Brain processing of consonance/dissonance in musicians and controls: a hemispheric asymmetry revisited
Bibliographic record
Abstract
It was investigated to what extent musical expertise influences the auditory processing of harmonicity by recording event-related potentials. Thirty-four participants (18 musicians and 16 controls) were asked to listen to hundreds of chords, differing in their degree of consonance, their complexity (from two to six composing sounds) and their range (distance of two adjacent pitches, from quartertones to more than 18 semitone steps). The task consisted of detecting rare targets. An early auditory N1 was observed that was modulated by chord dissonance in both groups. The response was generated in the right medial temporal gyrus (MTG) for consonant chords but in the left MTG for dissonant chords according to swLORETA reconstruction performed. An anterior negativity (N2) was enhanced only in musicians in response to chords featuring quartertones, thus suggesting a greater pitch sensitivity for simultaneous pure tones in the skilled brain. The P300 was affected by the frequency range only in musicians, who also showed a greater sensitivity to sound complexity. A strong left hemispheric specialization for processing quartertones in the left temporal cortex of musicians was observed at N2 level (250-350 ms), which was observed on the right side in controls. Additionally, in controls, widespread activity of the right limbic area was associated with listening to close frequencies causing disturbing beats, possibly suggesting a negative aesthetic appreciation for these stimuli. Overall, the data show a finer and more tuned neural representation of pitch intervals in musicians, linked to a marked specialization of their left temporal cortex (BA21/38).
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".