MEASURING AUDIENCE RESPONSE ON-LINE: AN EVALUATION OF THE PORTABLE AUDIENCE RESPONSE FACILITY (pARF)

If it is the case that artists and art explore organization of the brain (Zeki & Lamb, 1994), then the investigation of response to artistic performance holds promise as a window to perceptual and cognitive processes. The portable Audience Response Facility (pARF) is an instrument for recording real‐time audience response (Stevens et al. 2009). Twenty, handheld, Personal Digital Assistants (PDAs) collect responses on customizable skin interfaces. The pARF server transmits the customizable options, synchronizes devices and collects data for export. In this paper we report ratings of the usability of the pARF that were collected after 37 participants had used it to continuously rate engagement along a single dimension while a female dance artist gave two performances of a short solo contemporary dance work. The motion of the dancer was also captured as she performed the piece but only usability rating data are reported here. Ratings indicate that the cognitive load imposed by continuously rating engagement while watching a dance performance was manageable and the pARF was easy to use. An extended familiarization phase may further reduce dual task demand.

[1]  Catherine J. Stevens,et al.  Cognition and the temporal arts: Investigating audience response to dance using PDAs that record continuous data during live performance , 2009, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud..

[2]  J. Sloboda.  Exploring the Musical MindCognition, emotion, ability, function , 2004 .

[3]  Robert O. Gjerdingen,et al.  The Psychology of Music , 1972 .

[4]  Richard Loren Bruce,et al.  Fundamentals of physiological psychology , 1977 .

[5]  Stephen McAdams,et al.  Influences of Large-Scale Form on Continuous Ratings in Response to a Contemporary Piece in a Live Concert Setting , 2004 .

[6]  J. Sloboda,et al.  Music and emotion: Theory and research , 2001 .

[7]  R. Passingham,et al.  Action observation and acquired motor skills: an FMRI study with expert dancers. , 2005, Cerebral cortex.

[8]  S Zeki,et al.  The neurology of kinetic art. , 1994, Brain : a journal of neurology.

[9]  J. Russell.  A circumplex model of affect. , 1980 .

[10]  D. Ariely.  Combining experiences over time: the effects of duration, intensity changes and on‐line measurements on retrospective pain evaluations , 1998 .

[11]  Michael J. Martinez,et al.  Cerebral Cortex doi:10.1093/cercor/bhj057 Cerebral Cortex Advance Access published October 12, 2005 The Neural Basis of Human Dance , 2022 .

[12]  Daniel C. Johnson,et al.  Exploring the musical mind : cognition, emotion, ability, function , 2006 .

[13]  R. Weale,et al.  Discovering How Accessible Electroacoustic Music Can Be: the Intention/Reception project , 2006, Organised Sound.

[14]  V. Ramachandran,et al.  The science of art: A neurological theory of aesthetic experience , 1999 .

[15]  J. Russell.  Core affect and the psychological construction of emotion. , 2003, Psychological review.

[16]  C. Krumhansl.  Music as Cognition. , 1987 .

[17]  Clifford K. Madsen,et al.  The Experience of Musical Tension: A Replication of Nielsen's Research Using the Continuous Response Digital Interface , 1993 .

[18]  Eckart Altenmüller,et al.  EMuJoy: Software for continuous measurement of perceived emotions in music , 2007, Behavior research methods.

[19]  Emery Schubert.  Measuring emotion continuously: Validity and reliability of the two-dimensional emotion-space , 1999 .

[20]  Catherine J. Stevens,et al.  Moving with and without music : scaling and lapsing in time in the performance of contemporary dance , 2009 .