↓ Skip to main content

Cross-Modal Perception of Noise-in-Music: Audiences Generate Spiky Shapes in Response to Auditory Roughness in a Novel Electroacoustic Concert Setting

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, February 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (75th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (65th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
13 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
10 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
29 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
Cross-Modal Perception of Noise-in-Music: Audiences Generate Spiky Shapes in Response to Auditory Roughness in a Novel Electroacoustic Concert Setting
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, February 2018
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00178
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kongmeng Liew, PerMagnus Lindborg, Ruth Rodrigues, Suzy J. Styles

Abstract

Noise has become integral to electroacoustic music aesthetics. In this paper, we define noise as sound that is high in auditory roughness, and examine its effect on cross-modal mapping between sound and visual shape in participants. In order to preserve the ecological validity of contemporary music aesthetics, we developedRama, a novel interface, for presenting experimentally controlled blocks of electronically generated sounds that varied systematically in roughness, and actively collected data from audience interaction. These sounds were then embedded as musical drones within the overall sound design of a multimedia performance with live musicians, Audience members listened to these sounds, and collectively voted to create the shape of a visual graphic, presented as part of the audio-visual performance. The results of the concert setting were replicated in a controlled laboratory environment to corroborate the findings. Results show a consistent effect of auditory roughness on shape design, with rougher sounds corresponding to spikier shapes. We discuss the implications, as well as evaluate the audience interface.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 29 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 4 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 14%
Other 3 10%
Professor 2 7%
Lecturer > Senior Lecturer 1 3%
Other 3 10%
Unknown 12 41%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Arts and Humanities 5 17%
Psychology 5 17%
Engineering 2 7%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 3%
Computer Science 1 3%
Other 3 10%
Unknown 12 41%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. 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 02 November 2018.
All research outputs
#4,335,899
of 24,318,236 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#7,285
of 32,729 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#80,830
of 334,838 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#195
of 572 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,318,236 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 82nd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 32,729 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.8. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% 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 334,838 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 75% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 572 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 65% of its contemporaries.