EXPERTISE AND EVALUATIVE DEVELOPMENT IN M USIC

One hundred and forty-seven college students and 50 sixth-grade childr en, each being classified into three groups according to piano-playing skill, rated goodness of five sets of four performances (original (O) , monotonous (M), swapped (S), and artificial (A)). M was constructed by electronically equalizing the intensity of the sounds, S by swappin g the intensity among a half of the sounds, and A by assigning the int ensity to each sound according to three rules. Immediately after the i nitial rating, the college students were exposed to the same sets of p erformances and were asked to rate again and to choose from eight adje ctives the one describing best each performance. Analyses of ratings a nd of adjective selection revealed that even the non learners could di fferentially and appropriately evaluate three performances (O, M, and S); as to A, the better skilled, the more negative was the subjects' e valuation, Coherence of ratings across the five sets for best performa nce was greater among the better skilled and the older subjects. Stabi lity of goodness ranking between the two ratings by the college studen ts was higher among the experienced than the non learners.