Why Does Speech Sometimes Sound Like Song? Exploring the Role of Music-Related Priors in the “Speech-to-Song Illusion”
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The speech-to-song illusion is a perceptual effect emerging at the interplay of two cognitive domains, music and language. It arises upon repetitions of a spoken phrase that shifts to being perceived as song, and varies in the likelihood, ease, and vividness of its occurrence among individuals. A prevailing explanation of the illusion suggests that listeners’ attention shifts to rhythm and melody of the phrase once their involvement with the linguistic meaning subsides. The present study tested this mechanism by manipulating meaning plausibility and structural complexity of French and English phrases and by obtaining measures of attentional and working memory capacity from 80 French and English listeners who were exposed to repetitions of sentences in their native language. The results show that the transformation was facilitated in listeners with fewer cognitive resources and in less plausible, more complex phrases, which is at odds with the previously proposed mechanism underpinning the speech-to-song illusion. The illusion-promoting effect of musical training was visible only in simple but not in complex phrases. We propose a new account of the perceptual transformation from speech to song as a cognitive effect arising from the accumulation of music-related priors in a linguistically ambiguous context of massed repetitions.
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.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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 it