper in which a large sample of American students rated music prefer-
ences for 14 different music genres; these ratings were then compared with personality mea-
sures. Factor analysis showed a four-factor structure of music preference: reflective & complex
(classical, jazz, folk, blues), intense & rebellious (rock, alternative), upbeat & conventional (pop,
soundtrack, religious, country), and energetic & rhythmic (rap, soul, electronica). At first
glance, the factor labels seem somewhat inappropriate: Neither blues nor folk music are known
for their structural complexity, but rather the opposite, as they are more defined by their clear
arrangements/structure and repetitive nature. The entire work is well-conducted, and strongly
pleads for this four-factor structure (other studies suggesting similar factors), yet raises some
further questions. Is labelling music by genre a reasonable approach for investigating music
preferences? Measuring musical preferences by having participants rate specific genres seems
problematic because it adds another level of abstraction and therefore leaves room for interpre-
tation. The genre called Alternative has a low predictive value, as it can be interpreted differently
by different people and in fact refers to a range of musical styles as diverse as punk, gothic or
Britpop. The authors are aware of this problem and consider that the future of research on
music preferences might benefit from different ways of labelling music (rather than “genre”).
They instead propose “musical attributes” such as tempo, emotional content and instrumenta-
tion as possible structuring factors. Inspiration for further parameters could be gained by ana-
lysing “social tags” in online music networks (Ferrer, 2011; Ferrer & Eerola, 2010). While the
authors note that “. . . the social connotations that they (music genres) evoke change over time”
(p. 684), we should also consider that the meaning of specific genres changes over time. A
50-year-old who isn’t up to date with popular music developments might have a completely
different idea of “pop” music than a 16-year-old.
The following two chapters deal with very different topics (The influence of affect on music
choice; and Politics, mediation, social context and public use), but agree about the central role
of social context. Of the trinity of factors that supposedly determine emotional responses to
music – the listener, the music itself, and the situation – it is uncontested that the situation
(which often equals the social context) is the most under-researched of the three. This is even
more surprising when we consider theories of the origins of music. In most evolutionary theo-
ries, music was supposedly born out of social necessities. Social occurrences accompanied by
music may ultimately explain the connection between music and emotion.
PART VII, Applications, presents a selection of current social applications of research in
music and emotion. In these applications, music is exploited as a tool for emotion induction in
different situations in everyday life. The chapters in this section are entitled “Music education”
(Hallam), “Music therapy” (Thaut & Wheeler), “Music, health and well-being” (Hanser), “Music
as a source of emotion in film” (Cohen), and “Music and Marketing” (North & Hargreaves).
The last chapter by North and Hargreaves was particularly refreshing due to its unusual
marketing perspective, in which music is “. . . simply as a means to another end, namely profit”
(p. 909) – similar to Sloboda’s chapter on “Music in everyday life” in which music was also
considered in an everyday environment. Yet the approach is quite different as it does not high-
light the listener’s or recipient’s perspective, but that of individuals/institutions that use music
to manipulate emotion in daily life (e.g., radio, advertising agencies). Both chapters are also
examples for the growing trend of regarding music as dynamic and investigating it in its “natu-
ral environment”, as a part of daily life (Clarke, 2005; DeNora, 2000).
 Book reviews 527

In spite of its occasional weaknesses, this is a great book. It reflects the rapid growth in size
and quality of the field in the last 9 years (since the first edition was published). The editors’
claim on the cover that the book “will be a valuable resource for researchers of all career stages
(and all interested readers)” is certainly valid. The book comprehensively covers the main cur-
rent trends and findings, as well as relevant “historical” perspectives and future outlooks.
Several shortcomings of the first edition have been amended, e.g., the selection and organiza-
tion of the chapters, and discrepancies in definitions and usage of basic terms. If there is one
day a third volume of this kind, we can look forward to an even broader coverage and integra-
tion of work in neighbouring fields, in addition to the further deepening of existing lines of
research.

References
Berlyne, D. E. (1971). Aesthetics and psychobiology. New York, NY: Appleton-Century-Crofts.
Bernatzky, G., Presch, M., Anderson, M., & Panksepp, J. (2011). Emotional foundations of music as a non-
pharmacological pain management tool in modern medicine. Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews,
35(9), 1989–1999.
Clarke, E. F. (2005). Ways of listening: An ecological approach to the perception of musical meaning. New York,
NY: Oxford University Press.
Cooke, D. (1959). The language of music. London, UK: Oxford University Press.
DeNora, T. (2000). Music in everyday life. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Ferrer, R. (2011). Timbral environments: An ecological approach to the cognition of timbre. Empirical
Musicology Review, 6(2), 64–74.
Ferrer, R., & Eerola, T. (2010, August). “Timbral qualities of semantic structures of music”. Proceedings
of the 11th International Society for Music Information Retrieval Conference (ISMIR). Utrecht, The
Netherlands, 571–576.
Gardner, H. (1987). The mind’s new science: A history of the cognitive revolution. New York, NY: Basic.
Juslin, P. N., & Sloboda, J. (Eds.). (2001). Music and emotion: Theory and research. Oxford, UK: Oxford
University Press.
Juslin, P. N., & Sloboda, J. (2011). The past, present, and future of music and emotion research. In P. N.
Juslin & J. A. Sloboda (Eds.), Handbook of music and emotion: Theory, research, applications (pp. 933–
957). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Meyer, L. B. (1956). Emotion and meaning in music. Chicago, IL: Chicago University Press.
Zentner, M., Grandjean, D., & Scherer, K. R. (2008). Emotions evoked by the sound of music:
2013
Characterization, classification, and measurement. Emotion, 8, 494–521.

Karim Weth and Richard Parncutt

Centre for Systematic Musicology, University of Graz, Austria

View publication stats