↓ Skip to main content

A conceptual review on action-perception coupling in the musicians’ brain: what is it good for?

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, August 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

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

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
114 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
242 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
A conceptual review on action-perception coupling in the musicians’ brain: what is it good for?
Published in
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, August 2014
DOI 10.3389/fnhum.2014.00603
Pubmed ID
Authors

Giacomo Novembre, Peter E. Keller

Abstract

Experience with a sensorimotor task, such as practicing a piano piece, leads to strong coupling of sensory (visual or auditory) and motor cortices. Here we review behavioral and neurophysiological (M/EEG, TMS and fMRI) research exploring this topic using the brain of musicians as a model system. Our review focuses on a recent body of evidence suggesting that this form of coupling might have (at least) two cognitive functions. First, it leads to the generation of equivalent predictions (concerning both when and what event is more likely to occur) during both perception and production of music. Second, it underpins the common coding of perception and action that supports the integration of the motor output of multiple musicians' in the context of joint musical tasks. Essentially, training-based coupling of perception and action might scaffold the human ability to represent complex (structured) actions and to entrain multiple agents-via reciprocal prediction and adaptation-in the pursuit of shared goals.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 242 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Canada 2 <1%
United Kingdom 2 <1%
Netherlands 1 <1%
Italy 1 <1%
Switzerland 1 <1%
Germany 1 <1%
Australia 1 <1%
Japan 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 231 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 56 23%
Researcher 37 15%
Student > Master 33 14%
Student > Bachelor 26 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 11 5%
Other 41 17%
Unknown 38 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 80 33%
Neuroscience 33 14%
Arts and Humanities 24 10%
Medicine and Dentistry 14 6%
Social Sciences 9 4%
Other 38 16%
Unknown 44 18%
Attention Score in Context

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 04 November 2014.
All research outputs
#13,412,618
of 22,763,032 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#4,066
of 7,139 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#111,959
of 235,902 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#151
of 239 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,763,032 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,139 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.5. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% 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 235,902 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 239 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.