On the nature of phase attraction in sensorimotor synchronization with interleaved auditory sequences

In a task that requires in-phase synchronization of finger taps with an isochronous sequence of target tones that is interleaved with a sequence of distractor tones at various fixed phase relationships, the taps tend to be attracted to the distractor tones, especially when the distractor tones closely precede the target tones [Repp, B. H. (2003a). Phase attraction in sensorimotor synchronization with auditory sequences: Effects of single and periodic distractors on synchronization accuracy. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 29, 290-309]. The present research addressed two related questions about this distractor effect: (1) Is it a function of the absolute temporal separation or of the relative phase of the two stimulus sequences? (2) Is it the result of perceptual grouping (integration) of target and distractor tones or of simultaneous attraction to two independent sequences? In three experiments, distractor effects were compared across two different sequence rates. The results suggest that absolute temporal separation, not relative phase, is the critical variable. Experiment 3 also included an anti-phase tapping task that addressed the second question directly. The results suggest that the attraction of taps to distractor tones is caused mainly by temporal integration of target and distractor tones within a fixed window of 100-150 ms duration, with the earlier-occurring tone being weighted more strongly than the later-occurring one.     

Multiple temporal references in sensorimotor synchronization with metrical auditory sequences

A local phase perturbation in an auditory sequence during synchronized finger tapping elicits an automatic phase correction response (PCR). The stimulus for the PCR is usually considered to be the most recent tap-tone asynchrony. In this study, participants tapped on target tones ("beats") of isochronous tone sequences consisting of beats and subdivisions (1:n tapping). A phase perturbation was introduced either on a beat or on a subdivision. Both types of perturbation elicited a PCR, even though there was no asynchrony associated with a subdivision. Moreover, the PCR to a perturbed beat was smaller when an unperturbed subdivision followed than when there was no subdivision. The relative size of the PCRs to perturbed beats and subdivisions depended on tempo, on whether the subdivision was local or present throughout the sequence, and on whether or not participants engaged in mental subdivision, but not on whether or not taps were made on the subdivision level. The results show that phase correction in synchronization depends not merely on asynchronies but on perceptual monitoring of multiple temporal references within a metrical hierarchy.     

Phase attraction in sensorimotor synchronization with auditory sequences: effects of single and periodic distractors on synchronization accuracy

Four experiments showed that both single and periodic distractor tones affected the timing of finger taps produced in synchrony with an isochronous auditory target sequence. Single distractors had only small effects, but periodic distractors occurring at various fixed or changing phase relationships exerted strong phase attraction. The attraction was asymmetric, being stronger when distractors preceded target tones than when they lagged behind. A large pitch difference between target and distractor tones (20 vs. 3 semitones) did not reduce phase attraction substantially, although in the case of continuously changing phase relationships it did prevent complete capture of the taps by the distractors. The results support the hypothesis that phase attraction is an automatic process that is sensitive primarily to event onsets.     

Auditory dominance in temporal processing: new evidence from synchronization with simultaneous visual and auditory sequences

Evidence that audition dominates vision in temporal processing has come from perceptual judgment tasks. This study shows that this auditory dominance extends to the largely subconscious processes involved in sensorimotor coordination. Participants tapped their finger in synchrony with auditory and visual sequences containing an event onset shift (EOS), expected to elicit an involuntary phase correction response (PCR), and also tried to detect the EOS. Sequences were presented in unimodal and bimodal conditions, including one in which auditory and visual EOSs of opposite sign coincided. Unimodal results showed greater variability of taps, smaller PCRs, and poorer EOS detection in vision than in audition. In bimodal conditions, variability of taps was similar to that for unimodal auditory sequences, and PCRs depended more on auditory than on visual information, even though attention was always focused on the visual sequences.     

Rate limits in sensorimotor synchronization with auditory and visual sequences: the synchronization threshold and the benefits and costs of interval subdivision

Synchronization of finger taps with an isochronous event sequence becomes difficult when the event rate exceeds a certain limit. In Experiment 1, the synchronization threshold was reached at interonset intervals (IOIs) above 100 ms with auditory tone sequences (in a 1:4 tapping task) but at IOIs above 400 ms with visual flash sequences (1:1 tapping). Using IOIs above those limits, the author investigated in Experiment 2 the reduction in the variability of asynchronies that tends to occur when the intervals between target events are subdivided by additional identical events (1:1 vs. 1:n tapping). The subdivision benefit was found to decrease with IOI duration and to turn into a cost at IOIs of 200-250 ms in auditory sequences and at IOIs of 450-500 ms in visual sequences. The auditory results are relevant to the limits of metrical subdivision and beat rate in music. The visual results demonstrate the remarkably weak rhythmicity of (nonmoving) visual stimuli.     

