Discrimination of interval size in short tone sequences

Toby J. W. Hill and Ian R. Summersa兲

Biomedical Physics Group, School of Physics, University of Exeter, Exeter EX4 4QL, United Kingdom
共Received 2 August 2006; revised 16 November 2006; accepted 21 January 2007兲
This study investigates the discrimination of small changes of interval size in short sequences of
musical tones. Major, minor and neutral thirds were varied in increments of 15 cents. The nine
subjects had varying degrees of amateur musical experience—their level of musical training was
lower than that of professional musicians. In some experiments the stimuli were presented purely
melodically and in others they were presented together with a sustained tone at a higher pitch. Some
subjects were able to make use of the additional cues from beats in the latter case. Category widths
for identification were measured at around 70 cents and just-noticeable differences in frequency
were measured at around 10 cents. Little significant variation of inter-stimulus sensitivity index d⬘
was observed across the stimulus sets, i.e., there was little evidence for “anchors” or “landmarks”
within the range of tunings employed. However, for major thirds, discrimination of the 15 cent
increment between 400 and 415 cents was reduced compared to discrimination of other 15 cent
increments within the stimulus sets. © 2007 Acoustical Society of America.
关DOI: 10.1121/1.2697059兴
PACS number共s兲: 43.75.Cd, 43.75.Bc, 43.66.Hg, 43.66.Fe 关DD兴 Pages: 2376–2383

I. INTRODUCTION inherent complexity of the musical material and the listener’s

In Western music, the intervals used within the musical
scale 共minor second, major second, minor third, etc.兲 may be
subject to small variations of tuning according to particular
performance practices 共Rasch, 1983兲. For example, when us-
ing equal temperament 共based on a logarithmic division of
the octave into 12 equal steps兲 the major third is intended to
be 400 cents; when using a tuning scheme with a “just” ma-
jor third 共i.e., a fundamental-frequency ratio of 5:4兲 this in-
terval is intended to be 386 cents. 共Note: One cent is the unit
obtained by logarithmic division of the octave into 1200
equal steps.兲 The present study is concerned with the extent
to which such small changes in tuning are apparent to the
listener.
The literature documents a large number of studies re-
lated to perception of the tuning of musical intervals. Experi-
ments cover measurements of just-noticeable difference in
frequency for pure and complex tones 共e.g., Harris, 1952;
Nelson et al., 1983; Moore and Glasberg, 1990; Sek and
Moore, 1995兲, measurements of consonance and dissonance
共e.g., Kameoka and Kuriyagawa, 1969a, 1969b; Tufts et al.
2005兲, and a wide range of topics relating to the perception
of tone sequences and information transfer via such se-
quences 共Watson et al., 1975, 1976; Deutsch, 1980; Spiegel
and Watson, 1984; Kidd and Watson, 1992; Schellenberg and
Trehub, 1994; Parncutt and Cohen, 1995; Thompson et al.,
2001; Creel et al., 2004; Smith and Schmuckler, 2004兲.
Several previous studies have investigated perception of
the tuning of melodic or harmonic intervals presented in iso-
lation 共e.g., Burns and Ward, 1978; Hall and Hess, 1984;
Vos, 1986; Burns and Campbell, 1994兲. Equivalent experi-
ments in the context of “real” music are problematical—the
a兲
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed. Electronic mail:
i.r.summers@exeter.ac.uk
cognitive response means that subjects’ performance is diffi-
cult to analyze. Hence, investigators 共e.g., Rasch, 1985; Vos,
1988兲 have chosen to work on musical fragments or short
tone sequences which provide a quasi-musical context for
measurements, while avoiding undue complexity.
Rasch 共1985兲 used musical fragments in the form of two
simultaneous tone sequences, with experiments involving the
mistuning of tones in one or both of the sequences. Melodic
共interval-width兲 and harmonic 共beat兲 cues were found to con-
tribute to the detection of mistuning. Vos 共1988兲 used similar
musical fragments, with experiments involving rating and
paired comparison of six common intonation systems. Over-
all acceptability was found to relate to the “purity” of the
intervals 共i.e., their closeness to just intonation兲, suggesting
that harmonic 共beat兲 cues were dominant in this case.
An aim of the present study is to further explore this
“middle ground” between experiments on single intervals in
isolation and experiments based on real music. Four experi-
ments have been carried out using short tone sequences to
provide a quasi-musical context. Identification tasks were
used to determine subjects’ ability to detect small changes in
tuning. There is evidence 共Burns and Ward, 1978; Burns and
Campbell, 1994; Perlman and Krumhansl, 1996兲 that the per-
ceptual “landscape” contains “anchors” or “landmarks” at
particular positions in the pitch range. For example, sensitiv-
ity to small pitch changes might be less around unfamiliar
intervals such as the “neutral” third 共approximately
350 cents兲 and greater around familiar intervals such as the
major and minor thirds 共equal tempered at 400 and 300 cents
and just intonation at 386 and 316 cents兲. However, other
investigators 共Parncutt and Cohen, 1995兲 have not observed
this effect. In the present study, stimuli were designed to
investigate the possibility of anchors or landmarks within the
range of tunings employed.

