↓ Skip to main content

The movements made by performers in a skilled quartet: a distinctive pattern, and the function that it serves

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, January 2013
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
4 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
73 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
78 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
The movements made by performers in a skilled quartet: a distinctive pattern, and the function that it serves
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, January 2013
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00841
Pubmed ID
Authors

Donald Glowinski, Maurizio Mancini, Roddy Cowie, Antonio Camurri, Carlo Chiorri, Cian Doherty

Abstract

When people perform a task as part of a joint action, their behavior is not the same as it would be if they were performing the same task alone, since it has to be adapted to facilitate shared understanding (or sometimes to prevent it). Joint performance of music offers a test bed for ecologically valid investigations of the way non-verbal behavior facilitates joint action. Here we compare the expressive movement of violinists when playing in solo and ensemble conditions. The first violinists of two string quartets (SQs), professional and student, were asked to play the same musical fragments in a solo condition and with the quartet. Synchronized multimodal recordings were created from the performances, using a specially developed software platform. Different patterns of head movement were observed. By quantifying them using an appropriate measure of entropy, we showed that head movements are more predictable in the quartet scenario. Rater evaluations showed that the change does not, as might be assumed, entail markedly reduced expression. They showed some ability to discriminate between solo and ensemble performances, but did not distinguish them in terms of emotional content or expressiveness. The data raise provocative questions about joint action in realistically complex scenarios.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 78 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Italy 2 3%
United Kingdom 1 1%
Japan 1 1%
Canada 1 1%
Unknown 73 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 19 24%
Student > Master 15 19%
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 15%
Student > Bachelor 7 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 8%
Other 13 17%
Unknown 6 8%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 23 29%
Arts and Humanities 14 18%
Computer Science 6 8%
Neuroscience 6 8%
Engineering 4 5%
Other 15 19%
Unknown 10 13%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 25 December 2013.
All research outputs
#13,163,835
of 22,731,677 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#12,439
of 29,561 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#155,819
of 280,774 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#533
of 969 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,731,677 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 29,561 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 56% 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 280,774 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 969 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.