ArticlePloS one2024
Validation and applicability of the music ear test on a large Chinese sample.
Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. 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.
- The big three perfectionism scales: A psychometric characterization of a Chinese music student population.PloS one · 2025Article
- Correction: Validation and applicability of the music ear test on a large Chinese sample.PloS one · 2024Article
- Flow and performance: a quantitative study of elicitation modeling in a piano performance perspective.Frontiers in psychology · 2024Article
- Decoding everyday levels of musical training from subcortical white-matter architecture.Imaging neuroscience (Cambridge, Mass.)Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In the context of extensive disciplinary integration, researchers worldwide have increasingly focused on musical ability. However, despite the wide range of available music ability tests, there remains a dearth of validated tests applicable to China. The Music Ear Test (MET) is a validated scale that has been reported to be potentially suitable for cross-cultural distribution in a Chinese sample. However, no formal translation and cross-cultural reliability/validity tests have been conducted for the Chinese population in any of the studies using the Music Ear Test. This study aims to assess the factor structure, convergence, predictiveness, and validity of the Chinese version of the MET, based on a large sample of Chinese participants (n≥1235). Furthermore, we seek to determine whether variables such as music training level, response pattern, and demographic data such as gender and age have intervening effects on the results. In doing so, we aim to provide clear indications of musical aptitude and expertise by validating an existing instrument, the Music Ear Test, and provide a valid method for further understanding the musical abilities of the Chinese sample.
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.