2376 J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 121 共4兲, April 2007 0001-4966/2007/121共4兲/2376/8/$23.00 © 2007 Acoustical Society of America

Redistribution subject to ASA license or copyright; see http://acousticalsociety.org/content/terms. Download to IP: 144.173.6.37 On: Wed, 06 Aug 2014 12:16:58

FIG. 1. Schematic pitch-time diagrams for the tone sequences employed in
the four experiments: 共a兲 Experiment 1, melodic third; 共b兲 Experiment 2,
harmonized third; 共c兲 Experiment 3, melodic scale-like sequence; 共d兲 Ex-
periment 4, harmonized scale-like sequence. The double-headed arrows in-
dicate tones whose pitch was varied.
II. METHOD
A. Overview
This study includes four related experiments. In each
experiment subjects were presented with short sequences of
musical tones, each sequence being identical except for small
changes in the tuning of the component tones. The task was
to identify the tuning system used for each sequence—a
choice from five alternatives. As indicated above, the experi-
mental design is intended to provide a quasi-musical context
within which specific psychophysical measurements may be
made. It is not the intention to measure pre-learned notions
of “good” or “bad” intonation, but rather to see whether par-
ticular intonations are perceptually more distinct 共perhaps as
a result of being good or bad兲.
The tone sequences are illustrated in Fig. 1. For Experi-
ment 1 each sequence was of three tones, rising and then
falling by an interval of a third. For Experiment 2 these
three-note sequences were accompanied by a sustained tone
at a higher pitch 共at an interval of a perfect fifth above the
start note of the sequence兲. For Experiment 3 each sequence
was of seven tones, rising and falling in a scale-like manner.
For Experiment 4 these scale-like sequences were accompa-
nied by a sustained tone at a higher pitch 共again, at an inter-
val of a perfect fifth above the start note of the sequence兲.
The double-headed arrows in Fig. 1 indicate the tones whose
pitch was varied to achieve the different tuning systems—the
2nd tone within each sequence of three in Experiments 1 and
2, and the 2nd, 3rd, 5th and 6th tones within each sequence
of seven in Experiments 3 and 4. Experiments 3 and 4 were
intended to provide a more complex task than Experiments 1
and 2, but with additional cues. An important issue in rela-
tion to experiments on intonation is the relative importance
of melodic 共or interval-width兲 and harmonic 共or beat兲 cues in
the perception of the various stimuli. The intention in the
present study was to provide melodic cues to pitch changes
in Experiments 1 and 3 and both harmonic and melodic cues
in Experiments 2 and 4.
Details of the stimulus tunings are given in Tables I and
II. The experimental pitches were designed in sets of five
based around the equal-tempered major third 共400 cents兲, the
equal-tempered minor third 共300 cents兲 and the neutral third
共350 cents兲. Preliminary pilot studies indicated that incre-
ments of 15 cents would not only yield meaningful results
but would also allow close approximations of the just-
intonation major and minor thirds 共386 and 316 cents, re-
spectively兲 to be incorporated. In the tone sequences for Ex-
periments 3 and 4 the tones at a major second above the start
note 共i.e., tones 2 and 6 in the sequence—see Fig. 1兲 were
tuned so as to bisect the interval of the major third above the
start note 共see Table II兲, following the scheme adopted in
many tuning systems by which a major third contains two
equal-size major seconds 共Rasch, 1983兲.

