Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31666553›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2019

Rapid Brain Responses to Familiar vs. Unfamiliar Music - an EEG and Pupillometry study.

Robert Jagiello, Ulrich Pomper, Makoto Yoneya, Sijia Zhao, Maria Chait

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

24 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. The effect of two different types of music played to cancer patients during chemotherapy on anxiety, nausea, and satisfaction levels.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2023
    Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. The Interplay of Bottom-Up Arousal and Attentional Capture during Auditory Scene Analysis: Evidence from Ocular Dynamics.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2026
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
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

5 authors.

Robert JagielloEar Institute, University College London, London, UK.
Ulrich PomperEar Institute, University College London, London, UK. ulrich.pomper@univie.ac.at.
Makoto YoneyaNTT Communication Science Laboratories, NTT Corporation, Atsugi, 243-0198, Japan.
Sijia ZhaoEar Institute, University College London, London, UK.
Maria ChaitEar Institute, University College London, London, UK. m.chait@ucl.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7808-3593

Funding

Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Human listeners exhibit marked sensitivity to familiar music, perhaps most readily revealed by popular "name that tune" games, in which listeners often succeed in recognizing a familiar song based on extremely brief presentation. In this work, we used electroencephalography (EEG) and pupillometry to reveal the temporal signatures of the brain processes that allow differentiation between a familiar, well liked, and unfamiliar piece of music. In contrast to previous work, which has quantified gradual changes in pupil diameter (the so-called "pupil dilation response"), here we focus on the occurrence of pupil dilation events. This approach is substantially more sensitive in the temporal domain and allowed us to tap early activity with the putative salience network. Participants (N = 10) passively listened to snippets (750 ms) of a familiar, personally relevant and, an acoustically matched, unfamiliar song, presented in random order. A group of control participants (N = 12), who were unfamiliar with all of the songs, was also tested. We reveal a rapid differentiation between snippets from familiar and unfamiliar songs: Pupil responses showed greater dilation rate to familiar music from 100-300 ms post-stimulus-onset, consistent with a faster activation of the autonomic salience network. Brain responses measured with EEG showed a later differentiation between familiar and unfamiliar music from 350 ms post onset. Remarkably, the cluster pattern identified in the EEG response is very similar to that commonly found in the classic old/new memory retrieval paradigms, suggesting that the recognition of brief, randomly presented, music snippets, draws on similar processes.

Indexed as

ElectroencephalographyRecognition, PsychologyAuditory PerceptionBrainFemaleHumansMaleMusicPupilYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID31666553
PMCPMC6821741

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.