Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30077016›Full record

ArticleConsciousness and cognition2018

Musical hallucinations, musical imagery, and earworms: A new phenomenological survey.

Peter Moseley, Ben Alderson-Day, Sukhbinder Kumar, Charles Fernyhough

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Consciousness and cognition, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
1.9field-weighted citation impact, top 15% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

11 citing papers in PubMed, 27 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Peter MoseleyPsychology Department, Durham University, South Road, Durham DH1 3LE, United Kingdom; School of Psychology, University of Central Lancashire, Marsh Lane, Preston PR1 2HE, United Kingdom. Electronic address: peter.moseley@durham.ac.uk.
Ben Alderson-DayPsychology Department, Durham University, South Road, Durham DH1 3LE, United Kingdom.
Sukhbinder KumarInstitute of Neuroscience, Newcastle University, Newcastle NE1 7RU, United Kingdom.
Charles FernyhoughPsychology Department, Durham University, South Road, Durham DH1 3LE, United Kingdom.
Durham University · GBNewcastle University · GBUniversity of Lancashire · GB

Funding

Wellcome TrustWellcome Trust WT098455Wellcome Trust WT108720
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Musical hallucinations (MH) account for a significant proportion of auditory hallucinations, but there is a relative lack of research into their phenomenology. In contrast, much research has focused on other forms of internally generated musical experience, such as earworms (involuntary and repetitive inner music), showing that they can vary in perceived control, repetitiveness, and in their effect on mood. We conducted a large online survey (N = 270), including 44 participants with MH, asking participants to rate imagery, earworms, or MH on several variables. MH were reported as occurring less frequently, with less controllability, less lyrical content, and lower familiarity, than other forms of inner music. MH were also less likely to be reported by participants with higher levels of musical expertise. The findings are outlined in relation to other forms of hallucinatory experience and inner music, and their implications for psychological models of hallucinations discussed.

Indexed as

MusicAdolescentAdultAgedAuditory PerceptionFemaleHallucinationsHumansImaginationMaleMiddle AgedYoung AdultAuditory hallucinationsEarwormsMental imageryMusical hallucinationsPhenomenology

Identifiers

PMID30077016
PMCPMC6204882
OpenAlexW2886486862

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.