↓ Skip to main content

Synchronized tapping facilitates learning sound sequences as indexed by the P300

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, October 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (53rd percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
3 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
57 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Synchronized tapping facilitates learning sound sequences as indexed by the P300
Published in
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, October 2014
DOI 10.3389/fnhum.2014.00826
Pubmed ID
Authors

Keiko S. Kamiyama, Kazuo Okanoya

Abstract

The purpose of the present study was to determine whether and how single finger tapping in synchrony with sound sequences contributed to the auditory processing of them. The participants learned two unfamiliar sound sequences via different methods. In the tapping condition, they learned an auditory sequence while they tapped in synchrony with each sound onset. In the no tapping condition, they learned another sequence while they kept pressing a key until the sequence ended. After these learning sessions, we presented the two melodies again and recorded event-related potentials (ERPs). During the ERP recordings, 10% of the tones within each melody deviated from the original tones. An analysis of the grand average ERPs showed that deviant stimuli elicited a significant P300 in the tapping but not in the no-tapping condition. In addition, the significance of the P300 effect in the tapping condition increased as the participants showed highly synchronized tapping behavior during the learning sessions. These results indicated that single finger tapping promoted the conscious detection and evaluation of deviants within the learned sequences. The effect was related to individuals' musical ability to coordinate their finger movements along with external auditory events.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 57 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
India 1 2%
Germany 1 2%
Unknown 55 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 20 35%
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 21%
Student > Master 8 14%
Student > Bachelor 3 5%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 4%
Other 7 12%
Unknown 5 9%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 30 53%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 7 12%
Neuroscience 5 9%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 5%
Computer Science 2 4%
Other 2 4%
Unknown 8 14%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 30 January 2015.
All research outputs
#14,413,384
of 25,182,110 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#3,783
of 7,638 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#124,802
of 267,317 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#139
of 237 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,182,110 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,638 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.9. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 267,317 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 53% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 237 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.