↓ Skip to main content

Long-term music training modulates the recalibration of audiovisual simultaneity

Overview of attention for article published in Experimental Brain Research, April 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (80th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (94th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
6 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
11 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
36 Mendeley
Title
Long-term music training modulates the recalibration of audiovisual simultaneity
Published in
Experimental Brain Research, April 2018
DOI 10.1007/s00221-018-5269-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Crescent Jicol, Michael J. Proulx, Frank E. Pollick, Karin Petrini

Abstract

To overcome differences in physical transmission time and neural processing, the brain adaptively recalibrates the point of simultaneity between auditory and visual signals by adapting to audiovisual asynchronies. Here, we examine whether the prolonged recalibration process of passively sensed visual and auditory signals is affected by naturally occurring multisensory training known to enhance audiovisual perceptual accuracy. Hence, we asked a group of drummers, of non-drummer musicians and of non-musicians to judge the audiovisual simultaneity of musical and non-musical audiovisual events, before and after adaptation with two fixed audiovisual asynchronies. We found that the recalibration for the musicians and drummers was in the opposite direction (sound leading vision) to that of non-musicians (vision leading sound), and change together with both increased music training and increased perceptual accuracy (i.e. ability to detect asynchrony). Our findings demonstrate that long-term musical training reshapes the way humans adaptively recalibrate simultaneity between auditory and visual signals.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 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 36 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 36 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 22%
Researcher 5 14%
Student > Master 4 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 8%
Student > Bachelor 3 8%
Other 8 22%
Unknown 5 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 16 44%
Neuroscience 5 14%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 8%
Computer Science 2 6%
Social Sciences 1 3%
Other 2 6%
Unknown 7 19%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. 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 December 2022.
All research outputs
#3,449,132
of 24,929,945 outputs
Outputs from Experimental Brain Research
#253
of 3,389 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#66,289
of 332,303 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Experimental Brain Research
#4
of 50 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,929,945 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 86th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,389 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.4. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its peers.
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 332,303 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 50 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its contemporaries.