TABLE I. Stimulus tunings used in Experiments 1 and 2. Each variant of the test involves five stimuli. Stimuli
are presented melodically in Experiment 1 and accompanied by a higher-pitch tone in Experiment 2.

Tone 1 in Tone 2 in Tone 3 in Higher pitch in

sequence sequence sequence Experiment 2
Test variant Stimulus label 共cents re A3兲 共cents re A3兲 共cents re A3兲 共cents re A3兲

Major 3rd a 0 430 0 700

b 0 415 0 700
c 0 400 0 700
d 0 385 0 700
e 0 370 0 700
Neutral 3rd ᐉ 0 380 0 700
m 0 365 0 700
n 0 350 0 700
o 0 335 0 700
p 0 320 0 700
Minor 3rd v 0 330 0 700
w 0 315 0 700
x 0 300 0 700
y 0 285 0 700
z 0 270 0 700

J. Acoust. Soc. Am., Vol. 121, No. 4, April 2007 T. Hill and I. Summers: Discrimination of interval size 2377

Redistribution subject to ASA license or copyright; see http://acousticalsociety.org/content/terms. Download to IP: 144.173.6.37 On: Wed, 06 Aug 2014 12:16:58
 TABLE II. Stimulus tunings used in Experiments 3 and 4. Each test involves five stimuli. Stimuli are presented
melodically in Experiment 3 and accompanied by a higher-pitch tone in Experiment 4.
Tones 1, 7 Tones 2, 6
in sequence in sequence
Stimulus label 共cents re A3兲 共cents re A3兲
a 0 215
b 0 207.5
c 0 200
d 0 192.5
e 0 185
The wave forms used for the tones in these experiments
were designed to have an unambiguous pitch, to sound “mu-
sical” but not like any instrument in particular, and to be of a
duration 共400 ms兲 representative of “real” music. The pitch
on which the intervals were constructed was A3, with a fun-
damental frequency of 220 Hz. This pitch was found to be
relatively comfortable to listen to repetitively and is in the
midrange of pitches used melodically in music. Moreover, it
has been suggested that the perception of tones at this pitch
is representative of perception over a wide range of other
musical pitches 共Vos and van Vianen, 1985兲. Each tone com-
prised ten frequency components, the fundamental and the
next nine harmonics, with a spectral amplitude envelope fall-
ing at 6 dB oct−1 关equivalent to 1/共harmonic number兲兴. The
tones had rise and release times of 40 ms, giving them a
bland, organ-like timbre. Stimuli were specified in software,
using a 40 kHz sample rate.
B. Apparatus
The experiments were conducted in a room designed for
audiological purposes, with low reverberation. The subjects
were tested singly and were seated in the middle of the room
in front of a computer monitor and keyboard on which they
received instructions and entered their responses. The experi-
ments were self-paced by the subject. The stimuli were pre-
sented to the subject via two loudspeakers, which carried
identical signals, positioned on either side of the monitor.
The sound level at the subject’s head was measured to be
62 dB共A兲 for the melodic stimuli and 64 dB共A兲 for the har-
monized stimuli. This represents a comfortable listening
level.
C. Subjects
Subjects were unpaid volunteers, predominantly gradu-
ate students in physics, with varying degrees of amateur mu-
sical experience. Their level of musical training was lower
than that of professional musicians. The same nine subjects,
eight male and one female, participated in each of the four
experiments. Subjects’ ages ranged from 20 to 45. None of
the subjects reported any hearing impairment, and none pos-
sessed the ability of absolute pitch determination.
D. Paradigm and protocol
A single-interval, five-alternative, forced-choice identifi-
cation paradigm was employed in each of the four experi-
ments. Subjects were asked to identify the tuning system
2378 J. Acoust. Soc. Am., Vol. 121, No. 4, April 2007
Redistribution subject to ASA license or copyright; see http://acousticalsociety.org/content/terms. Download to IP: 144.173.6.37 On: Wed, 06 Aug 2014 12:16:58
Tone 3, 5 Tone 4 Higher pitch in
in sequence in sequence Experiment 4
