Interpersonal synchronization between musicians during ensemble performances is characterized by continuous micro-timing adjustments due to intentional and unintentional factors supporting expressive interpretations, or caused by noise during the cognitive-motor process. Whether visual contact between musicians and the instruction to act as leader or follower affect synchronization in ensembles remains mostly unclear. This study investigates the role of visual cues and leader-follower relationships in singing performances. Twelve vocal duos took part in the study, singing a two-part piece, which was composed for the study and was mostly homophonic in structure. Four conditions were applied in a randomized order: with and without visual contact, and with a designated leader or follower. The piece was repeated four times in each condition, and the condition presented three times, for a total of 12 performances of the piece in each condition. Data were acquired using electrolaryngograph electrodes and head mounted microphones to track the fundamental frequency estimates of the individual singers. Results show that the presence and absence of visual contact had a significant effect on the precision and consistency of synchronization during singing duo performances. Precision and consistency were better in the presence of visual contact between singers than without, and these effects were associated with the beginning of phonation of the first note of the piece. The presence/absence of visual contact also had an effect on the tendency to lead or lag a co-performer associated with the onset of the first note; the extent of leading was greater when visual contact was absent. The instruction to act as leader or follower did not affect precision or consistency of synchronization, nor did it relate to the observed tendency to precede or lag a co-performer. The results contribute to the tailoring of rehearsal strategies, as singers and directors can be better informed of the factors influencing synchronization and focus on specific areas of difficulty in certain performance conditions, such as first note onsets when performers are not able to see each other.
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 14 August 2018.
All research outputs
#13,620,235
of 23,092,602 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#13,566
of 30,473 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#153,700
of 296,617 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#441
of 720 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,092,602 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 30,473 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 53% 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 296,617 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 720 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
