The Vocal Advantage in Memory for Melodies is Based on Contour
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Recognition memory is better for vocal melodies than instrumental melodies. Here we examine whether this vocal advantage extends to recall. Thirty-one violinists learned four melodies (28 notes, 16 s), two produced by voice and two by violin. Their task was to listen to each melody and then immediately sing (for vocal stimuli) or play back on violin (for violin stimuli) the melody. Recall of the melody was tested in ten consecutive trials. After a brief delay (∼10 min), participants were asked to perform the four melodies from memory. Each performance was scored based on the accuracy of two measures: (1) intervals and (2) contour. The results revealed an advantage for vocal over violin melodies in immediate recall of the melodic contour and, after the delay, a reverse pattern with an advantage for violin over vocal melodies. The findings are consistent with the hypothesis that the voice facilitates learning of melodies and further show that the vocal advantage in recall is short-lived and based on contour.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 teacher head, 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".