↓ Skip to main content

The Unresponsive Partner: Roles of Social Status, Auditory Feedback, and Animacy in Coordination of Joint Music Performance

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, February 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (81st percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (69th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
13 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
23 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
51 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
The Unresponsive Partner: Roles of Social Status, Auditory Feedback, and Animacy in Coordination of Joint Music Performance
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, February 2017
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00149
Pubmed ID
Authors

Alexander P. Demos, Daniel J. Carter, Marcelo M. Wanderley, Caroline Palmer

Abstract

We examined temporal synchronization in joint music performance to determine how social status, auditory feedback, and animacy influence interpersonal coordination. A partner's coordination can be bidirectional (partners adapt to the actions of one another) or unidirectional (one partner adapts). According to the dynamical systems framework, bidirectional coordination should be the optimal (preferred) state during live performance. To test this, 24 skilled pianists each performed with a confederate while their coordination was measured by the asynchrony in their tone onsets. To promote social balance, half of the participants were told the confederate was a fellow participant - an equal social status. To promote social imbalance, the other half was told the confederate was an experimenter - an unequal social status. In all conditions, the confederate's arm and finger movements were occluded from the participant's view to allow manipulation of animacy of the confederate's performances (live or recorded). Unbeknownst to the participants, half of the confederate's performances were replaced with pre-recordings, forcing the participant into unidirectional coordination during performance. The other half of the confederate's performances were live, which permitted bidirectional coordination between performers. In a final manipulation, both performers heard the auditory feedback from one or both of the performers' parts removed at unpredictable times to disrupt their performance. Consistently larger asynchronies were observed in performances of unidirectional (recorded) than bidirectional (live) performances across all conditions. Participants who were told the confederate was an experimenter reported their synchrony as more successful than when the partner was introduced as a fellow participant. Finally, asynchronies increased as auditory feedback was removed; removal of the confederate's part hurt coordination more than removal of the participant's part in live performances. Consistent with the assumption that bidirectional coupling yields optimal coordination, an unresponsive partner requires the other member to do all the adapting for the pair to stay together.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 13 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 51 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Canada 1 2%
Unknown 50 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 22%
Researcher 10 20%
Student > Master 8 16%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 12%
Student > Bachelor 2 4%
Other 6 12%
Unknown 8 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 20 39%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 8%
Neuroscience 3 6%
Computer Science 2 4%
Sports and Recreations 2 4%
Other 10 20%
Unknown 10 20%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. 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 21 March 2017.
All research outputs
#4,219,480
of 25,101,232 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#7,327
of 33,885 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#81,955
of 439,389 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#150
of 489 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,101,232 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 83rd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 33,885 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.1. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% 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 439,389 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 489 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% of its contemporaries.