↓ Skip to main content

Selective auditory grouping by zebra finches: testing the iambic–trochaic law

Overview of attention for article published in Animal Cognition, April 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
20 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
51 Mendeley
Title
Selective auditory grouping by zebra finches: testing the iambic–trochaic law
Published in
Animal Cognition, April 2017
DOI 10.1007/s10071-017-1089-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Michelle Spierings, Jeroen Hubert, Carel ten Cate

Abstract

Humans have a strong tendency to spontaneously group visual or auditory stimuli together in larger patterns. One of these perceptual grouping biases is formulated as the iambic/trochaic law, where humans group successive tones alternating in pitch and intensity as trochees (high-low and loud-soft) and alternating in duration as iambs (short-long). The grouping of alternations in pitch and intensity into trochees is a human universal and is also present in one non-human animal species, rats. The perceptual grouping of sounds alternating in duration seems to be affected by native language in humans and has so far not been found among animals. In the current study, we explore to which extent these perceptual biases are present in a songbird, the zebra finch. Zebra finches were trained to discriminate between short strings of pure tones organized as iambs and as trochees. One group received tones that alternated in pitch, a second group heard tones alternating in duration, and for a third group, tones alternated in intensity. Those zebra finches that showed sustained correct discrimination were next tested with longer, ambiguous strings of alternating sounds. The zebra finches in the pitch condition categorized ambiguous strings of alternating tones as trochees, similar to humans. However, most of the zebra finches in the duration and intensity condition did not learn to discriminate between training stimuli organized as iambs and trochees. This study shows that the perceptual bias to group tones alternating in pitch as trochees is not specific to humans and rats, but may be more widespread among animals.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users 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 51 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 2%
Unknown 50 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 24%
Student > Bachelor 8 16%
Researcher 8 16%
Student > Master 8 16%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 6%
Other 5 10%
Unknown 7 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 13 25%
Neuroscience 9 18%
Linguistics 8 16%
Psychology 6 12%
Chemistry 2 4%
Other 5 10%
Unknown 8 16%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 19 June 2017.
All research outputs
#17,886,132
of 22,963,381 outputs
Outputs from Animal Cognition
#1,305
of 1,460 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#221,203
of 309,848 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Animal Cognition
#22
of 22 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,963,381 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,460 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 33.4. This one is in the 8th percentile – i.e., 8% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 309,848 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 22 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.