Musicians and non-musicians consonant/dissonant perception investigated by EEG and fMRI
Jo, H.; Hsieh, T.-H.; Chhien, W.-C.; Shaw, F.-Z.; Liang, S.-F.; Kung, C.-C.
Show abstract
The perception of two (or more) simultaneous musical notes, depending on their pitch interval(s), could be broadly categorized as consonant or dissonant. Previous studies have suggested that musicians and non-musicians adopt different strategies when discerning music intervals: the frequency ratio (perfect fifth or tritone) for the former, and frequency differences (e.g., roughness vs. non-roughness) for the latter. To extend and replicate this previous finding, in this follow-up study we reran the ElectroEncephaloGraphy (EEG) experiment, and separately collected functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) data of the same protocol. The behavioral results replicated our previous findings that musicians used pitch intervals and nonmusicians roughness for consonant judgments. And the ERP amplitude differences between groups in both frequency ratio and frequency differences were primarily around N1 and P2 periods along the midline channels. The fMRI results, with the joint analyses by univariate, multivariate, and connectivity approaches, further reinforce the involvement of midline and related-brain regions in consonant/dissonance judgments. Additional representational similarity analysis (or RSA), and the final spatio-temporal searchlight RSA (or ss-RSA), jointly combined the fMRI-EEG into the same representational space, providing final support on the neural substrates of neurophysiological signatures. Together, these analyses not just exemplify the importance of replication, that musicians rely more on top-down knowledge for consonance/dissonance perception; but also demonstrate the advantages of multiple analyses in constraining the findings from both EEG and fMRI. Significance StatementIn this study, the neural correlates of consonant and dissonant perception has been revisited with both EEG and fMRI. Behavioral results of the current study well replicated the pattern of our earlier work (Kung et al., 2014), and the ERP results, though showing that both musicians and nonmusicians processed rough vs. non-rough notes similarly, still supported the top-down modulation in musicians likely through long-term practice. The fMRI results, combining univariate (GLM contrast and functional connectivity) and multivariate (MVPA searchlight and RSA on voxel-, connectivity-, and spatio-temporal RSA searchlight-level) analyses, commonly speak to lateralized and midline regions, at different time windows, as the core brain networks that underpin both musicians and nonmusicians consonant/dissonant perceptions.
Matching journals
The top 6 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Leading and Following: Noise Differently Affects Semantic and Acoustic Processing during Naturalistic Speech Comprehension 96%
- Decomposing neural responses to melodic surprise in musicians and non-musicians: evidence for a hierarchy of predictions in the auditory system 96%
- Natural Music Evokes Correlated EEG Responses Reflecting Temporal Structure and Beat 96%
Similar papers in this journal
Similar papers in this journal
- Dissociation of connectivity for syntactic irregularity and perceptual ambiguity in musical chord stimuli 97%
- Short-term audiovisual spatial training enhances electrophysiological correlates of auditory selective spatial attention 95%
- The Neural Response at the Fundamental Frequency of Speech is Modulated by Word-level Acoustic and Linguistic Information 95%
Similar papers in this journal
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.