1 / 14

Automaticity of Musical Processing

Automaticity of Musical Processing. Danielle DeVincentis , Melissa Poole, and Zach Reed Hanover College. Introduction. The Stroop Effect (Stroop, 1938) Automaticity of Movement ( Solso , 2008) Similar effect when playing instrument Can musical literacy become automatic?.

chin
Download Presentation

Automaticity of Musical Processing

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Automaticity of Musical Processing Danielle DeVincentis, Melissa Poole, and Zach Reed Hanover College

  2. Introduction • The Stroop Effect (Stroop, 1938) • Automaticity of Movement (Solso, 2008) • Similar effect when playing instrument • Can musical literacy become automatic?

  3. Previous Research • Irrelevant musical notation causes Stroop effect (Stewart, 2005)

  4. Previous Research, Cont. • Incongruence between auditory and visual stimuli leads to inaccuracy (Wöllner, Halfpenny, Ho, & Kurosawa, 2003).

  5. Hypothesis • When presented with incongruent visual and auditory stimuli, participants who were music-literate would: • have slower reaction times. • be less accurate than participants who could not read music.

  6. Method • Participants • N=38 • 17 male, 21 female • 18-22 years old, with one 53 year old outlier • 38 Caucasian • 25 could read music, 13 could not.

  7. Stimuli • 6 simple tunes • “Mary Had A Little Lamb”, “Frere Jacques”, “Jesus Loves Me”, “Ode to Joy”, “Yankee Doodle”, or “Twinkle, Twinkle, Little Star.” • Musical staff with congruent or incongruent notes

  8. Equipment • Gateway Model FPD1565 LCD Monitor • Gateway Model E4300 Computer • Headphones • Demographic Survey • Java Program (Krantz, 2010)

  9. Procedure • Within-Subjects design • 25 trials per condition • After participants completed one condition, researchers prepared the computer for the next condition • Indicate tune being played • Recorded average reaction time and accuracy for each condition

  10. Results

  11. Discussion • Too much error to make conclusions • Not a problem in traditional Stroop.

  12. Possible Explanation • Continuum of Automaticity (MacLeod & Dunbar, 1988) • Variance in level of training or ability causes varying levels of automaticity.

  13. Future Directions • Faster reaction task • Interactive visual stimuli (Stewart, Walsh, & Frith, 2004; Stewart, 2005) • Association between musical notation and physical actions (Stewart, Walsh &, Frith, 2004) • Phonological loop for music reading?

  14. Questions?

More Related