Quantifying phase correction in sensorimotor synchronization: empirical comparison of three paradigms

Tapping in synchrony with a metronome requires phase error correction, a process often described by a single-parameter autoregressive model. The parameter (α) is a measure of sensorimotor coupling strength. This study compares α estimates obtained from three experimental paradigms: synchronization with (1) a perfectly regular metronome (RM), (2) a perturbed metronome containing phase shifts (PS), and (3) an "adaptively timed" metronome (AT). Musically trained participants performed in each paradigm at four tempi, with baseline interval durations ranging from 400 to 1300 ms. Two estimation methods were applied to each data set. Results showed that all α estimates increased with interval duration. However, the PS paradigm yielded much larger α values than did the AT paradigm, with those from the RM paradigm falling in between. Positional analysis of the PS data revealed that α increased immediately following a phase shift and then decreased sharply. Unexpectedly, all PS α estimates were uncorrelated with the RM and AT estimates, which were strongly correlated. These results suggest that abruptly perturbed sequences engage a different mechanism of phase correction than do regular or continuously modulated sequences.     

Sensorimotor synchronization with adaptively timed sequences

Most studies of human sensorimotor synchronization require participants to coordinate actions with computer-controlled event sequences that are unresponsive to their behavior. In the present research, the computer was programmed to carry out phase and/or period correction in response to asynchronies between taps and tones, and thereby to modulate adaptively the timing of the auditory sequence that human participants were synchronizing with, as a human partner might do. In five experiments the computer's error correction parameters were varied over a wide range, including "uncooperative" settings that a human synchronization partner could not (or would not normally) adopt. Musically trained participants were able to maintain synchrony in all these situations, but their behavior varied systematically as a function of the computer's parameter settings. Computer simulations were conducted to infer the human participants' error correction parameters from statistical properties of their behavior (means, standard deviations, auto- and cross-correlations). The results suggest that participants maintained a fixed gain of phase correction as long as the computer was cooperative, but changed their error correction strategies adaptively when faced with an uncooperative computer.     

Phase correction, phase resetting, and phase shifts after subliminal timing perturbations in sensorimotor synchronization.

Recent studies of synchronized finger tapping have shown that perceptually subliminal phase shifts in an auditory sequence are rapidly compensated for in the motor activity (B. H. Repp, 2000a). Experiment 1 used a continuation-tapping task to confirm that this compensation is indeed a phase correction, not an adjustment of the central timekeeper period. Experiments 2-5 revealed that this phase correction occurs even when there is no ordinary sensorimotor asynchrony--when the finger taps are in antiphase or arbitrary phase relative to the auditory sequence (Experiments 2 and 3) or when the tap coinciding with the sequence phase shift is withheld (Experiments 4 and 5). The phase correction observed in the latter conditions was instantaneous, which suggests that phase resetting occurs when the motor activity is discontinuous. A prolonged phase shift suggestive of overcompensation was observed in some conditions, which poses a challenge to pure phase correction models.     

Automaticity and voluntary control of phase correction following event onset shifts in sensorimotor synchronization

Seven experiments show that an event onset shift (EOS) in an auditory sequence causes an involuntary phase correction response (PCR) in synchronized finger tapping. This PCR is (a) equally large in inphase and antiphase tapping; (b) reduced but still present when the EOS occurs in either of two interleaved (target-distractor) sequences; (c) unaffected by increased pitch separation between these sequences; (d) asymptotic in magnitude as EOS magnitude increases, unlike the intentional PCR to expected phase shifts; and (e) enhanced when the EOS precedes the onset of tapping, because of phase resetting. Thus, phase correction is revealed to be partially automatic and partially under voluntary control, and to be based mainly on temporal information derived from simple onset detection.     

Linear phase correction models for synchronization: parameter identification and estimation of parameters.

Linear phase correction models for synchronized tapping and their stochastic properties are presented. In the most general form they include a central timer, a motor execution, and a phase correction mechanism that acts on the physical or the perceived asynchrony. A central issue of the article is how to identify and estimate the model parameters from the data. Monte Carlo simulations show serious problems of parameter interdependency.     

