↓ Skip to main content

What musicians do to induce the sensation of groove in simple and complex melodies, and how listeners perceive it

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, August 2014
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)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (67th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
10 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages
reddit
1 Redditor

Readers on

mendeley
73 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
What musicians do to induce the sensation of groove in simple and complex melodies, and how listeners perceive it
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, August 2014
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00894
Pubmed ID
Authors

Guy Madison, George Sioros

Abstract

Groove is the experience of wanting to move when hearing music, such as snapping fingers or tapping feet. This is a central aspect of much music, in particular of music intended for dancing. While previous research has found considerable consistency in ratings of groove across individuals, it remains unclear how groove is induced, that is, what are the physical properties of the acoustic signal that differ between more and less groove-inducing versions. Here, we examined this issue with a performance experiment, in which four musicians performed six simple and six complex melodies in two conditions with the intention of minimizing and maximizing groove. Analyses of rhythmical and temporal properties from the performances demonstrated some general effects. For example, more groove was associated with more notes on faster metrical levels and syncopation, and less groove was associated with deadpan timing and destruction of the regular pulse. We did not observe that deviations from the metrical grid [i.e., micro-timing (MT)] were a predictor of groove. A listener experiment confirmed that the musicians' manipulations had the intended effects on the experience of groove. A Brunswikian lens model was applied, which estimates the performer-perceiver communication across the two experiments. It showed that the communication achievement for simple melodies was 0.62, and that the matching of performers' and listeners' use of nine rhythmical cues was 0.83. For complex melodies with an already high level of groove, the corresponding values were 0.39 and 0.34, showing that it was much more difficult to "take out" groove from musical structures designed to induce groove.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 10 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 73 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Portugal 1 1%
Chile 1 1%
United Kingdom 1 1%
Spain 1 1%
United States 1 1%
Unknown 68 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 16 22%
Student > Master 10 14%
Researcher 9 12%
Student > Bachelor 8 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 10%
Other 11 15%
Unknown 12 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 24 33%
Arts and Humanities 9 12%
Neuroscience 7 10%
Computer Science 4 5%
Social Sciences 2 3%
Other 11 15%
Unknown 16 22%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 19 September 2019.
All research outputs
#4,507,265
of 22,760,687 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#7,312
of 29,672 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#45,141
of 230,675 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#125
of 380 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,760,687 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 80th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 29,672 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 done well, scoring higher than 75% 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 230,675 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 380 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% of its contemporaries.