The influence of height and key on the perceptual similarity of transposed melodies

Perception and Psychophysics

Volumn 58, Issue 8, 1996, Pages 1252-1259

  Van Egmond, René ^a,b   Povel, Dirk Jan ^a   Maris, Eric ^a  

^a RADBOUD UNIVERSITY NIJMEGEN   (Netherlands)

^b RADBOUD UNIVERSITY NIJMEGEN   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; ATTENTION; FEMALE; HEARING; HUMAN; MALE; MUSIC; PSYCHOPHYSICS; SOUND DETECTION;

ADULT; ATTENTION; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; MUSIC; PITCH DISCRIMINATION; PSYCHOACOUSTICS; SOUND SPECTROGRAPHY;

EID: 0030278843     PISSN: 00315117     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3758/BF03207557     Document Type: Article

References (35)

1. ALDWELL, E., & SCHACHTER, C. (1989). Harmony and voice leading (2nd ed.). San Diego, CA: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.
2. ATTNEAVE, F., & OLSON, R. (1971). Pitch as a medium: A new approach to psychophysical scaling. American Journal of Psychology, 84, 147-166.
3. BARTLETT, J. C., & DOWLING, W. J. (1980). Recognition of transposed melodies: A key-distance effect in developmental perspective. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 6, 501-515.
4. BHARUCHA, J. J. (1984a). Anchoring effects in music: The resolution of dissonance. Cognitive Psychology, 16, 485-518.
5. BHARUCHA, J. J. (1984b). Event hierarchies, tonal hierarchies, and assimilation: A reply to Deutsch and Dowling. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 113, 421-425.
6. BRADLEY, R. A., & TERRY, M. E. (1952). Rank analysis of incomplete block designs: I. The method of paired comparison. Biometrika, 39, 324-335.
7. BROWN, H., & BUTLER, D. (1981). Diatonic trichords as minimal tonal cue-cells. In Theory Only, 5, 39-55.
8. BROWN, H., BUTLER, D., & JONES, M. R. (1994). Musical and temporal influences on key identification. Music Perception, 14, 371-407.
9. BUTLER, D. (1983). The initial identification of tonal centers in music. In D. R. Rogers & J. A. Sloboda (Eds.), The acquisition of symbolic skills (pp. 251-262). New York: Plenum.
10. BUTLER, D. (1989). Describing the perception of tonality in music: A critique of the tonal hierarchy theory and a proposal for a theory of intervallic rivalry. Music Perception, 6, 219-242.
11. CROONEN, W. L. M. (1991). Recognition of tone series containing tonic triads. Music Perception, 9, 231-250.
12. CROONEN, W. L. M., & KOP, P. F. M. (1989). Tonality, tonal scheme, and contour in delayed recognition of tone sequences. Music Perception, 7, 49-68.
13. CUDDY, L. L., COHEN, A. J., & MEWHORT, D. J. (1981). Perception of structure in short melodic sequences. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 7, 869-883.
14. CUDDY, L. L., COHEN, A. L., & MILLER, J. (1979). Melody recognition: The experimental application of musical rules. Canadian Journal of Psychology, 33, 148-156.
15. CUDDY, L. L., & THOMPSON, W. F. (1992). Asymmetry of perceived key movement in chorale sequences: Converging evidence from a probe-tone analysis. Psychological Research, 54, 51-59.
16. DEUTSCH, D. (1984). Two issues concerning tonal hierarchies: Comment on Castellano, Bharucha, and Krumhansl. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 113, 413-416.
17. DEWITT, L. A., & CROWDER, R. G. (1986). Recognition of novel melodies after brief delays. Music Perception, 3, 259-274.
18. DOWLING, W. J. (1978). Scale and contour. Two components of a theory of memory for melodies. Psychological Review, 85, 341-345.
19. DOWLING, W. J. (1986). Context effects on melody recognition: Scale-step versus interval representation. Music Perception, 3, 281-296.
20. DOWLING, W. J. (1991). Tonal strength and melody recognition after long and short delays. Perception & Psychophysics, 50, 305-313.
21. FRANCÈS, R. (1988). The perception of music (W. J. Dowling, Trans.). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. (Original work published in 1958)
22. HERSHMAN, D. P. (1994). Key distance effects in ecological contexts. In I. DeLiège (Ed.), Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference for Music Perception and Cognition (pp. 243-244). Liège: University of Liège.
23. KRUMHANSL, C. L. (1990). Cognitive foundations of musical pitch. New York: Oxford University Press.
24. LUCE, R. D. (1959). Individual choice behavior: A theoretical analysis. New York: Wiley.
25. ROSEN, C. (1976). The classical style (rev. ed.). London: Faber & Faber.
26. SCHOENBERG, A. (1978). Theory of harmony (R. E. Carter, Trans.). London: Faber & Faber. (Original work published in 1922)
27. SHEPARD, R. N. (1982). Geometrical approximations to the structure of musical pitch. Psychological Review, 89, 305-333.
28. TAKEUCHI, A. H., & HULSE, S. H. (1992). Key distance effects in melody recognition reexamined. Music Perception, 10, 1-24.
29. THOMPSON, W. F., & CUDDY, L. L. (1989). Sensitivity to key change in chorale sequences: A comparison of single voices and four-voice harmony. Music Perception, 7, 151-168.
30. THURSTONE, L. L. (1927). A law of comparative judgment. Psychological Review, 34, 273-286.
31. TRAINOR, L. J., & TREHUB, S. E. (1993). Musical context effects in infants and adults: Key distance. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 19, 615-626.
32. TRAINOR, L. J., & TREHUB, S. E. (1994). Key membership and implied harmony in Western tonal music: Developmental perspectives. Perception & Psychophysics, 56, 125-132.
33. VAN EGMOND, R., & POVEL, D. J. (1994a). Factors in the recognition of transposed melodies: A reply to Takeuchi and Hulse. Music Perception, 12, 137-142.
34. VAN EGMOND, R., & POVEL, D. J. (1994b). Similarity judgments on transposed melodies as a function of overlap and key-distance. In I. DeLiège (Ed.), Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference for Music Perception and Cognition (pp. 219-220). Liège: University of Liège.
35. VAN EGMOND, R., & POVEL, D. J. (1996). Perceived similarity of exact and inexact transpositions. Acta Psychologica, 92, 283-295.