ArticleScientific reports2022
The role of auditory feedback in the motor learning of music in experienced and novice performers.
Article in Scientific reports, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- On stage: the association between self-efficacy, flow, anxiety, and performers' well-being in musical performance.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Article
- Divergent effects of pitch feedback on online and offline motor sequence learning.Frontiers in behavioral neuroscience · 2025Article
- Interaction of motor practice and memory training in expressive piano performance: expanding the possibilities of improvisation.Psychological research · 2024Article
- Effects of individual practice on joint musical synchronization.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2024Article
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
Musical learning is related to the development of audio-visuomotor associations linking gestures with musical sounds. To study the role of auditory feedback in learning, 115 students (56 guitarists, 59 pianists) at the beginner, intermediate and advanced levels were recruited. Playing with sound (audio-motor feedback), mute practice (motor feedback), and piece listening (auditory feedback) were compared to first sight reading to assess the role of auditory and motor feedback in procedural learning. The procedure consisted of the execution of a standard piece for determining the students' level and 4 further music executions (every week for 4 weeks), preceded by different practice conditions (for 12 min, once a day, for 5 days). Real musical pieces (e.g., Segovia, Schubert, Bartók) were used. Performance evaluation focused on four macro-categories: note, rhythm, dynamics and smoothness. For both instruments, first-sight reading (A - M -) was associated with the worst performance: silent motor practice (A - M +) resulted in learning the rhythmic structure of the piece and in a smoother performance. Listening to pieces (A + M -) resulted in learning the agogics and in improving articulation and smoothness. Listening during performance (A + M +) resulted in fewer intonation errors. Interestingly, auditory feedback was more relevant for beginners than for advanced students, as evidenced by the greater benefits of listening during practice.
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.