↓ Skip to main content

Auditory imagery and the poor-pitch singer

Overview of attention for article published in Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, February 2013
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
1 X user
peer_reviews
1 peer review site
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
52 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
115 Mendeley
Title
Auditory imagery and the poor-pitch singer
Published in
Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, February 2013
DOI 10.3758/s13423-013-0401-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Peter Q. Pfordresher, Andrea R. Halpern

Abstract

The vocal imitation of pitch by singing requires one to plan laryngeal movements on the basis of anticipated target pitch events. This process may rely on auditory imagery, which has been shown to activate motor planning areas. As such, we hypothesized that poor-pitch singing, although not typically associated with deficient pitch perception, may be associated with deficient auditory imagery. Participants vocally imitated simple pitch sequences by singing, discriminated pitch pairs on the basis of pitch height, and completed an auditory imagery self-report questionnaire (the Bucknell Auditory Imagery Scale). The percentage of trials participants sung in tune correlated significantly with self-reports of vividness for auditory imagery, although not with the ability to control auditory imagery. Pitch discrimination was not predicted by auditory imagery scores. The results thus support a link between auditory imagery and vocal imitation.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 115 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Japan 2 2%
United States 1 <1%
Denmark 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Unknown 110 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 27 23%
Student > Ph. D. Student 18 16%
Researcher 16 14%
Student > Bachelor 13 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 5%
Other 15 13%
Unknown 20 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 37 32%
Arts and Humanities 21 18%
Neuroscience 10 9%
Medicine and Dentistry 5 4%
Social Sciences 5 4%
Other 12 10%
Unknown 25 22%