共cents re A3兲 共cents re A3兲 共cents re A3兲
430 500 700
415 500 700
400 500 700
385 500 700
370 500 700
employed for each of a series of melodic fragments, using a
labeling system 共see Tables I and II兲 which was demonstrated
at the start of the experiment. The experimental protocol
comprised a sequence of three sections that was repeated
within each test session. First, in a demonstration block, sub-
jects were presented with the stimuli and their identifying
labels 共e.g., ᐉ, m, n, o, p—each variant of the test involved
five stimuli兲. Subjects were able to repeat this demonstration
block on request. Second, subjects received a training block
in which they identified stimuli and received trial-by-trial
feedback and an overall score—the initial training block in a
session comprised 25 items and all subsequent training
blocks comprised ten items. At the end of a training block
subjects were offered further demonstration or training or
they could proceed to the third section of the protocol: the
test blocks. Each test block comprised 25 stimuli without
feedback, presented in a balanced, pseudo-random order in
which each stimulus occurred five times. At the end of each
test block subjects were informed of their performance, with
a breakdown of score for each of the five stimuli. This pro-
tocol, which is similar to that reported by Mori and Ward
共1995兲, was intended to assist subjects in self-motivation 共by
being aware of their performance兲 and in maintaining their
decision criteria and concentration levels. The modular struc-
ture also facilitated the statistical assessment of learning ef-
fects. It was not the intention to intensively train subjects in
order to measure their optimal performance—rather the in-
tention was to overcome any asymptotic tendencies in the
response function due to subjects gaining familiarity with the
task and stimuli, in order to measure their latent ability to do
the task.
Computer simulations 共Hill, 2000兲 of absolute identifi-
cation tasks suggested that a minimum of 40 trials per stimu-
lus category 共i.e., 200 trials in the case of five stimulus cat-
egories兲 are required per subject in order to satisfactorily
extract values for information transfer and sensitivity index
from individual confusion matrices 共see following sections兲.
Consequently, nine test blocks 共each of 25 trials兲 were used
for each variant 共major third, neutral third and minor third兲
of Experiments 1 and 2. In each case this gave an experi-
mental session lasting typically between 45 and 60 min. Pilot
studies suggested that longer sessions might produce prob-
lems with subjects maintaining their attention. Therefore, for
the longer, more complex stimuli of Experiments 3 and 4
共see Fig. 1兲 it was decided to use two test sessions of five
blocks in order to keep the average session time below
60 min. Subjects were free to pause or take a short break in
T. Hill and I. Summers: Discrimination of interval size
 TABLE III. Results from Experiment 2: pooled confusion matrix for the major-third variant of the test.
Stimulus
R1 共a兲 R2 共b兲
S1 共a兲 306 86
S2 共b兲 63 226
S3 共c兲 17 83
S4 共d兲 3 21
S5 共e兲 4 7
between test blocks and most subjects opted to take one
break halfway through a session. In Experiments 1 and 2 the
order in which subjects completed major-, neutral- and
minor-third tests was permutated among the subjects to bal-
ance learning effects.
E. Data analyses
Individual-subject data for each identification task were
analyzed to give values for information transfer IT over the
stimulus set and sensitivity index d⬘ between stimuli within
the set. These quantities indicate the extent to which the
stimulus categories are perceptually distinct. The full-range
sensitivity index D⬘ 共i.e., cumulative d⬘ across the full stimu-
lus range兲 is closely related to IT, since both D⬘and IT indi-
