Psychomusicology: Music, Mind and Brain 

About: Psychomusicology: Music, Mind and Brain is an academic journal published by American Psychological Association. The journal publishes majorly in the area(s): Music psychology & Music and emotion. It has an ISSN identifier of 0275-3987. Over the lifetime, 292 publications have been published receiving 3055 citations. The journal is also known as: Psychomusicology & Psychomusicology : music, mind, & brain.

Ever-changing cycles of musical pleasure: The role of dopamine and anticipation.

Abstract: Music listening is highly pleasurable and important part of most people's lives. Because music has no obvious importance for survival, the ubiquity of music remains puzzling and the brain processes underlying this attraction to music are not well understood. Like other rewards (such as food, sex, and money), pleasurable music activates structures in the dopaminergic reward system, but how music manages to tap into the brain's reward system is less clear. Here we propose a novel framework for understanding musical pleasure, suggesting that music conforms to the recent concept of pleasure cycles with phases of "wanting/expectation," "liking," and "learning." We argue that expectation is fundamental to musical pleasure, and that music can be experienced as pleasurable both when it fulfills and violates expectations. Dopaminergic neurons in the midbrain represent expectations and violations of expecta- tions (prediction errors) in response to "rewards" and "alert/incentive salience signals." We argue that the human brain treats music as an alert/incentive salience signal, and suggest that the activity of dopamine neurons represents aspects of the phases of musical expectation and musical learning, but not directly the phase of music liking. Finally, we propose a computational model for understanding musical anticipation and pleasure operationalized through the recent theory of predictive coding.Keywords: music, pleasure, reward, dopamine, anticipationSupplemental materials: http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0031126.suppSome people prefer Mozart whereas others prefer Nirvana or Bob Dylan, but common to most of us is that we find great pleasure in listening to music. Indeed, music is consistently rated to be among the top 10 things people find pleasurable in life (Dube & Lebel, 2003). Consequently, researchers have suggested that music listening is rewarding in itself (Huron, 2001, 2003; Vuust & Kringelbach, 2009; Wallin, Merker, & Brown, 2000; Zald & Zatorre, 2011). This might explain why music is so widely used across situations in our everyday life and why music has sustained such prominence in human cultural development (Fitch, 2005; Rentfrow & Gosling, 2003).Similar to the processing of other rewards, the brain structures that mediate musical perception and pleasure are thought to be anatomically and functionally separated (Peretz, 2010). This sep- aration of perception and pleasure has permeated existing music research (Peretz, 2010), and consequently most studies concentrate entirely on one or the other system. This may partly be owing to the advantages and disadvantages associated with different brain imaging methods. Functional MRI (fMRI) and positron emission tomography (PET) have high spatial resolution, allowing the study of emotion processing by midbrain structures. However, the high spatial resolution comes at the cost of the temporal resolution, which is essential for studying online musical anticipation. A high temporal resolution measuring changes on the basis of millisec- onds is an integrated part of electroencephalography (EEG) and magneto-encephalography (MEG). Consequently many EEG and MEG studies describe anticipatory processes in the auditory cor- tices (Brattico et al., 2009; Brattico, Tervaniemi, Naatanen, & Peretz, 2006; Fujioka, Trainor, Ross, Kakigi, & Pantev, 2004; Garza Villarreal, Brattico, Leino, Ostergaard, & Vuust, 2011; Janata, 1995; Koelsch, 2009; Koelsch, Jentschke, Sammler, & Mietchen, 2007; Leino, Brattico, Tervaniemi, & Vuust, 2007; Loui, Grent-"t-Jong, Torpey, & Woldorff, 2005; Maess, Koelsch, Gunter, & Friederici, 2001; Patel, Gibson, Ratner, Besson, & Holcomb, 1998; Schiavetto, Cortese, & Alain, 1999; Toiviainen & Krumhansl, 2003; Trainor, McDonald, & Alain, 2002), but few relate this knowledge to the pleasure of music.In this article, we propose a novel framework for understanding musical pleasure. …

Individual differences in rhythmic ability: Behavioral and neuroimaging investigations.

