↓ Skip to main content

Memory for surface features of unfamiliar melodies: independent effects of changes in pitch and tempo

Overview of attention for article published in Psychological Research, February 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
28 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
55 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
Title
Memory for surface features of unfamiliar melodies: independent effects of changes in pitch and tempo
Published in
Psychological Research, February 2013
DOI 10.1007/s00426-013-0483-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

E. Glenn Schellenberg, Stephanie M. Stalinski, Bradley M. Marks

Abstract

A melody's identity is determined by relations between consecutive tones in terms of pitch and duration, whereas surface features (i.e., pitch level or key, tempo, and timbre) are irrelevant. Although surface features of highly familiar recordings are encoded into memory, little is known about listeners' mental representations of melodies heard once or twice. It is also unknown whether musical pitch is represented additively or interactively with temporal information. In two experiments, listeners heard unfamiliar melodies twice in an initial exposure phase. In a subsequent test phase, they heard the same (old) melodies interspersed with new melodies. Some of the old melodies were shifted in key, tempo, or key and tempo. Listeners' task was to rate how well they recognized each melody from the exposure phase while ignoring changes in key and tempo. Recognition ratings were higher for old melodies that stayed the same compared to those that were shifted in key or tempo, and detrimental effects of key and tempo changes were additive in between-subjects (Experiment 1) and within-subjects (Experiment 2) designs. The results confirm that surface features are remembered for melodies heard only twice. They also imply that key and tempo are processed and stored independently.

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 55 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 4%
Unknown 53 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 24%
Researcher 8 15%
Student > Bachelor 7 13%
Student > Master 7 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 7%
Other 10 18%
Unknown 6 11%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 26 47%
Arts and Humanities 5 9%
Neuroscience 5 9%
Computer Science 4 7%
Social Sciences 3 5%
Other 5 9%
Unknown 7 13%
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 03 February 2014.
All research outputs
#15,293,290
of 22,743,667 outputs
Outputs from Psychological Research
#546
of 962 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#182,615
of 283,101 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Psychological Research
#6
of 11 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,743,667 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 962 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.6. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% 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 283,101 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 11 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.