Details
| Originalsprache | Englisch |
|---|---|
| Seitenumfang | 18 |
| Fachzeitschrift | Psychology of music |
| Publikationsstatus | Elektronisch veröffentlicht (E-Pub) - 27 Nov. 2024 |
Abstract
Folk psychology posits that music artists’ first albums are considered their best, whereas later albums draw fewer accolades, and that artists’ second albums are considered worse than their first—a phenomenon called the “sophomore slump.” This work is the first large-scale multi-study attempt to test changes in album quality over time and whether a sophomore slump bias exists. Study 1 examined music critics, sampling all A, B, and C entries from The New Rolling Stone Record Guide (2,078 album reviews, 387 artists, 38 critics). Study 2 examined music fans, sampling crowdsourced Rate Your Music ratings of artists with at least one Rolling Stone top 500 album (4,030 album reviews, 254 artists). Using multilevel models, both studies showed significant linear declines in ratings of artists’ album quality over artists’ careers; however, the linear effects were qualified by significantly positive quadratic effects, suggesting slightly convex patterns where declines were steeper among earlier (vs later) albums. Controlling for these trends, a significant and substantial sophomore slump bias was observed for critics’ ratings, but not for fans’ ratings. We discuss theoretical perspectives that may contribute to the observed effects, including regression to the mean, cognitive biases and heuristics, and social psychological accounts.
ASJC Scopus Sachgebiete
- Psychologie (insg.)
- Psychologie (sonstige)
- Geisteswissenschaftliche Fächer (insg.)
- Musik
Zitieren
- Standard
- Harvard
- Apa
- Vancouver
- BibTex
- RIS
in: Psychology of music, 27.11.2024.
Publikation: Beitrag in Fachzeitschrift › Artikel › Forschung › Peer-Review
}
TY - JOUR
T1 - Burning out, fading away, and the sophomore slump
T2 - Critics’ versus fans’ ratings of music artists’ album quality over time
AU - Webster, Gregory D.
AU - Zander, Lysann
N1 - Publisher Copyright: © The Author(s) 2024.
PY - 2024/11/27
Y1 - 2024/11/27
N2 - Folk psychology posits that music artists’ first albums are considered their best, whereas later albums draw fewer accolades, and that artists’ second albums are considered worse than their first—a phenomenon called the “sophomore slump.” This work is the first large-scale multi-study attempt to test changes in album quality over time and whether a sophomore slump bias exists. Study 1 examined music critics, sampling all A, B, and C entries from The New Rolling Stone Record Guide (2,078 album reviews, 387 artists, 38 critics). Study 2 examined music fans, sampling crowdsourced Rate Your Music ratings of artists with at least one Rolling Stone top 500 album (4,030 album reviews, 254 artists). Using multilevel models, both studies showed significant linear declines in ratings of artists’ album quality over artists’ careers; however, the linear effects were qualified by significantly positive quadratic effects, suggesting slightly convex patterns where declines were steeper among earlier (vs later) albums. Controlling for these trends, a significant and substantial sophomore slump bias was observed for critics’ ratings, but not for fans’ ratings. We discuss theoretical perspectives that may contribute to the observed effects, including regression to the mean, cognitive biases and heuristics, and social psychological accounts.
AB - Folk psychology posits that music artists’ first albums are considered their best, whereas later albums draw fewer accolades, and that artists’ second albums are considered worse than their first—a phenomenon called the “sophomore slump.” This work is the first large-scale multi-study attempt to test changes in album quality over time and whether a sophomore slump bias exists. Study 1 examined music critics, sampling all A, B, and C entries from The New Rolling Stone Record Guide (2,078 album reviews, 387 artists, 38 critics). Study 2 examined music fans, sampling crowdsourced Rate Your Music ratings of artists with at least one Rolling Stone top 500 album (4,030 album reviews, 254 artists). Using multilevel models, both studies showed significant linear declines in ratings of artists’ album quality over artists’ careers; however, the linear effects were qualified by significantly positive quadratic effects, suggesting slightly convex patterns where declines were steeper among earlier (vs later) albums. Controlling for these trends, a significant and substantial sophomore slump bias was observed for critics’ ratings, but not for fans’ ratings. We discuss theoretical perspectives that may contribute to the observed effects, including regression to the mean, cognitive biases and heuristics, and social psychological accounts.
KW - archival data
KW - artistic output
KW - creativity
KW - multilevel modeling
KW - music
KW - regression to the mean
KW - sophomore slump
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85210388563&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.31234/osf.io/hceg8
DO - 10.31234/osf.io/hceg8
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85210388563
JO - Psychology of music
JF - Psychology of music
SN - 0305-7356
ER -