Main content

Home

Menu

Loading wiki pages...

View
Wiki Version:
Previous research reaches different conclusions on whether non-musicians or musicians are more likely to perceive the beat of a rhythm at a slower tempo (at a higher level in the metric hierarchy). To investigate this, participants completed two tasks for a set of thirty monotonic rhythms in either a Fast tempo (150 bpm, 400 ms inter-beat-interval) or Slow tempo condition (75 bpm, 800 ms inter-beat-interval). Their first task was to adjust the tempo of each rhythm in real time until it was at what they determined to be the best tempo; their second task was to tap along with what they felt was the beat of each rhythm. Participants did this both with and without an isochronous metrical context. Finally, participants’ musical background was assessed using the Goldsmith’s Musical Sophistication Index (GMSI). The ratio of the determined best tempo to the tapped tempo was calculated for each participant and rhythm. If participants tap a beat at the same tempo as their determined tempo, the ratio would be 1:1 between tapped and determined tempo. Of particular interest were ratios of 0.5, where participants tapped at half the tempo of the beat unit, a phenomenon known as a hypermetrical interpretation. Overall, participants produced more hypermetrical interpretations in the Fast tempo condition and for rhythms presented with a metrical context than without a metrical context. Moreover, participants with higher GMSI scores tended to produce more hypermetrical interpretations than participants with lower GMSI scores, but only in the Fast tempo condition.
OSF does not support the use of Internet Explorer. For optimal performance, please switch to another browser.
Accept
This website relies on cookies to help provide a better user experience. By clicking Accept or continuing to use the site, you agree. For more information, see our Privacy Policy and information on cookie use.
Accept
×

Start managing your projects on the OSF today.

Free and easy to use, the Open Science Framework supports the entire research lifecycle: planning, execution, reporting, archiving, and discovery.