characters as a function of the two contrasting musical soundtracks (Weak and Strong) and a condition with no soundtrack (Control). If there were no effect of background music, the data for the two music conditions would not differ from the Control conditions and all lines would be horizontal (Figure © 1988 by the Regents of the University of California, reprinted from Music Perception, Vol. 6, No. 1, Fall, p. 107, by permission.)

These previous examples have considered abstract visual materials and simple auditory materials. What of more realistic and complex materials that would be viewed in a movie theatre, typical of the everyday film experience? In one study of such complex materials, short (1 min) film music excerpts, entitled Conflict (M1) and Say Hello To Love (M2), were presented to over 50 students subjects who rated them on semantic differential scales. As a measure of denotative meaning, subjects also rated the appropriateness of various titles including Say Hello to Love and Conflict. Figure 5 (left top row) shows that the Evaluative, Potency and Activity ratings differ significantly for the two pieces. Figure 5 (right top) shows that the judged appropriateness of the two titles also differed for the two pieces. (Two other titles were also judged, but, for simplicity, are not shown.) As well, two contrasting film excerpts were selected. One (F1) showed a male chasing a female; the other (F2) showed a fist fight between two males. These were rated on semantic differential and titles by another large group of subjects and again, as shown in the second row of Figure 5, the patterns of affective and denotative meanings differ for the two film excerpts. Comparing the judgments for the music and film, it can be seen, for example, that M1 and F2 are denotatively similar and M2 and F2 are opposites. If music influences meaning of film, then the different musical backgrounds should alter judgments of the meaning of the films. To test this, different groups of subjects rated the films in the presence of the different soundtracks. One group rated M1F1, M2F2 and the other rated M1F2, M2F1. As can be seen in the bottom half of Figure 5, the judgments of the combined stimuli reflect the meanings of the individual components in many cases although not all. F1 is influenced directly by M1 but not so obviously by M2 for both affective and denotative meaning. F2 tends to dominate over M1 and M2. These results lead to further questions about the roles of salience and ambiguity of meaning of separate audiovisual components on the direct influence of music on film judgments.5