Different interference effects in musicians and a control group.

In the present study musicians and normal control subjects performed an S1-S2 pitch comparison task, which included the presentation of intervening tones during the retention interval. The time for encoding and storing the pitch of S1 was varied between 200 and 1,500 ms by changing the pause between the S1 offset and the onset of the intervening tones. Although musicians outperformed the control group with longer pauses after the S1 offset, this advantage was relatively small with shorter pauses. These results suggest that the advantage of musicians in storing auditory information is not solely due to their superior encoding of information but also to improved working memory operations.

[1]  M. Tervaniemi,et al.  Superior pre-attentive auditory processing in musicians. , 1999, Neuroreport.

[2]  N. Cowan.  Evolving conceptions of memory storage, selective attention, and their mutual constraints within the human information-processing system. , 1988, Psychological bulletin.

[3]  D Deutsch,et al.  Facilitation by repetition in recognition memory for tonal pitch , 1975, Memory & cognition.

[4]  T. Pechmann,et al.  Interference in memory for tonal pitch: Implications for a working-memory model , 1992, Memory & cognition.

[5]  Diana Deutsch,et al.  9 – The Processing of Pitch Combinations , 1982 .

[6]  I. Winkler,et al.  From sensory to long-term memory: evidence from auditory memory reactivation studies. , 2005, Experimental psychology.

[7]  D. Deutsch.  Tones and Numbers: Specificity of Interference in Immediate Memory , 1970, Science.

[8]  N. Cowan.  On short and long auditory stores. , 1984, Psychological bulletin.

[9]  I. Winkler,et al.  The concept of auditory stimulus representation in cognitive neuroscience. , 1999, Psychological bulletin.

[10]  M. Tervaniemi,et al.  Pitch discrimination accuracy in musicians vs nonmusicians: an event-related potential and behavioral study , 2005, Experimental Brain Research.

[11]  D. Holding.  The Psychology of Chess Skill , 1985 .

[12]  Diana Deutsch,et al.  THE PROCESSING OF PITCH COMBINATIONS , 1999 .

[13]  J. G. Snodgrass,et al.  Pragmatics of measuring recognition memory: applications to dementia and amnesia. , 1988, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[14]  R. Ruibal,et al.  Mapping of Interactions in the Pitch Memory Store , 2004 .

[15]  K. A. Ericsson,et al.  Long-term working memory. , 1995, Psychological review.

[16]  L. Henry,et al.  The Development of the Use of Long-Term Knowledge to Assist Short-Term Recall , 2000, The Quarterly journal of experimental psychology. A, Human experimental psychology.

[17]  D Deutsch,et al.  Mapping of Interactions in the Pitch Memory Store , 1972, Science.

[18]  D Deutsch,et al.  Effect of repetition of standard and comparison tones on recognition memory for pitch. , 1972, Journal of experimental psychology.

[19]  D. Deutsch,et al.  The Psychology of Music , 1983 .

[20]  L. Demany,et al.  Pitch perception and retention: Two cumulative benefits of selective attention , 2004, Perception & psychophysics.

[21]  Diana Deutsch,et al.  Disinhibition in pitch memory , 1975 .