↓ Skip to main content

Synchronization and leadership in string quartet performance: a case study of auditory and visual cues

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, June 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
51 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
61 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
Synchronization and leadership in string quartet performance: a case study of auditory and visual cues
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, June 2014
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00645
Pubmed ID
Authors

Renee Timmers, Satoshi Endo, Adrian Bradbury, Alan M. Wing

Abstract

Temporal coordination between members of a string quartet was investigated across repeated performances of an excerpt of Haydn's string quartet in G Major, Op. 77 No. 1. Cross-correlations between interbeat intervals of performances at different lags showed a unidirectional dependence of Viola on Violin I, and of Violin I on Cello. Bidirectional dependence was observed for the relationships between Violin II and Cello and Violin II and Viola. Own-reported dependencies after the performances reflected these measured dependencies more closely than dependencies of players reported by the other players, which instead showed more typical leader-follower patterns in which Violin I leads. On the other hand, primary leadership from Violin I was observed in an analysis of the bow speed characteristics preceding the first tone onset. The anticipatory movement of Violin I set the tempo of the excerpt. Taken together the results show a more complex and differentiated pattern of dependencies than expected from a traditional role division of leadership suggesting several avenues for further research.

Timeline

Login to access the full chart related to this output.

If you don’t have an account, click here to discover Explorer

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 61 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 2 3%
France 1 2%
Portugal 1 2%
Canada 1 2%
United States 1 2%
Unknown 55 90%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 15 25%
Student > Master 11 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 15%
Student > Bachelor 5 8%
Professor > Associate Professor 5 8%
Other 9 15%
Unknown 7 11%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 14 23%
Arts and Humanities 12 20%
Engineering 5 8%
Social Sciences 5 8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 5%
Other 10 16%
Unknown 12 20%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 24 July 2014.
All research outputs
#14,271,191
of 23,314,015 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#14,539
of 31,003 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#118,714
of 229,359 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#234
of 382 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,314,015 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 31,003 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% of its peers.
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 229,359 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 382 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.