Literature DB >> 10909141

Proactive interference of a sequence of tones in a two-tone pitch comparison task.

T Ruusuvirta1.   

Abstract

Subjects compared pitches of a standard tone and a comparison tone separated by 1,300-3,000 msec and responded according to whether the comparison tone sounded higher or lower in pitch than the standard tone. Three interfering tones at 300-msec intervals were presented before each pair of tones. Their pitch range varied, being either below or above the pitch of the standard tone; in some of the trials, their pitches were identical to the pitch of the standard tone (no interference). The highest error rate in performance was found when the interfering tones and the comparison tone deviated in the same direction in pitch from the standard tone. In turn, their deviations in the opposite directions resulted in the lowest error rate. This effect was not found to be dependent on whether the interfering tones were randomly ordered or monotonically ordered, together with the standard tone, into melodically ascending/descending sequences. An intermediate error rate in performance was found when the interfering tones and the standard tone were identical. The results support earlier hypotheses, presented in the context of retroactive interference, by demonstrating proactive interference of a tone sequence at the level of representations of individual tones.

Mesh:

Year:  2000        PMID: 10909141     DOI: 10.3758/bf03212989

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev        ISSN: 1069-9384


  9 in total

1.  Interference in memory for tonal pitch: implications for a working-memory model.

Authors:  T Pechmann; G Mohr
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  1992-05

2.  Representation of abstract attributes of auditory stimuli in the human brain.

Authors:  J Saarinen; P Paavilainen; E Schöger; M Tervaniemi; R Näätänen
Journal:  Neuroreport       Date:  1992-12       Impact factor: 1.837

3.  Mismatch between anticipated and actually presented sound stimuli in humans.

Authors:  G B Remijn; Y Sugita
Journal:  Neurosci Lett       Date:  1996-01-05       Impact factor: 3.046

4.  Facilitation by repetition in recognition memory for tonal pitch.

Authors:  D Deutsch
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  1975-05

5.  Speech versus nonspeech in pitch memory.

Authors:  C Semal; L Demany; K Ueda; P A Hallé
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1996-08       Impact factor: 1.840

6.  Neural mechanisms of the octave illusion: electrophysiological evidence for central origin.

Authors:  J Ross; M Tervaniemi; R Näätänen
Journal:  Neuroreport       Date:  1996-12-20       Impact factor: 1.837

7.  Stimulus duration and the sensory memory trace: an event-related potential study.

Authors:  P Paavilainen; D Jiang; J Lavikainen; R Näätänen
Journal:  Biol Psychol       Date:  1993-04       Impact factor: 3.251

8.  Temporal integration of auditory information in sensory memory as reflected by the mismatch negativity.

Authors:  M Tervaniemi; J Saarinen; P Paavilainen; N Danilova; R Näätänen
Journal:  Biol Psychol       Date:  1994-10       Impact factor: 3.251

9.  Neural representations of abstract stimulus features in the human brain as reflected by the mismatch negativity.

Authors:  M Tervaniemi; S Maury; R Näätänen
Journal:  Neuroreport       Date:  1994-03-21       Impact factor: 1.837

  9 in total
  3 in total

1.  Proactive interference in a two-tone pitch-comparison task without additional interfering tones.

Authors:  Timo Ruusuvirta; Jan Wikgren; Piia Astikainen
Journal:  Psychol Res       Date:  2006-09-26

2.  Auditory proactive interference in monkeys: the roles of stimulus set size and intertrial interval.

Authors:  James Bigelow; Amy Poremba
Journal:  Learn Behav       Date:  2013-09       Impact factor: 1.986

3.  Trial-to-trial carryover in auditory short-term memory.

Authors:  Kristina M Visscher; Michael J Kahana; Robert Sekuler
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn       Date:  2009-01       Impact factor: 3.051

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.