Sensorimotor synchronization: Motor responses to pseudoregular auditory patterns

Musically trained and untrained subjects (N=30) were asked to synchronize their finger tapping with stimuli in auditory patterns. Each pattern comprised six successive tonal stimuli of the same duration, the first of which was accented by a different frequency. The duration of interstimulus onset intervals (ISIs) gradually increased or decreased in constant steps toward the end of the patterns. Four values of such steps were used in different trials: 20, 30, 45, and 60 msec. Various time-control mechanisms are hypothesized as being simultaneously responsible for subjects’ incorrect reproduction of the internal temporal ratios of the stimulus patterns. The mechanism of assimilation (of a central tendency) led subjects to enforce a regular (isochronous) structure on the patterns. The influence of other time-control mechanisms (distinction, subjective expression of an accent, sequential transfer) was expressed mainly in differences between intertap onset intervals (ITIs) and the corresponding ISIs at the beginning of the patterns. The duration of the first two ITIs was in the majority of the trials in an inverse ratio to the ratio of the respective ISIs. The distortions resulting from the timing mechanisms concerned were more pronounced in the performance of nonmusicians than in that of musicians.     

Sensorimotor synchronization: Motor responses to regular auditory patterns

Subjects (N = 32) were asked to synchronize a motor response with tones in auditory patterns. These patterns were created from six tones and six intertone intervals of equal duration. The pitch of the first tone differed from the others. It was found that subjects used three types of timing in their motor response: (1) the first intertone interval was prolonged and the second interval was shortened, (2) the second intertone interval was prolonged and the first interval was shortened, and/or (3) the first interval and the second interval were of approximately the same length. The prolongation of the fifth interval was observed during all three types of timing. The results are explained using the concept of suprasegmental control of timing, which explains a prolongation of intervals at critical control point of the patterns. The occurrence of three different strategies of timing is discussed in connection with similar principles in musical performance.     

Staying offbeat: Sensorimotor syncopation with structured and unstructured auditory sequences

Three experiments investigated whether adding metric (higher-order, periodic) structure to tone sequences stabilizes syncopated finger tapping. Participants tapped in antiphase with metronomic tone sequences in which accents—produced by sounding two tones simultaneously—occurred regularly every two, three, or four tones (metric), occurred unpredictably (irregular), occurred on every tone (heavy beat), or were absent (light beat). Tap timing variability, although commensurate with metric and light beat sequences, was lower with metric than with heavy beat and irregular sequences even when the instructions specified using metric grouping in all conditions. Higher-order periodic fluctuations (delays) in tap timing—found only in metric conditions—were associated with low overall tap timing variability, suggesting that a regularly applied, meter-based phase-resetting mechanism stabilizes syncopation.

---

Identification of temporal order within auditory sequences

Unpracticed Ss reported the order of sounds in sequences consisting of either three or four successive items repeated over and over without pause. With unrelated sounds each lasting 200 msec, correct reports of order were at chance level for oral responses and for card-ordering responses (each card bearing the name of one sound). The sequences with four unrelated items were studied in greater detail, and the threshold for identification was found to be 670 msec with oral responses and 300 msec with card-ordering responses. When two related sounds (tones) were used in four-item sequences, correct card-ordering was possible at 200 msec per item when the tones were temporally contiguous, but was not possible at this duration when the tones were separated by nonrelated sounds. Some special rules governing auditory sequence identification were suggested, and implications for theories of auditory perception discussed.     

Sensorimotor synchronization: the impact of temporally displaced auditory feedback

When subjects are asked to tap in synchrony to a regular sequence of stimulus events (e.g., clicks), performance is not perfect in that, usually, an anticipation of the tap is observed. The present study examines the influence of temporally displaced auditory feedback on the size of this anticipatory error. Whereas earlier studies have shown that this asynchrony exhibits a linear increase in size as a function of an increasing delay in such additional auditory feedback, this study compared the impact of shifting feedback forward in time (i.e., feedback presented before the tap) with that of delayed auditory feedback. Results showed that the impact of feedback displacement on the amount of asynchrony differed for positive and negative displacements. Delayed feedback led to an increase in asynchrony, whereas negative displacements had (almost) no effect. This finding is related to a model assuming that the various feedback components arising from the tap (tactile, kinesthetic, auditory) are integrated to form one central representation, and that the timing of this central representation arises from a linear combination of the components involved.     

Sensorimotor synchronization: motor responses to regular auditory patterns.

Subjects (N = 32) were asked to synchronize a motor response with tones in auditory patterns. These patterns were created from six tones and six intertone intervals of equal duration. The pitch of the first tone differed from the others. It was found that subjects used three types of timing in their motor response: (1) the first intertone interval was prolonged and the second interval was shortened, (2) the second intertone interval was prolonged and the first interval was shortened, and/or (3) the first interval and the second interval were of approximately the same length. The prolongation of the fifth interval was observed during all three types of timing. The results are explained using the concept of suprasegmental control of timing, which explains a prolongation of intervals at critical control point of the patterns. The occurrence of three different strategies of timing is discussed in connection with similar principles in musical performance.     

