ArticlePsychonomic bulletin & review2024
Investigating acoustic numerosity illusions in professional musicians.
Article in Psychonomic bulletin & review, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Abstract
Various studies have reported an association between musical expertise and enhanced visuospatial and mathematical abilities. A recent work tested the susceptibility of musicians and nonmusicians to the Solitaire numerosity illusion finding that also perceptual biases underlying numerical estimation are influenced by long-term music training. However, the potential link between musical expertise and different perceptual mechanisms of quantitative estimation may be either limited to the visual modality or universal (i.e., modality independent). We addressed this question by developing an acoustic version of the Solitaire illusion. Professional musicians and nonmusicians listened to audio file recordings of piano and trombone notes and were required to estimate the number of piano notes. The stimuli were arranged to form test trials, with piano and trombone notes arranged in a way to form the Solitaire pattern, and control trials, with randomly located notes to assess their quantitative abilities in the acoustic modality. In the control trials, musicians were more accurate in numerical estimation than nonmusicians. In the presence of illusory patterns, nonmusicians differed from musicians in the esteem of regularly arranged vs. randomly arranged notes. This suggests that the association between long-term musical training and different perceptual mechanisms underlying numerical estimation may not be confined to the visual modality. However, neither musicians nor nonmusicians seemed to be susceptible to the acoustic version of the Solitaire illusion, suggesting that the emergence of this illusion may be stimulus and task-dependent.
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.