Literature DB >> 25934332

The auditory dynamic attending theory revisited: A closer look at the pitch comparison task.

Anna-Katharina R Bauer1, Manuela Jaeger2, Jeremy D Thorne3, Alexandra Bendixen4, Stefan Debener5.   

Abstract

The dynamic attending theory as originally proposed by Jones, 1976. Psychol. Rev. 83(5), 323-355 posits that tone sequences presented at a regular rhythm entrain attentional oscillations and thereby facilitate the processing of sounds presented in phase with this rhythm. The increased interest in neural correlates of dynamic attending requires robust behavioral indicators of the phenomenon. Here we aimed to replicate and complement the most prominent experimental implementation of dynamic attending (Jones et al., 2002. Psychol. Sci. 13(4), 313-319). The paradigm uses a pitch comparison task in which two tones, the initial and the last of a longer series, have to be compared. In-between the two, distractor tones with variable pitch are presented, at a regular pace. A comparison tone presented in phase with the entrained rhythm is hypothesized to lead to better behavioral performance. Aiming for a conceptual replication, four different variations of the original paradigm were created which were followed by an exact replication attempt. Across all five experiments, only 40 of the 140 tested participants showed the hypothesized pattern of an inverted U-shaped profile in task accuracy, and the group average effects did not replicate the pattern reported by Jones et al., 2002. Psychol. Sci. 13(4), 313-319 in any of the five experiments. However, clear evidence for a relationship between musicality and overall behavioral performance was found. This study casts doubt on the suitability of the pitch comparison task for demonstrating auditory dynamic attending. We discuss alternative tasks that have been shown to support dynamic attending theory, thus lending themselves more readily to studying its neural correlates. This article is part of a Special Issue entitled SI: Prediction and Attention.
Copyright © 2015 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Entrainment; Musicality; Replication; Temporal expectation

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 25934332     DOI: 10.1016/j.brainres.2015.04.032

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Brain Res        ISSN: 0006-8993            Impact factor:   3.252


  12 in total

1.  Surface and structural effects of pitch and time on global melodic expectancies.

Authors:  Jon B Prince; Leong-Min Loo
Journal:  Psychol Res       Date:  2016-01-12

Review 2.  Rhythmic abilities in humans and non-human animals: a review and recommendations from a methodological perspective.

Authors:  Fleur L Bouwer; Vivek Nityananda; Andrew A Rouse; Carel Ten Cate
Journal:  Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci       Date:  2021-08-23       Impact factor: 6.671

3.  Effects of temporally regular versus irregular distractors on goal-directed cognition and behavior.

Authors:  Troby Ka-Yan Lui; Malte Wöstmann
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2022-06-15       Impact factor: 4.996

4.  Word Recall is Affected by Surrounding Metrical Context.

Authors:  Amelia E Kimball; Loretta K Yiu; Duane G Watson
Journal:  Lang Cogn Neurosci       Date:  2019-09-20       Impact factor: 2.331

5.  Musical Scales in Tone Sequences Improve Temporal Accuracy.

Authors:  Min S Li; Massimiliano Di Luca
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2018-02-06

Review 6.  The tempos of performance.

Authors:  Nir Shalev; Anna-Katharina R Bauer; Anna C Nobre
Journal:  Curr Opin Psychol       Date:  2019-06-18

Review 7.  Synchronisation of Neural Oscillations and Cross-modal Influences.

Authors:  Anna-Katharina R Bauer; Stefan Debener; Anna C Nobre
Journal:  Trends Cogn Sci       Date:  2020-04-18       Impact factor: 20.229

8.  Intrinsic Rhythmicity Predicts Synchronization-Continuation Entrainment Performance.

Authors:  Trevor McPherson; Dorita Berger; Sankaraleengam Alagapan; Flavio Fröhlich
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2018-08-06       Impact factor: 4.379

9.  Can rhythm-induced attention improve the perceptual representation?

Authors:  Asaf Elbaz; Yaffa Yeshurun
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2020-04-16       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  No behavioural evidence for rhythmic facilitation of perceptual discrimination.

Authors:  Wy Ming Lin; Djamari A Oetringer; Iske Bakker-Marshall; Jill Emmerzaal; Anna Wilsch; Hesham A ElShafei; Elie Rassi; Saskia Haegens
Journal:  Eur J Neurosci       Date:  2021-05-04       Impact factor: 3.698

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.