Literature DB >> 30404491

Many listeners cannot discriminate major vs minor tone-scrambles regardless of presentation rate.

Solena Mednicoff1, Stephanie Mejia1, Jordan Ali Rashid1, Charles Chubb1.   

Abstract

A tone-scramble is a random sequence of pure tones. Previous studies have found that most listeners (≈ 70%) perform near chance in classifying rapid tone-scrambles composed of multiple copies of notes in G-major vs G-minor triads; the remaining listeners perform nearly perfectly [Chubb, Dickson, Dean, Fagan, Mann, Wright, Guan, Silva, Gregersen, and Kowalski (2013). J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 134(4), 3067-3078; Dean and Chubb (2017). J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 142(3), 1432-1440]. This study tested whether low-performing listeners might improve with slower stimuli. In separate tasks, stimuli were tone-scrambles presented at 115, 231, 462, and 923 notes per min. In each task, the listener classified (with feedback) stimuli as major vs minor. Listeners who performed poorly in any of these tasks performed poorly in all of them. Strikingly, performance was worst in the task with the slowest stimuli. In all tasks, most listeners were biased to respond "major" ("minor") if the stimulus ended on a note high (low) in pitch. Dean and Chubb introduced the name "scale-sensitivity" for the cognitive resource that separates high- from low-performing listeners in tone-scramble classification tasks, suggesting that this resource confers sensitivity to the full gamut of qualities that music can attain by being in a scale. In ruling out the possibility that performance in these tasks depends on speed of presentation, the current results bolster this interpretation.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 30404491      PMCID: PMC6192795          DOI: 10.1121/1.5055990

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am        ISSN: 0001-4966            Impact factor:   1.840


  30 in total

1.  Musical training enhances automatic encoding of melodic contour and interval structure.

Authors:  Takako Fujioka; Laurel J Trainor; Bernhard Ross; Ryusuke Kakigi; Christo Pantev
Journal:  J Cogn Neurosci       Date:  2004 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 3.225

2.  Influence of musical expertise on segmental and tonal processing in Mandarin Chinese.

Authors:  Céline Marie; Franco Delogu; Giulia Lampis; Marta Olivetti Belardinelli; Mireille Besson
Journal:  J Cogn Neurosci       Date:  2010-10-14       Impact factor: 3.225

Review 3.  The relationship of music to the melody of speech and to syntactic processing disorders in aphasia.

Authors:  Aniruddh D Patel
Journal:  Ann N Y Acad Sci       Date:  2005-12       Impact factor: 5.691

4.  Individual differences in auditory abilities.

Authors:  Gary R Kidd; Charles S Watson; Brian Gygi
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2007-07       Impact factor: 1.840

5.  Musical experience shapes top-down auditory mechanisms: evidence from masking and auditory attention performance.

Authors:  Dana L Strait; Nina Kraus; Alexandra Parbery-Clark; Richard Ashley
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  2009-12-14       Impact factor: 3.208

Review 6.  Textures as Probes of Visual Processing.

Authors:  Jonathan D Victor; Mary M Conte; Charles F Chubb
Journal:  Annu Rev Vis Sci       Date:  2017-09-15       Impact factor: 6.422

7.  Temporal modulation transfer functions based upon modulation thresholds.

Authors:  N F Viemeister
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1979-11       Impact factor: 1.840

8.  Musician enhancement for speech-in-noise.

Authors:  Alexandra Parbery-Clark; Erika Skoe; Carrie Lam; Nina Kraus
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2009-12       Impact factor: 3.570

9.  Summary statistics in auditory perception.

Authors:  Josh H McDermott; Michael Schemitsch; Eero P Simoncelli
Journal:  Nat Neurosci       Date:  2013-02-24       Impact factor: 24.884

10.  Transfer of Training between Music and Speech: Common Processing, Attention, and Memory.

Authors:  Mireille Besson; Julie Chobert; Céline Marie
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2011-05-12
View more
  6 in total

1.  Pitch discrimination with mixtures of three concurrent harmonic complexes.

Authors:  Jackson E Graves; Andrew J Oxenham
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2019-04       Impact factor: 1.840

2.  How rests and cyclic sequences influence performance in tone-scramble tasks.

Authors:  Joselyn Ho; Charles Chubb
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2020-06       Impact factor: 1.840

3.  Sensitivity to major versus minor musical modes is bimodally distributed in young infants.

Authors:  Scott A Adler; Kyle J Comishen; Audrey M B Wong-Kee-You; Charles Chubb
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2020-06       Impact factor: 1.840

4.  Inadequate pitch-difference sensitivity prevents half of all listeners from discriminating major vs minor tone sequences.

Authors:  Joselyn Ho; Daniel S Mann; Gregory Hickok; Charles Chubb
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2022-05       Impact factor: 2.482

5.  An auditory-visual tradeoff in susceptibility to clutter.

Authors:  Min Zhang; Rachel N Denison; Denis G Pelli; Thuy Tien C Le; Antje Ihlefeld
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2021-12-07       Impact factor: 4.379

Review 6.  Auditory affective processing, musicality, and the development of misophonic reactions.

Authors:  Solena D Mednicoff; Sivan Barashy; Destiny Gonzales; Stephen D Benning; Joel S Snyder; Erin E Hannon
Journal:  Front Neurosci       Date:  2022-09-23       Impact factor: 5.152

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.