cate the number of discriminable categories within the stimu-
lus range 共Braida and Durlach, 1972兲.
1. Calculation of IT
For an identification task with s stimulus categories, s
response categories and n test items, experimental data may
be represented by an s ⫻ s confusion matrix with n entries. In
this case, s = 5 and n = 225 or 250 共for a single subject兲. In-
formation transfer to the subject was calculated from the
confusion matrix according to the formula given by Miller
and Nicely 共1955兲, incorporating the correction suggested by
Miller 共1955兲 for the case when n is not large.
2. Calculation of d⬘ and D⬘
共Implicit in the discussion which follows is the assump-
tion that the identification task is one dimensional, i.e., that
the various stimuli within the stimulus set are ranged along a
single perceptual dimension. This assumption is necessary in
order for d⬘analysis of confusion matrices to be tractable.
The experimental results provide evidence that the tasks in
the present study are, to some extent, multidimensional—see
below for discussion of this—but do not suggest that the
one-dimensional assumption represents a major distortion of
subjects’ strategies.兲
Braida and Durlach 共1972兲 proposed a method by which
d⬘ values can be calculated from a confusion matrix. This
method works well for well-populated matrices, i.e., when n
is very large. However, there are numerical problems for
smaller values of n. For this reason a similar but more robust
method 共Hill, 2000兲, which is better able to cope with
smaller n, has been used in the present study. In summary,
J. Acoust. Soc. Am., Vol. 121, No. 4, April 2007
Redistribution subject to ASA license or copyright; see http://acousticalsociety.org/content/terms. Download to IP: 144.173.6.37 On: Wed, 06 Aug 2014 12:16:58
Response
R3 共c兲 R4 共d兲 R5 共e兲
10 3
85 26 5
264 37 4
98 252 31
76 318
this method pools all “high” errors and all “low” errors for a
given stimulus category in order to produce more reliable
estimates of inter-stimulus d⬘s.
In the present study, d⬘ values are calculated from
individual-subject confusion matrices. In a very few in-
stances a negative d⬘ is obtained between neighboring stimu-
lus categories because of a subject’s anomalous response pat-
tern, in which cases the negative value has been set to zero.
For some of the higher scoring subjects, a given stimulus
category may produce a zero error count, in which cases an
infinite inter-stimulus d⬘ is suggested. However, this is a con-
sequence of the quantized nature of the subjects’ response
patterns—a more realistic d⬘ estimate is obtained by attrib-
uting a zero error count to a “true” count in the range 0–0.5
and hence calculating d⬘ from an error count of 0.25.
3. Calculation of just-noticeable differences and
category widths
A just-noticeable difference JND can be defined as the
stimulus change which corresponds to d⬘ = 1. For a particular
set of experimental data, a JND value 共in cents兲 can thus be
calculated as the inverse slope of a cumulative plot of d⬘ vs
stimulus separation 共in cents兲 or, equivalently, as the quotient
R / D⬘ of the stimulus range R and the full-range sensitivity
index D⬘. 共R = 60 cents for the experiments in this study.兲
The IT calculated for a particular stimulus set is conven-
tionally interpreted as indicating the number of stimulus cat-
egories 2IT within the stimulus range R. The category width
r, i.e., the separation 共in cents兲 required for two stimuli to be
reliably categorized as different, may thus be calculated us-
ing the formula r = R / 共2IT − 1兲.
III. RESULTS
Data are available for eight identification tasks: for the
various major 3rds in Experiments 1, 2, 3 and 4, for the
various neutral thirds in Experiments 1 and 2, and for the
various minor thirds in Experiments 1 and 2. All eight tasks
