ArticleAttention, perception & psychophysics2025
Effects of vocal-motor interference on vocal pitch imitation.
Article in Attention, perception & psychophysics, 2025. 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The act of singing involves perceptual processing of pitch as well as vocal motor planning. One mechanism that may underlie this type of sensorimotor processing is auditory imagery. Prior research showed that less accurate singers, who report less vivid auditory imagery, engage in more preparatory subvocal movements than more accurate singers. The current research addressed the degree to which motor processing is causally involved in the preparatory auditory imagery that is associated with accurate vocal pitch matching. On each trial, participants were presented with a novel four-note target melody, then imagined the melody, and finally sang the melody aloud. During the auditory imagery period of the trials, participants either simply imagined the target melody (control) or imagined the melody while simultaneously engaged in one of the following secondary tasks: silently repeating the syllables /bɑtah/ (articulatory interference), continually droning a low quiet hum (phonatory interference), or exhaling continuously (phonatory suppression). Phonatory interference significantly disrupted vocal pitch matching relative to performance in the control task. Furthermore, the degree of phonatory disruption was related to participants' overall singing accuracy, such that less accurate singers were more disrupted by phonatory interference than more accurate singers. This suggests that less accurate singers rely on subvocalization to prepare for imitation, whereas more accurate singers may be able to rely on mental models of the actions needed to imitate pitch when subvocalization is prevented.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40325328What 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.