Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35786153›Full record

SynthesisQuarterly journal of experimental psychology (2006)2023

The Behavioural Economics of Music: Systematic review and future directions.

Manuel Anglada-Tort, Nikhil Masters, Jochen Steffens, Adrian North, Daniel Müllensiefen

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Quarterly journal of experimental psychology (2006), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Your ears don't change what your eyes like: People can independently report the pleasure of music and images.Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance · 2023
    Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Manuel Anglada-TortAudio Communication Group, Technische Universität Berlin, Berlin, Germany.ORCID 0000-0003-3421-9361
Nikhil MastersDepartment of Economics, School of Social Sciences, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-2171-3491
Jochen SteffensAudio Communication Group, Technische Universität Berlin, Berlin, Germany.
Adrian NorthSchool of Population Health, Curtin University, Perth, WA, Australia.
Daniel MüllensiefenDepartment of Psychology, Goldsmiths, University of London, London, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Music-related decision-making encompasses a wide range of behaviours including those associated with listening choices, composition and performance, and decisions involving music education and therapy. Although research programmes in psychology and economics have contributed to an improved understanding of music-related behaviour, historically, these disciplines have been unconnected. Recently, however, researchers have begun to bridge this gap by employing tools from behavioural economics. This article contributes to the literature by providing a discussion about the benefits of using behavioural economics in music-decision research. We achieve this in two ways. First, through a systematic review, we identify the current state of the literature within four key areas of behavioural economics-heuristics and biases, social decision-making, behavioural time preferences, and dual-process theory. Second, taking findings of the literature as a starting point, we demonstrate how behavioural economics can inform future research. Based on this, we propose

Indexed as

Economics, BehavioralMusicHeuristicsHumansBehavioural economicsdecision-makinginterdisciplinary researchmusicsystematic review

Identifiers

PMID35786153
PMCPMC10119905

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.