↓ Skip to main content

Auditory-motor adaptation to frequency-altered auditory feedback occurs when participants ignore feedback

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Neuroscience, January 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
2 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
30 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
50 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Auditory-motor adaptation to frequency-altered auditory feedback occurs when participants ignore feedback
Published in
BMC Neuroscience, January 2013
DOI 10.1186/1471-2202-14-25
Pubmed ID
Authors

Dwayne Keough, Colin Hawco, Jeffery A Jones

Abstract

Auditory feedback is important for accurate control of voice fundamental frequency (F(0)). The purpose of this study was to address whether task instructions could influence the compensatory responding and sensorimotor adaptation that has been previously found when participants are presented with a series of frequency-altered feedback (FAF) trials. Trained singers and musically untrained participants (nonsingers) were informed that their auditory feedback would be manipulated in pitch while they sang the target vowel [/α /]. Participants were instructed to either 'compensate' for, or 'ignore' the changes in auditory feedback. Whole utterance auditory feedback manipulations were either gradually presented ('ramp') in -2 cent increments down to -100 cents (1 semitone) or were suddenly ('constant') shifted down by 1 semitone.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 50 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Netherlands 2 4%
Japan 1 2%
Canada 1 2%
Unknown 46 92%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 26%
Student > Master 8 16%
Researcher 7 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 8%
Student > Postgraduate 4 8%
Other 7 14%
Unknown 7 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 10 20%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 8 16%
Engineering 6 12%
Neuroscience 4 8%
Linguistics 4 8%
Other 8 16%
Unknown 10 20%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 07 October 2020.
All research outputs
#9,831,832
of 16,025,406 outputs
Outputs from BMC Neuroscience
#558
of 1,116 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#83,014
of 153,202 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Neuroscience
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 16,025,406 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,116 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.8. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% 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 153,202 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them