| Title |
The Shepard–Risset glissando: music that moves you
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Experimental Brain Research, July 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00221-017-5033-1 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Rebecca A. Mursic, Bernhard E. Riecke, Deborah Apthorp, Stephen Palmisano |
| Abstract |
Sounds are thought to contribute to the perceptions of self-motion, often via higher-level, cognitive mechanisms. This study examined whether illusory self-motion (i.e. vection) could be induced by auditory metaphorical motion stimulation (without providing any spatialized or low-level sensory information consistent with self-motion). Five different types of auditory stimuli were presented in mono to our 20 blindfolded, stationary participants (via a loud speaker array): (1) an ascending Shepard-Risset glissando; (2) a descending Shepard-Risset glissando; (3) a combined Shepard-Risset glissando; (4) a combined-adjusted (loudness-controlled) Shepard-Risset glissando; and (5) a white-noise control stimulus. We found that auditory vection was consistently induced by all four Shepard-Risset glissandi compared to the white-noise control. This metaphorical auditory vection appeared similar in strength to the vection induced by the visual reference stimulus simulating vertical self-motion. Replicating past visual vection findings, we also found that individual differences in postural instability appeared to significantly predict auditory vection strength ratings. These findings are consistent with the notion that auditory contributions to self-motion perception may be predominantly due to higher-level cognitive factors. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 38 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 38 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 9 | 24% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 6 | 16% |
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 11% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 2 | 5% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 4 | 11% |
| Unknown | 12 | 32% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 12 | 32% |
| Arts and Humanities | 3 | 8% |
| Computer Science | 2 | 5% |
| Neuroscience | 2 | 5% |
| Engineering | 2 | 5% |
| Other | 5 | 13% |
| Unknown | 12 | 32% |
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 24 July 2018.
All research outputs
#17,909,758
of 22,994,508 outputs
Outputs from Experimental Brain Research
#2,397
of 3,240 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#227,624
of 316,999 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Experimental Brain Research
#41
of 66 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,994,508 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 3,240 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.0. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% 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 316,999 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 66 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.