Source:
Fiveash, Anna and
Kristen Pammer. “Music and Language: Do they draw on similar syntactic working
memory resources?” Psychology of Music
(2014), Vol. 42 (2), pp.190-209.
Summary:
Anna Fiveash and Kristen
Pammer state that “the cognitive processing similarities between music and
language is an emerging field of study, with research finding evidence for
shared processing pathways in the brain, especially in relation to syntax.” To
test this concept, the authors undertook a research experiment, hypothesizing that
there was to be shared processing costs when music and language concurrently
accessed Syntactic Working Memory (SWM). Meaning, they predicted that the working
memory would begin to falter if exposed to two kinds of stimuli simultaneously?
They recruited sixty-one
participants at the Australian National University for the experiment, in order
to determine whether syntax processing in the brain is the same for both music
and language. Just as the English language has rules of grammar, there are
similar concepts in music that combine different elements into an overriding
structure. But would the performance of SWM be different between musicians and
non-musicians? For this, they had 25 participants who classified themselves as
musicians and 36 who were non-musicians. The thought was that “musicians are
more sensitive to speech sounds, and that there is a transfer of training
between music and language,” Besson, Chobert, and Marie (2011), so this would
lead to a higher level of distraction for musicians, with less attention being
placed to working memory.
The experiment was
designed to incorporate a visually presented word list, and/or a complex
sentence, paired with three music conditions: normal; syntactic manipulation
(out-of-key chord); and a control condition with an instrument manipulation. For
a completely random result, the 40 sets of music were re-randomized every eight
participants “to ensure the results were related to the music condition rather
than the difficulty of the word or sentence.” With syntactic manipulation, they
believed that it would affect the memory to a point that the list of words, or
sentences would become more difficult to recount thanks to their working memory
being distorted.
A typical word list
included: ‘sand, bat, light, pear, mole’
A complex sentence
example was: ‘The host who the contestant offended ruined the show for the
audience’.
The results were as
predicted. The accuracy of recall was lower when the combination of music and language
syntax were accessing the Syntactic Working Memory concurrently.
Comment/Reflections:
This is a topic that I
have been intrigued with for a while, because on a personal front, at times I
have found it difficult to listen to conversations when music is being played,
especially if the harmonic balance is a little off. It affects both my Syntactic
Working Memory, and my centre of focus. This is because the music seems to
speak to me, as if it were indeed a language, thus taking my focus elsewhere.
As I musician, I have also noticed how I am unable to study with music playing
in the background, for I am pulled mentally in two directions. Therefore, it is
quite easy to see why musicians’ accuracy was significantly affected in this
experiment when charged with the task of remembering a sentence – much more so
than the non-musician. So it would seem Anna Fiveash and Kristen Pammer got the
answer they were looking for - that the processing mechanisms in the brain between
music and language syntax are shared.
However, while I believe
this to have been a good study, I feel it would have been great had it delved
into the activations in the brain during the test. In the conclusion, the
authors state: “while it is clear there appears to be a connection between
music and language, this connection is multi-layered and is still being
uncovered.” Had they left that sentence out and perhaps been able to go a step
further, the experiment would be a little more complete. One thing that would
have been of benefit to them would have been to complete a reading of the brain
with the use of an fMRI (Functional Magnetic Resonance Imagery), while
administering the experiment. As it is understood, music shares several
features/similarities with language, such as a syntax/harmony, the use of a
vocabulary (words/chords and intervals), tonal properties (inflection/timbre),
and a temporal clock (prosody/rhythm). Therefore, it’s not surprising that
music activates the ‘language regions’ of the brain. The imaging would show
that.
Also, the imaging would
show how much the brain is activated while processing language and music. One
would be able to notice that the major difference between the way music is
processed, compared to language is that while language predominantly shows lateral
activation, music processing shows bilateral activation.
Music and language: Do they draw on similar syntactic
working memory resources? This was the original question of the study. After
undertaking this experiment, the results of the authors would show that yes,
they do! The research produces clear evidence of the effects to the Syntactic
Working Memory, while including the comparison between musicians and
non-musicians. Further to this, it is interesting to see that while musicians
had the highest accuracy recall for word lists, it suffered significantly for
sentences. Anna Fiveash and Kristen Pammer seem to think the better performance
with words lists is because musicians have been shown to have “superior
rehearsal mechanisms for verbal working memory.” But this doesn’t help when the
words have been stringed together to form a sentence, because as discussed, music
and language are processed together, and so the Syntactic Working Memory of the
musician is significantly impaired.
Works cited:
Besson,
M., Chobert, J., and Marie, C. “Transfer of training between music and speech:
Common processing, attention, and memory.”
Frontiers in Psychology (2011), 2, pp.1-12.
No comments:
Post a Comment