↓ Skip to main content

Music expertise shapes audiovisual temporal integration windows for speech, sinewave speech, and music

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

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Readers on

mendeley
80 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
Music expertise shapes audiovisual temporal integration windows for speech, sinewave speech, and music
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, August 2014
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00868
Pubmed ID
Authors

Hweeling Lee, Uta Noppeney

Abstract

This psychophysics study used musicians as a model to investigate whether musical expertise shapes the temporal integration window for audiovisual speech, sinewave speech, or music. Musicians and non-musicians judged the audiovisual synchrony of speech, sinewave analogs of speech, and music stimuli at 13 audiovisual stimulus onset asynchronies (±360, ±300 ±240, ±180, ±120, ±60, and 0 ms). Further, we manipulated the duration of the stimuli by presenting sentences/melodies or syllables/tones. Critically, musicians relative to non-musicians exhibited significantly narrower temporal integration windows for both music and sinewave speech. Further, the temporal integration window for music decreased with the amount of music practice, but not with age of acquisition. In other words, the more musicians practiced piano in the past 3 years, the more sensitive they became to the temporal misalignment of visual and auditory signals. Collectively, our findings demonstrate that music practicing fine-tunes the audiovisual temporal integration window to various extents depending on the stimulus class. While the effect of piano practicing was most pronounced for music, it also generalized to other stimulus classes such as sinewave speech and to a marginally significant degree to natural speech.

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 80 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 2 3%
Netherlands 1 1%
Philippines 1 1%
Austria 1 1%
Unknown 75 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 23 29%
Student > Master 20 25%
Researcher 9 11%
Student > Bachelor 5 6%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 6%
Other 13 16%
Unknown 5 6%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 28 35%
Neuroscience 18 23%
Arts and Humanities 5 6%
Medicine and Dentistry 5 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 4%
Other 11 14%
Unknown 10 13%
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 25 September 2014.
All research outputs
#14,198,374
of 22,759,618 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#15,057
of 29,671 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#118,827
of 230,235 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#260
of 380 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,759,618 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 29,671 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.5. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% 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 230,235 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 380 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.