Activation of learned action sequences by auditory feedback

The present research addressed whether auditory feedback associated with a learned action sequence can activate the action representation of that sequence. Nonpianist participants learned to perform two melodies at a piano keyboard repeatedly during a trial. The participants heard feedback either from the melody they were performing (normal feedback) or from the other learned melody (termed alternate feedback). An additional tone functioned as an instruction cue to either switch melodies or continue the current melody. Following the instruction cues, participants typically paused just before switching, and paused similarly during trials with a continue cue. Participants paused longer after a continue cue when they experienced alternate rather than normal feedback. This effect was specific to instruction cues positioned at weak metrical accents—positions at which participants were less likely to switch overall. Feedback did not influence timing on switch trials. These findings indicate that influences of auditory feedback can activate learned action sequences, leading to longer latencies associated with cue evaluation.     

The planning and execution of short auditory sequences

Action planning, but not action execution, in speeded tasks is typically faster when responses and their effects are compatible than when they are incompatible. We tested whether response-effect compatibility (REC) affects the execution of music-like sequential actions that require temporal regularity rather than rapidity. Musicians responded to metronomic visual stimuli by producing sequences of three taps at a specific tempo on three vertically aligned keys. Each tap triggered a tone. Key-to-tone mapping was either compatible or incompatible in terms of spatial height and pitch height. The results indicated that tap timing was more accurate with compatible than with incompatible mappings, both for taps produced before (Tap 1) and after (Taps 2 and 3) the onset of auditory feedback. Thus, the observed influence of REC on action execution was not due exclusively to actual auditory feedback. The anticipation of distal action effects may be involved in planning the dynamics of temporally precise movements.     

Discrimination of time intervals presented in sequences: spatial effects with multiple auditory sources

This article discusses two experiments on the discrimination of time intervals presented in sequences marked by brief auditory signals. Participants had to indicate whether the last interval in a series of three intervals marked by four auditory signals was shorter or longer than the previous intervals. Three base durations were under investigation: 75, 150, and 225 ms. In Experiment 1, sounds were presented through headphones, from a single-speaker in front of the participants or by four equally spaced speakers. In all three presentation modes, the highest different threshold was obtained in the lower base duration condition (75 ms), thus indicating an impairment of temporal processing when sounds are presented too rapidly. The results also indicate the presence, in each presentation mode, of a 'time-shrinking effect' (i.e., with the last interval being perceived as briefer than the preceding ones) at 75 ms, but not at 225 ms. Lastly, using different sound sources to mark time did not significantly impair discrimination. In Experiment 2, three signals were presented from the same source, and the last signal was presented at one of two locations, either close or far. The perceived duration was not influenced by the location of the fourth signal when the participant knew before each trial where the sounds would be delivered. However, when the participant was uncertain as to its location, more space between markers resulted in longer perceived duration, a finding that applies only at 150 and 225 ms. Moreover, the perceived duration was affected by the direction of the sequences (left-right vs. right-left).     

When acoustic sequences are not perceptual sequences: The global perception of auditory patterns

Warren, Bashford, and Gardner (1990) found that when sequences consisting of 10 40-msec steady-state vowels were presented in recycled format, minimal changes in order (interchanging the position of two adjacent phonemes) produced easily recognizable differences in verbal organization, even though the vowel durations were well below the threshold for identification of order. The present study was designed to determine if this ability to discriminate between different arrangements of components is limited to speech sounds subject to verbal organization, or if it reflects a more general auditory ability. In the first experiment. 10 40-msec sinusoidal tones were substituted for the vowels; it was found that the easy discrimination of minimal changea in order is not limited to speech sounds. A second experiment substituted 10 40-msec frozen noise segments for the vowels. The succession of noise segments formed a 400-msec frozen noise pattern that cannot be considered as a sequence of individual sounds, as can the succession of vowels or tones. Nevertheless, listeners again could discriminate between patterns differing.only in the order of two adjacent 40-msec segments. These results, together with other evidence, indicate that it is not necessary foracoustic sequences of brief items (such as phonemes and tones) to be processed asperceptual sequences (that is, as a succession of discrete identifiable sounds) for different arrangements to be discriminated. Instead, component acoustic elements form distinctive “temporal compounds,” which permit listeners to distinguish between different arrangements of portions of an acoustic pattern without the need for segmentation into an ordered series of component items. Implications for models dealing with the recognition of speech and music are discussed.