ArticlePloS one2017
What can we learn about beat perception by comparing brain signals and stimulus envelopes?
Article in PloS one, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
16 citing papers in PubMed.
- Intrinsic Rhythmicity Predicts Synchronization-Continuation Entrainment Performance.Scientific reports · 2018Trial
- Critical Review on the Development and Evolution of Beat Perception.Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences · 2026Review
- Polyrhythms in the Brain: Metrical Priming, Acoustic Balance, and Perceptual Biases.Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences · 2026Article
- Investigating Generalizability of Top-Down Neural Representation of Meter in Infancy.Journal of cognitive neuroscience · 2025Article
- Tempo-dependent selective enhancement of neural responses at the beat frequency can be mimicked by both an oscillator and an evoked model.Cerebral cortex (New York, N.Y. : 1991) · 2025Article
- Perceived rhythmic regularity is greater for song than speech: examining acoustic correlates of rhythmic regularity in speech and song.Frontiers in psychology · 2023Article
- "What" and "when" predictions modulate auditory processing in a mutually congruent manner.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2023Article
- Musical rhythm effects on visual attention are non-rhythmical: evidence against metrical entrainment.Social cognitive and affective neuroscience · 2021Article
- Auditory cortical representation of music favours the perceived beat.Royal Society open science · 2020Article
- Frequency tagging cannot measure neural tracking of beat or meter.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2019Article
- Preferred Tempo and Low-Audio-Frequency Bias Emerge From Simulated Sub-cortical Processing of Sounds With a Musical Beat.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2018Article
- The Involvement of Endogenous Neural Oscillations in the Processing of Rhythmic Input: More Than a Regular Repetition of Evoked Neural Responses.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2018Review
- What makes a rhythm complex? The influence of musical training and accent type on beat perception.PloS one · 2018Article
- Editorial: The Evolution of Rhythm Cognition: Timing in Music and Speech.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2017Article
- Directed Motor-Auditory EEG Connectivity Is Modulated by Music Tempo.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2017Article
- Prefrontal High Gamma in ECoG Tags Periodicity of Musical Rhythms in Perception and Imagination.eNeuroArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Entrainment of neural oscillations on multiple time scales is important for the perception of speech. Musical rhythms, and in particular the perception of a regular beat in musical rhythms, is also likely to rely on entrainment of neural oscillations. One recently proposed approach to studying beat perception in the context of neural entrainment and resonance (the "frequency-tagging" approach) has received an enthusiastic response from the scientific community. A specific version of the approach involves comparing frequency-domain representations of acoustic rhythm stimuli to the frequency-domain representations of neural responses to those rhythms (measured by electroencephalography, EEG). The relative amplitudes at specific EEG frequencies are compared to the relative amplitudes at the same stimulus frequencies, and enhancements at beat-related frequencies in the EEG signal are interpreted as reflecting an internal representation of the beat. Here, we show that frequency-domain representations of rhythms are sensitive to the acoustic features of the tones making up the rhythms (tone duration, onset/offset ramp duration); in fact, relative amplitudes at beat-related frequencies can be completely reversed by manipulating tone acoustics. Crucially, we show that changes to these acoustic tone features, and in turn changes to the frequency-domain representations of rhythms, do not affect beat perception. Instead, beat perception depends on the pattern of onsets (i.e., whether a rhythm has a simple or complex metrical structure). Moreover, we show that beat perception can differ for rhythms that have numerically identical frequency-domain representations. Thus, frequency-domain representations of rhythms are dissociable from beat perception. For this reason, we suggest caution in interpreting direct comparisons of rhythms and brain signals in the frequency domain. Instead, we suggest that combining EEG measurements of neural signals with creative behavioral paradigms is of more benefit to our understanding of beat perception.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.