produce broadly similar confusion matrices. An example is
given in Table III, which shows data pooled over subjects for
identification of major thirds in Experiment 2. It can be seen
that the degree of difficulty of the task produces an accept-
able distribution of errors. Mean values of d⬘ for discrimina-
tion within the various stimulus sets 共averaged over single-
subject values calculated from individual confusion
matrices兲 are given in Figs. 2 and 3. These figures show
mean d⬘ for nearest neighbor stimuli 共a : b, b : c, c : d, etc.兲,
i.e., the perceptual distance corresponding to a 15 cent incre-
T. Hill and I. Summers: Discrimination of interval size 2379
 FIG. 2. Sensitivity indices d⬘ for nearest-neighbor stimulus pairs: data from
Experiments 1 and 2, averaged over nine subjects; error bars show the
standard error. The stimulus pairs are labeled according to the mean of the
principal thirds, e.g., a:b as 422.5 cents, y : z as 277.5 cents.
ment, as it varies with the position of the increment within
the overall pitch range of the stimulus set. Cumulative d⬘
values 共corresponding to larger pitch increments兲 may be cal-
culated from these data, if required. Note that in Experiments
3 and 4, in addition to cues available from pitch increments
in the principal third, cues are also available from pitch in-
crements in the tones at a major second above the start note.
Hence, in these experiments the experimental results relate to
discrimination of changes in the overall tuning system, al-
though for convenience these changes are labeled according
to pitch changes in the principal third.
Table IV shows mean values of IT 共averaged over
single-subject values calculated from individual confusion
matrices兲 and mean values for full-range sensitivity index D⬘
共averaged over single-subject values calculated from slopes
of individual cumulative d⬘ plots兲. Table IV also gives values
for category width r 共calculated from IT兲, for JND 共calcu-
lated from D⬘兲 and for the quotient r / JND. The quoted un-
certainties are standard errors.
A. Results from Experiment 1: Three-tone melodic
sequence
Analysis of variance 共ANOVA兲 on the overall scores for
each test block, between and within each test session,
FIG. 3. Sensitivity indices d⬘ for nearest-neighbor stimulus pairs: data from
Experiments 3 and 4, averaged over nine subjects; error bars show the
standard error. Corresponding data from Experiments 1 and 2 are shown for
comparison. The stimulus pairs are labeled according to the mean of the
principal thirds, e.g., a : b as 422.5 cents, d : e as 377.5 cents.
showed no significant learning effects. The variation of inter-
stimulus d⬘ across the stimulus set is shown in Fig. 2. Dif-
ferences between the three variants of the experiment—
major, neutral and minor thirds—were found not to be
significant at the p = 0.05 level 关one-way ANOVA on data
pooled over each class of third; three levels of “interval”
variable; F共2 , 16兲 = 3.26, p = 0.065兴. Differences within the
three variants of the experiment were investigated using
three separate one-way ANOVAs 共four levels of “subinter-
val” variable兲—a significant effect was found at the p
= 0.05 level in the neutral-third case 关F共3 , 24兲 = 6.17, p
= 0.003兴 but not in the major-third case 关F共3 , 24兲 = 1.65, p
= 0.20兴 or the minor-third case 关F共3 , 24兲 = 0.99, p = 0.41兴.
共Note: No attempt was made to adjust the threshold on the
test statistic to take account of multiple implementations of
the ANOVA.兲
Inter-stimulus d⬘ values have a mean of around 1.5 for
the pitch increments of 15 cents. Hence the values of full-
range sensitivity index D⬘ 共for 60 cent range兲 are around 6.0,
and the JND values 共for d⬘ = 1兲 are around 10 cents 共Table
IV兲. The mean values for IT are around 1 bit, equivalent to
perfect transmission of around two categories. Hence the cat-

