Hand Shape Familiarity Affects Guitarists’ Perception of Sonic Congruence
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Musical performance depends on the anticipation of the perceptual consequences of motor behavior. Altered auditory feedback (AAF) has previously been used to investigate auditory-motor coupling but studies to date have predominantly used MIDI piano in experimental tasks. In the present study, we extend the AAF paradigm to the guitar, which differs from the piano both motorically and in its pitch-to-place mapping, allowing further investigation into the nature of this coupling. Guitarists played chords on a MIDI guitar in response to tablature diagrams. In half of the trials, one of the notes in the heard chord was artificially altered. Participants judged whether the feedback was altered or not, responding as quickly and accurately as possible by pressing one of two buttons on a footswitch. Participants ranked the familiarity of the chord shapes and the hand shapes of the stimuli. Judgement of sonic congruence was faster when the chord and hand shape were familiar, and when feedback was congruent, though there was no interaction between these factors. Our findings suggest that guitarists’ auditory-motor coupling is heterogenous with respect to their technique, and that perception-action coupling operates at the abstract level of the gesture. We discuss implications of these findings with regard to forward models and embodiment.
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 | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".