Musical skills and auditory processing in music trainees
,
Abstract
Background and aim: Contraversy exists regarding the link between the psychoacoustical measures and the perceptual rating of musical skills. The study aimed to determine whether the perception of musical abilities, as rated by music teachers, is associated with specific psychoacoustical abilities.
Methods: Twenty-seven children who had undergone Carnatic music training for a duration of 2 months to 1 year were assessed using three psychoacoustical tests: Gap Detection Test (GDT), Duration Discrimination Test (DDT), and Difference Limen of Frequency (DLF) tests. Two music teachers, with different teaching experiences, rated their pitch, rhythm, tempo, auditory memory, and overall musical abilities.
Results: The inter-rater reliability was found to be excellent, suggesting that the ratings given by both teachers were similar. A Spearman’s rank correlation test showed a moderate significant correlation between rating scores awarded by the teachers and the thresholds obtained by the trainees on the psychoacoustical tasks. These correlations were seen between temporal resolution (GDT) with the rating of the teachers for auditory memory (r=-.55, p=.003), and between frequency discrimination at mid-frequency stimuli (DLF at 1000 Hz) and the rating by the teachers for tempo (r=-.62, p=.000). A principal component analysis also grouped GDT and DLF at 1000 Hz with the ratings of the teachers, substantiating the findings of the correlation.
Conclusions: The findings indicated that music teachers are able to provide information only on a few acoustical aspects when rating music trainees. Hence, to get more specific information about the musical abilities of trainees, they should be evaluated using psychoacoustical measures.
2. Sangamanatha A, Fernandes J, Bhat J, Srivastava M, Prakrithi S. Temporal resolution in individuals with and without musical training. J Ind Speech Hear Assoc. 2012; 26(1):27-35.
3. Estis JM, Dean-Claytor A, Moore RE, Rowell TL. Pitch-matching accuracy in trained singers and untrained individuals: The impact of musical interference and noise. J Voice. 2011; 25(2):173-80. [DOI:10.1016/j.jvoice.2009.10.010]
4. Kumar P, Sanju HK, Nikhil J. Temporal resolution and active auditory discrimination skill in vocal musicians. Int Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2016; 20(4):310-4. [DOI:10.1055/s-0035-1570312]
5. Houtsma AJ, Durlach NI, Horowitz DM. Comparative learning of pitch and loudness identification. J Acoust Soc Am. 1987; 81(1):129-32. [DOI:10.1121/1.395021]
6. Zaltz Y, Globerson E, Amir N. Auditory perceptual abilities are associated with specific auditory experience. Front Psychol. 2017; 8:2080. [DOI:10.3389/fpsyg.2017.02080]
7. Monteiro RAM, Nascimento FM, Soares CD, da Costa Ferreira MID. Temporal resolution abilities in musicians and no musicians violinists. Int Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2010; 14(03):302-8. [DOI:10.1590/S1809-48722010000300006]
8. Gordon E. Rating scales and their uses for measuring and evaluating achievement in music performance. Chicago: GIA Publications; 2002.
9. Saunders TC, Holahan JM. Criteria-specific rating scales in the evaluation of high school instrumental performance. J Res Music Educ. 1997;45(2):259-72. [DOI:10.2307/3345585]
10. Teachout DJ. Preservice and experienced teachers' opinions of skills and behaviors important to successful music teaching. J Res Music Educ. 1997; 45(1):41-50. [DOI:10.2307/3345464]
11. Madsen K, Cassidy JW. The effect of focus of attention and teaching experience on perceptions of teaching effectiveness and student learning. J Res Music Educ. 2005; 53(3):222-33. [DOI:10.1177/002242940505300304 ]
12. Madsen K. The effect of accuracy of instruction, teacher delivery, and student attentiveness on musicians' evaluation of teacher effectiveness. J Res Music Educ. 2003; 51(1):38-50. [DOI:10.2307/3345647]
13. Parthasarathy S, Yathiraj A, Sreelatha KR. Relation between performance on psychoacoustical tests and rating of musical abilities in music trainees. J Acoust Soc Ind. 2023; 50(3):148-55.
14. Bendig AW. Transmitted information and the length of rating scales. J Exp Psychol. 1954; 47(5):303-8. [DOI:10.1037/h0055679]
15. Symonds PM. On the Loss of Reliability in Ratings Due to Coarseness of the Scale. J Exp Psychol. 1924; 7(6):456-61. [DOI:10.1037/h0074469]
16. Preston CC, Colman AM. Optimal number of response categories in rating scales: reliability, validity, discriminating power, and respondent preferences. Acta Psychol (Amst). 2000; 104(1):1-15. [DOI:10.1016/S0001-6918(99)00050-5]
17. Bendig AW. The reliability of self-ratings as a function of the amount of verbal anchoring and of the number of categories on the scale. J Appl Psychol. 1953; 37(1):38-41. [DOI:10.1037/h0057911]
18. WHO. Assessment of people with Mental Retartdation. In: Division of Mental Health. Geneva: WHO; 1997. Doi ندارد
19. Grassi M, Soranzo A. MLP: A MATLAB toolbox for rapid and reliable auditory threshold estimation. Behav Res Methods. 2009; 41(1):20-8. [DOI:10.3758/BRM.41.1.20]
20. Amaral MI, Colella-Santos MF. Temporal resolution: Performance of school-aged children in the GIN-Gaps-in-noise test. Braz J Otorhinolaryngol. 2010; 76(6):745-52. [DOI:10.1590/S1808-86942010000600013]
21. Banai K, Yifat R. Perceptual anchoring in preschool children: Not adultlike, but there. PLoS One. 2011; 6(5):e19769. [DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0019769]
22. Vaidyanath R. Efficacy of temporal processing training in older adults with temporal processing deficits. [PhD dissertation]. Mysore: University of Mysore; 2016.
23. Oxenham AJ. Pitch perception. J Neurosci. 2012; 32(39):13335-8. [DOI:10.1523/JNEUROSCI.3815-12.2012]
| Files | ||
| Issue | Articles in Press | |
| Section | Research Article(s) | |
| Keywords | ||
| Musical training gap detection threshold duration discrimination test difference limen for frequency rating scale | ||
| Rights and permissions | |
|
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. |