TABLE IV. Summary results from Experiments 1, 2, 3 and 4: mean values for information transfer IT, category
width r, full-range sensitivity index D⬘; just-noticeable difference JND and the quotient r / JND; the quoted
uncertainties are standard errors.

JND
Experiment IT 共bits兲 r 共cents兲 D⬘ 共Cents兲 r / JND

1 major 1.020± 0.065 58± 5 6.3± 0.5 9.5± 0.8 6.1

1 neutral 0.897± 0.055 70± 6 5.3± 0.4 11.3± 0.8 6.2
1 minor 0.900± 0.045 69± 5 5.5± 0.4 10.9± 0.8 6.3
2 major 1.153± 0.132 49± 8 8.0± 1.1 7.5± 1.1 6.5
2 neutral 1.132± 0.112 50± 7 7.5± 0.9 8.0± 1.0 6.3
2 minor 1.153± 0.146 49± 9 7.9± 1.2 7.6± 1.2 6.4
3 major 0.698± 0.116 96± 21 4.9± 0.7 12.2± 1.8 7.9
4 major 0.896± 0.180 70± 20 6.8± 1.3 8.8± 1.7 8.0

2380 J. Acoust. Soc. Am., Vol. 121, No. 4, April 2007 T. Hill and I. Summers: Discrimination of interval size

Redistribution subject to ASA license or copyright; see http://acousticalsociety.org/content/terms. Download to IP: 144.173.6.37 On: Wed, 06 Aug 2014 12:16:58
 egory width r is approximately equal to the stimulus range R,
i.e., 60 cents.
B. Results from Experiment 2: Three-tone
harmonized sequence
As with Experiment 1, an ANOVA found no significant
learning effects over the course of the experiment. The varia-
tion of inter-stimulus d⬘ across the stimulus set is shown in
Fig. 2. Differences between the three variants of the
experiment—major, neutral and minor thirds—were found
not to be significant at the p = 0.05 level 关one-way ANOVA
on data pooled over each class of third; three levels of inter-
val variable; F共2 , 16兲 = 0.35, p = 0.71兴. Differences within the
three variants of the experiment were investigated using
three separate one-way ANOVAs 共four levels of “subinter-
val” variable兲—a significant effect was found at the p
= 0.05 level in the major-third case 关F共3 , 24兲 = 4.34, p
= 0.014兴 but not in the neutral-third case 关F共3 , 24兲 = 0.31, p
= 0.82兴 or the minor-third case 关F共3 , 24兲 = 0.15, p = 0.93兴.
共Note: No attempt was made to adjust the threshold on the
test statistic to take account of multiple implementations of
the ANOVA.兲
Inter-stimulus d⬘ values have a mean of around 2.0 for
the pitch increments of 15 cents—higher than in Experiment
1, indicating the effect of the extra cues provided by the
additional sustained tone. Hence the values of full-range sen-
sitivity index D⬘ 共for 60 cent range兲 are around 8.0, and the
JND values 共for d⬘ = 1兲 are around 7.5 cents—the latter cor-
respondingly lower than in Experiment 1 共Table IV兲. A two-
way ANOVA on the complete data sets for d⬘ from Experi-
ments 1 and 2 共12 levels of “interval/subinterval” variable;
two levels of “experiment” variable; data summarized in Fig.
2兲 indicates that the additional tone in Experiment 2 provides
a significant overall benefit, compared to Experiment 1
关F共1 , 8兲 = 6.55, p = 0.034兴. The error bars in Fig. 2 indicate
that, compared to Experiment 1, there is greater variation in
performance over the subject group. Some subjects find the
additional tone of little benefit, whereas other subjects make
good use of the additional information. The mean values for
IT are just over 1 bit, equivalent to perfect transmission of
just over two categories. The category width r is conse-
quently slightly less than the stimulus range R and is calcu-
lated to be around 50 cents.
C. Results from Experiment 3: Melodic scale-like
sequence
A two-tailed t test and nonparametric runs test indicate
no significant learning effects in Experiment 3, either in each
experimental session or over the course of the whole experi-
ment. The variation of inter-stimulus d⬘ across the stimulus
set is shown in Fig. 3. Differences across the stimulus range
were investigated using a one-way ANOVA 共four levels of
subinterval variable兲 and a significant effect was found
关F共3 , 24兲 = 15.44, p ⬍ 0.001兴. Inter-stimulus d⬘ values have a
mean of around 1.2 for the pitch increments of
15 cents—lower than in Experiment 1, reflecting the addi-
tional complexity of the task. The value of full-range sensi-
tivity index D⬘ 共for 60 cent range兲 is 4.9± 0.7, and the JND is
J. Acoust. Soc. Am., Vol. 121, No. 4, April 2007
Redistribution subject to ASA license or copyright; see http://acousticalsociety.org/content/terms. Download to IP: 144.173.6.37 On: Wed, 06 Aug 2014 12:16:58
12.2± 1.8 cents—the latter correspondingly higher than in
Experiment 1 共Table IV兲. The mean value for IT is approxi-
mately 0.7 bits. The category width r is consequently greater
than the stimulus range R and is calculated to be around
100 cents.
D. Results from Experiment 4: Harmonized scale-like
sequence
The results from Experiment 4 similarly exhibit no
learning effects when examined by a two-tailed t test and a
nonparametric runs test. The variation of inter-stimulus d⬘
across the stimulus set is shown in Fig. 3. Differences across
