Re: Gay Classical Guitarists

On Apr 30, 10:47 am, ktaylor <childbl...@xxxxxxx> wrote:
darwin_...@xxxxxxxx wrote:
On Apr 30, 12:34 am, ktaylor <childbl...@xxxxxxx> wrote:
Dicer...@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
In the same vein, could one also say that pitch is not really high or
low? It is a synestheisian metaphor that serves as a useful and
functional convention. So functional that our graphic interpretation
of pitch reflected it on the staff.

Pitch height is not metaphorical - see this recent study (I think it
might still be in press - I have a copy of the ms if you are
interested KT):

Rusconi, Elena; Kwan, Bonnie; Giordano, Bruno L.; Umilta, Carlo;
Butterworth, Brian (2006). Spatial Representation of Pitch Height: The
SMARC Effect. Cognition 99 (2), 113-129

Abstract

Through the preferential pairing of response positions to pitch, here
we show that the internal representation of pitch height is spatial in
nature and affects performance, especially in musically trained
participants, when response alternatives are either vertically or
horizontally aligned. The finding that our cognitive system maps pitch
height onto an internal representation of space, which in turn affects
motor performance even when this perceptual attribute is irrelevant to
the task, extends previous studies on auditory perception and suggests
an interesting analogy between music perception and mathematical
cognition. Both the basic elements of mathematical cognition (i.e.
numbers) and the basic elements of musical cognition (i.e. pitches),
appear to be mapped onto a mental spatial representation in a way that
affects motor performance.



However, pre-operation children do not map pitch like that. It has to
be learned. It is learned with the convention
of high/low (Children naturally think high/low refers to loud/soft - a
convention quickly transferred to pitch with training).


They cite a study (Roffler and Butler 1968) where high low
associations with pitch were found in 4-5 year olds unaware of "high"
and "low" being used with reference to pitch. Where have you read to
the contrary?


But I sure like your referenced study. I would like to read more of it
to see what they mean about affecting motor performance. Can you
describe that?

Kevin

Motor performance is referring to a reaction time setup. Participants
were asked to press either '6' or 'spacebar' on a QWERTY keyboard in
response to a target stimulus. Where stimulus response compatibility
(SRC) existed (e.g., being asked to press '6' for high sounds), RT
improved significantly. Most importantly, the pitch-based SRC effect
was still there in non-musicians even when given a task that was
unrelated to pitch (decide if a target tone is produced by a wind or
percussion instrument - i.e. their timbre judgments were still
modulated by pitch-based SRC even though it wasn't part of the
task).

Interestingly, only musicians showed an SRC effect for horizontal
setup (using 'q' and 'p' keys). I would think this might be learned
(i.e. piano, guitar lessons).

BTW, SMARC is a reference to SNARC - a well-established effect where
RT for number magnitude judgment improves with SRC horizontally,
suggesting an innate 'number line'. That this effect should be found
in both music and math is absolutely fascinating IMHO.

.

Quantcast