Abstract: Rhythmic abilities vary widely in the general population, but little is known about the factors that give rise to this variability. One factor may be musical training. Another may be differences in auditory short-term memory (STM) capacity (the amount of auditory information that can be remembered over a few seconds). Finally, as rhythms with temporal regularity (e.g., a beat) are more easily remembered and reproduced, individual differences in sensitivity to regularity may contribute to rhythmic ability differences. To investigate the contribution of each of these factors to rhythm reproduction ability, we assessed auditory STM capacity (using digit and pseudoword span tasks), beat sensitivity (using the Beat Alignment Test [BAT]), and levels of musical training. Rhythmic ability was measured using a rhythm reproduction test. We found that STM capacity, beat sensitivity, and musical training predicted unique variance in rhythm reproduction performance. Using functional magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), we assessed individual differences in brain activity related to the previously measured auditory STM capacity, BAT score, musical training, and rhythmic ability, while participants performed a rhythm discrimination task. Activity in posterior superior temporal gyrus and middle temporal gyrus negatively correlated with auditory STM capacity. Positive correlations with BAT score were found in leftangular gyrus, supplementary motor area, and premotor cortex. Positive correlations with musical training were observed in leftposterior middle temporal gyrus, and negative correlations were observed in leftsupplementary motor area. The findings implicate both auditory and motor areas in factors that underlie individual differences in rhythmic ability.Keywords: music, rhythm, timing, auditory perceptionSupplemental materials: http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0031188.suppAnecdotally, rhythmic ability is thought to vary widely across healthy individuals. Several individuals report having "no sense of rhythm," and previous work has investigated individuals with specific rhythmic impairments or "beat deafness" (Foxton, Nandy, & Griffiths, 2006; Phillips-Silver et al., 2011). However, little work has specifically investigated and reported on the range of rhythmic ability in the general population, and the underlying causes of individual differences in rhythmic ability have yet to be fully elucidated. Three factors seem like promising candidates and form the focus of the current study. The first is auditory short-term memory (STM) capacity, as this has been shown to relate to rhythm reproduction, discrimination, and synchronization ability in previous work (Bailey & Penhune, 2010; Saito, 2001; Wallentin, Nielsen, Friis-Olivarius, Vuust, & Vuust, 2010). The second is sensitivity to the presence of regular temporal structure (e.g., beat structure). Rhythms that have a regular temporal structure are discriminated and reproduced better than irregular rhythms (Grahn & Brett, 2007; Patel, Iversen, Chen, & Repp, 2005); therefore, it is likely that individuals with better ability to detect this regularity (when it exists) should do better on rhythm tasks. The third factor is musical training. However, musical training may exert an indirect effect by influencing the aforementioned factors: musical training is associated with better auditory STM span (Bailey & Penhune, 2010; Saito, 2001; Wallentin et al., 2010), and seems likely to improve beat detection, although this has not been tested directly. Music also may have direct effects on rhythmic ability, such as providing a range of strategies for accurate rhythmic encoding and reproduction. The potential role of each of these factors will now be described and considered in more detail.Auditory STMMost models of auditory STM posit two components: one involved in representing the to-be-remembered items and the other involved in maintaining those representations (Baddeley & Hitch, 1974; Cowan, 1999). …

Singing, health and well-being: A health psychologist's review

Abstract: - Research is reviewed on singing, health and well-beingfrom the perspective of health psychology. In accordance with a multidimensional, biopsychosocial conceptual framework commonly used by health psychologists, the review is organized by biological, psychological and social factors that collectively contribute to health. Studies using quantitative and qualitative methods are reviewed that include singing prescribed as intervention, and research with professional and amateur singers. Although research findings are often inconclusive, preliminary evidence suggests possible benefits of breathing and short-term immune response. Mood, stress, and social responses may vary with amateur or professional status and nature of the singing activity (group or solo, rehearsal or performance). Potential mechanisms and variables for future study are proposed. Recommendations for further research include studies that are interdisciplinary, address basic descriptive phenomena as well as explanatory mechanisms, utilize appropriate methods and controls while maintaining validity, measure long-term health, examine potential drawbacks of singing, and explore linkages among biological, psychological and social processes. KEYWORDS - singing, health, well-being, singing and health, singing and well-being The idea that singing may be conducive to wellbeing is an old one. In Cervantes' (1605/1885) 17th century novel, Don Quixote states that "he who sings scares away his woes" (p. 171). Longfellow's (1881) poem "The Day is Done" similarly suggests the power of singing to drive away sorrow (e.g., "Such songs have power to quiet The restless pulse of care"; p. 134). In addition, Hunter (1999) reports on references to physical health benefits of singing in his review of articles published between 1891 and 1949 in a popular music magazine, The Etude. Why might singing be beneficial? Everyday experience suggests that singing favorite, upbeat songs may energize us or even provide a physical workout. Indeed, singing was discussed by several Etude authors as an appropriate means of exercising the lungs in women, because they were often prohibited from participating in exercise, and, moreover, had to wear restricting corsets (Hunter, 1999). Hunter (1999) also reports that Etude authors described singing as a pleasant diversion for hospitalized patients. Given that positive mood and exercise are generally related to good health (Pressman & Cohen, 2005), it is not unreasonable to expect potential benefits to health from singing. Is there research evidence to support the common-sense and anecdotal claims of benefits of singing to health and well-being? In contrast to research on benefits of music to health or well-being, singing is under-researched. A search of a common psychology database (Psychlnfo) yielded 550 journal articles on music (and not singing), health or well-being, in contrast to 48 articles on singing, health or well-being. Research on singing varies widely in purpose, methodological approach, and measures. Examples include a quasi-experimental study of successful aging in choral members vs. nonchoral members of a retirement community (Wise, Hartmann, & Fischer, 1992); an experimental study of singing as an inexpensive and non-pharmacological treatment for distress following knee surgery (Giaquinto, Cacciato, Minasi, Sostero, &: Amanda, 2006), and associations between performance satisfaction and immune response in professional choral singers (Beck, Cesario, Yousefi, & Enamoto, 2000). Given the varying populations and methodological approaches, perhaps it is not surprising that the research lacks an overarching theoretical framework, including what is meant by health and well-being. One objective of the present review is to consolidate research on singing, health and well-being into a common conceptual framework in order to facilitate its evaluation, consideration of possible mechanisms by which singing may have its effects, and suggestions for further research. …

