Tonal Expectations Influence Early Pitch Processing

2011 ◽  
Vol 23 (10) ◽  
pp. 3095-3104 ◽  
Author(s):  
Frédéric Marmel ◽  
Fabien Perrin ◽  
Barbara Tillmann

The present study investigated the ERP correlates of the influence of tonal expectations on pitch processing. Participants performed a pitch discrimination task between penultimate and final tones of melodies. These last two tones were a repetition of the same musical note, but penultimate tones were always in tune whereas final tones were slightly out of tune in half of the trials. The pitch discrimination task allowed us to investigate the influence of tonal expectations in attentive listening and, for penultimate tones, without being confounded by decisional processes (occurring on final tones). Tonal expectations were manipulated by a tone change in the first half of the melodies that changed their tonality, hence changing the tonal expectedness of penultimate and final tones without modifying them acoustically. Manipulating tonal expectations with minimal acoustic changes allowed us to focus on the cognitive expectations based on listeners' knowledge of tonal structures. For penultimate tones, tonal expectations modulated processing within the first 100 msec after onset resulting in an Nb/P1 complex that differed in amplitude between tonally related and less related conditions. For final tones, out-of-tune tones elicited an N2/P3 complex and, on in-tune tones only, tonal manipulation elicited an ERAN/RATN-like negativity overlapping with the N2. Our results suggest that cognitive tonal expectations can influence pitch perception at several steps of processing, starting with early attentional selection of pitch.

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dominique T Vuvan ◽  
Marília Nunes-Silva ◽  
Isabelle Peretz

A major theme driving research in congenital amusia is related to the modularity of this musical disorder, with two possible sources of the amusic pitch perception deficit. The first possibility is that the amusic deficit is due to a broad disorder of acoustic pitch processing that has the effect of disrupting downstream musical pitch processing, and the second is that amusia is specific to a musical pitch processing module. To interrogate these hypotheses, we performed a meta-analysis on two types of effect sizes contained within 42 studies in the amusia literature: the performance gap between amusics and controls on tasks of pitch discrimination, broadly defined, and the correlation between specifically acoustic pitch perception and musical pitch perception. To augment the correlation database, we also calculated this correlation using data from 106 participants tested by our own research group. We found strong evidence for the acoustic account of amusia. The magnitude of the performance gap was moderated by the size of pitch change, but not by whether the stimuli were composed of tones or speech. Furthermore, there was a significant correlation between an individual's acoustic and musical pitch perception. However, individual cases show a double dissociation between acoustic and musical processing, which suggests that although most amusic cases are probably explainable by an acoustic deficit, there is heterogeneity within the disorder. Finally, we found that tonal language fluency does not influence the performance gap between amusics and controls, and that there was no evidence that amusics fare worse with pitch direction tasks than pitch discrimination tasks. These results constitute a quantitative review of the current literature of congenital amusia, and suggest several new directions for research, including the experimental induction of amusic behaviour through transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) and the systematic exploration of the developmental trajectory of this disorder.


2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kerry MM Walker ◽  
Ray Gonzalez ◽  
Joe Kang ◽  
Josh H McDermott ◽  
Andrew J King

AbstractPitch perception is critical for recognizing speech, music and animal vocalizations, but its neurobiological basis remains unsettled, in part because of divergent results from different species. We used a combination of behavioural measurements and cochlear modelling to investigate whether species-specific differences exist in the cues used to perceive pitch and whether these can be accounted for by differences in the auditory periphery. Ferrets performed a pitch discrimination task well whenever temporal envelope cues were robust, but not when resolved harmonics only were available. By contrast, human listeners exhibited the opposite pattern of results on an analogous task, consistent with previous studies. Simulated cochlear responses in the two species suggest that the relative salience of the two types of pitch cues can be attributed to differences in cochlear filter bandwidths. Cross-species variation in pitch perception may therefore reflect the constraints of estimating a sound’s fundamental frequency given species-specific cochlear tuning.


NeuroImage ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 163 ◽  
pp. 231-243 ◽  
Author(s):  
Xilin Zhang ◽  
Nicole Mlynaryk ◽  
Shruti Japee ◽  
Leslie G. Ungerleider

1998 ◽  
Vol 11 (4) ◽  
pp. 329-347 ◽  
Author(s):  
M.W. Von Grünau ◽  
P. Pakneshan ◽  
A. Bertone

2020 ◽  
Vol 32 (6) ◽  
pp. 1170-1183 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dirk Kerzel ◽  
Nicolas Burra

Top–down control of attention allows us to resist attentional capture by salient stimuli that are irrelevant to our current goals. Recently, it was proposed that attentional suppression of salient distractors contributes to top–down control by biasing attention away from the distractor. With small search displays, attentional suppression of salient distractors may even result in reduced RTs on distractor-present trials. In support of attentional suppression, electrophysiological measures revealed a positivity between 200 and 300 msec contralateral to the distractor, which has been referred to as distractor positivity (PD). We reexamined distractor benefits with small search displays and found that the positivity to the distractor was followed by a negativity to the distractor. The negativity, referred to as N2pc, is considered an index of attentional selection of the contralateral element. Thus, attentional suppression of the distractor (PD) preceded attentional capture (N2pc) by the distractor, which is at odds with the idea that attentional suppression avoids attentional capture by the distractor. Instead, we suggest that the initial “PD” is not a positivity to the distractor but rather a negativity (N2pc) to the contralateral context element, suggesting that, initially, the context captured attention. Subsequently, the distractor was selected because, paradoxically, participants searched all lateral target positions (even when irrelevant) before they examined the vertical positions. Consistent with this idea, search times were shorter for lateral than vertical targets. In summary, the early voltage difference in small search displays is unrelated to distractor suppression but may reflect capture by the context.


Author(s):  
O. H. RUNDELL ◽  
HAROLD L. WILLIAMS

Performance on two auditory choice reaction time (RT) tasks was studied in a group of 12 subjects under the influence of graded doses of ethyl alcohol ranging from placebo to 1 g/kg body weight. Deadline procedures were employed in a side discrimination and a pitch discrimination task to permit the calculation of speed-accuracy tradeoff functions (accuracy versus RT). Accuracy declined as a function of dose, but alcohol did not significantly influence RT. Conversely, accuracy was not affected by task; but the pitch discrimination task required an average of 88 ms more time than the side task. Alcohol dose and task produced independent effects on the speed-accuracy tradeoff function. As dose increased, the slope of the tradeoff function declined; but slopes were equivalent for the two tasks. On the other hand, the x-intercept (where accuracy equals chance levels) was 90 ms greater for the pitch task than for the side task.


2010 ◽  
Vol 15 (3) ◽  
pp. 137-148 ◽  
Author(s):  
Arthur Peter Wunderlich ◽  
Carlos Schönfeldt-Lecuona ◽  
Robert Christian Wolf ◽  
Kristina Dorn ◽  
Edgar Bachor ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document