Expressive timing and dynamics in infant- directed and non-infant-directed singing

Abstract: Expressive variations in timing and dy- namics were examined in infant-directed performances of Twinkle, Twinkle, Little Star by mothers and in non-infant-directed performances by non-mothers. Mothers sang to their infants, and non-mothers sang informally on their own. Acoustic analyses revealed that infant-directed performances had fewer expres- sive variations in timing such as rubato and ritar - dando than did non-infant-directed performances. By contrast, infant-directed performances exhibited a greater dynamic range than non-infant-directed perfor- mances. Moreover, relations between pitch height and amplitude were more tightly coupled in infant-directed than in non-infant-directed performances. We interpret mothers' liberal modulation of dynamics and their lim- ited modulation of timing as fine-tuning to the percep - tual, emotional, and informational needs of infants.

Differences in auditory imagery self-report predict neural and behavioral outcomes.

Abstract: Mental imagery has been a topic of psychological inquiry for a number of years, with most researchers focusing on visual imagery. However, auditory imagery has recently been studied as a topic in its own right (see Hubbard, 2010 for a review). Auditory imagery has been implicated in a variety of mental processes, such as reality monitoring (Johnson & Raye, 1981), working memory and rehearsal (Rudner, Ronnberg & Hugdahl, 2005; Tinti, Cornoldi, & Marschark, 1997), and hallucinations (Vitrovic & Biller, 2013), as well as musical processing (Crowder, 1989; Cupchik, Phillips, & Hill, 2001; Halpern, 1988a, 1988b). The experience of "hearing" something in one's head is a phenomenologically strong one, particularly for music (Bailes, 2007) and is accompanied by identifiable changes in cerebral blood flow (Halpern & Zatorre, 1999; Zvyagintsev et al., 2013) as well as neural electrical signal (Schaefer, Vlek, & Desain, 2011).One aspect common to many of these studies is that performance is usually averaged over all the participants in a study. Sometimes group differences, particularly with regard to musical training, are examined. For instance, Aleman, Nieuwenstein, Bocker, and de Haan (2000b) found that musicians were superior to nonmusicians in both musical and nonmusical auditory imagery tasks, but not in a visual imagery task. However, individual differences in auditory imagery at a finer level have not typically been addressed.In contrast, individual differences in visual imagery have been studied extensively, most commonly by self-report measures such as the Vividness of Visual Imagery Questionnaire (VVIQ; Marks, 1973). This questionnaire is designed to elicit self-report measures of visual imagery vividness, and has been used in hundreds of studies either probing differences in reported imagery ability for different participant groups or assessing the predictive value of self-reported imagery for more objective tasks presumed to require imagery. McKelvie (1995) reviewed both reliability and validity of the VVIQ in a large meta-analysis. Reliability as measured by internal consistency was quite good. Predictive validity, on the other hand, seems to vary by type of task. As examples, VVIQ scores predict reasonably well performance on tasks such as memory for visual detail, but not performance on mental rotation tasks. Kozhevnikov, Kozhevnikov, Yu, and Blazhenkova (2013) link vividness to one aspect of visual imagery skill called object visualization; this predicts artistic creativity-in contrast to spatial visualization, which predicts scientific creativity.Similar questions about individual variability are of potential interest to auditory imagery researchers. For instance, Aleman, Nieuwenstein, Bocker, and de Haan (2000a) compared the imagery abilities of nonpsychotic individuals who report occasional verbal hallucinations to those of nonhallucinators. Hallucinators reported more vivid visual imagery on the VVIQ than nonhallucinators. Barrett (1993) found a similar result using the visual vividness subscale of Betts' (1909) Questionnaire Upon Mental Imagery or QMI (see more below). On the other hand, both studies reported that the two groups did not differ on self-reported vividness of auditory imagery using the auditory subscale of the QMI.Despite this interest in documenting individual differences in auditory imagery, scales for capturing this ability have been slow to develop. An early attempt to index individual differences was Betts' (1909) QMI, which assesses imagery in seven sensory modalities, including audition. The QMI presents people with written descriptions, using visual, auditory, or other sensory detail, and asks them to rate the vividness of their mental images of certain aspects of the descriptions. Participants use a 7-point rating scale for vividness and clarity, ranging from "perfectly clear and vivid as the actual experience" to "no image present at all. …