the stimulus range were investigated using a one-way
ANOVA 共four levels of subinterval variable兲 and, as for Ex-
periment 3, a significant effect was found 关F共3 , 24兲 = 12.11,
p ⬍ 0.001兴. Inter-stimulus d⬘ values have a mean of around
1.6 for the pitch increments of 15 cents—lower than in Ex-
periment 2 共reflecting the additional complexity of the task兲,
but higher than in Experiment 3 共indicating the effect of the
extra cues provided by the additional sustained tone兲. The
value of full-range sensitivity index D⬘ 共for 60 cent range兲 is
6.8± 1.3, and the JND is 8.8± 1.7 cents—the latter corre-
spondingly higher than in Experiment 2 and lower than in
Experiment 3 共Table IV兲. A two-way ANOVA on the data
sets for d⬘ from Experiments 3 and 4 共four levels of subinter-
val variable; two levels of experiment variable; data summa-
rized in Fig. 3兲 indicates that the benefit provided by the
additional tone in Experiment 4, compared to Experiment 3,
is 共just兲 not significant at the p = 0.05 level 关F共1 , 8兲 = 4.53,
p = 0.066兴. The error bars in Fig. 3 again indicate a significant
variation in performance over the subject group, as in Ex-
periment 2. The mean value for IT is approximately 0.9 bits.
The category width r is consequently slightly greater than the
stimulus range R and is calculated to be around 70 cents.
E. Dimensionality of the task
As mentioned above, the method of d⬘ analysis used
here, similar to that reported by Braida and Durlach 共1972兲,
is technically only valid for stimuli that vary along a single
dimension. In practice, the addition of the upper tone in Ex-
periments 2 and 4 共see Fig. 1兲 may introduce a second di-
mension relating to beat frequencies.
For the small pitch changes used in these experiments,
the beat frequency 共in Hz兲 varies linearly with the pitch in-
crement 共in cents兲, to a good approximation. However, be-
cause the listener cannot distinguish between positive and
negative beat frequencies, the perceived beat frequency has a
less simple relation to the pitch increment. For example, for
the major thirds in Experiments 2 and 4, the dominant beat
frequencies are as follows: a, 44.0 Hz; b, 29.4 Hz; c,
14.9 Hz; d, 0.6 Hz; e, 共–兲13.6 Hz. Stimulus d is effectively
beat free and stimuli c and e are effectively identical with
respect to beat frequency. Similarly, for the minor thirds, the
dominant beat frequencies are as follows: v, 12.5 Hz; w,
1.0 Hz; x, 共–兲10.4 Hz; y, 共–兲21.7 Hz; z, 共–兲32.9 Hz. Stimlus
w is effectively beat free and stimuli v and x are effectively
identical with respect to beat frequency. 关For the neutral
thirds the beat frequencies relating to mistuning from the
T. Hill and I. Summers: Discrimination of interval size 2381
 major third are ᐉ, 共–兲4.2 Hz; m, 共–兲18.3 Hz; n, 共–兲32.4 Hz;
o, 共–兲46.3 Hz; p, 共–兲60.1 Hz. The beat frequencies relating
to mistuning from the minor third are ᐉ, 51.5 Hz; m,
39.7 Hz; n, 27.9 Hz; o, 16.3 Hz; p, 4.8 Hz.兴
According to Braida and Durlach’s analysis, in the one-
dimensional case the quotient r / JND of the category width r
and the JND 共d⬘ = 1兲 should be approximately 5. The data in
the final column of Table IV show this quotient to be typi-
cally 6 or more in the present study, perhaps suggesting that
the one-dimensional assumption represents a distortion of the
true situation but not a major distortion. Further evidence is
provided by error patterns within the pooled subject data
共see, for example, Table III, which relates to Experiment 2兲,
which are generally as expected for the one-dimensional
case.
In Experiments 2 and 4 there is some direct evidence
that the higher scoring subjects are making use of beat cues,
i.e., for those subjects the stimulus set is not one dimen-
sional. For example, for stimulus e in Experiment 2, some
subjects produce more erroneous identifications as stimulus c
than as the 共nearest neighbor兲 stimulus d. This may be ex-
plained on the basis 共see above兲 that beats give little or no
information to distinguish stimulus e 共370 cents兲 and stimu-
lus c 共400 cents兲 from each other, but provide a significant
cue to distinguish these two stimuli from stimulus d
共385 cents兲.
The effect of beat cues in Experiment 4 is complex. One
of the higher scoring subjects commented that stimulus d
共see Table II兲 could be reliably identified by the lack of beats
on the 3rd and 5th tones in the sequence 共whose relation to
the sustained tone at 700 cents is very close to a beat-free
316 cents兲, whereas stimulus c could be reliably identified by
the lack of beats on the 2nd and 6th tones in the sequence
共whose relation to the sustained tone at 700 cents is very
close to a beat-free 498 cents兲. The task for that subject was
then to distinguish the other three stimuli which provided no
obvious beat cues.
F. General discussion of Experiments 1, 2, 3 and 4
The addition of the continuous upper tone in Experi-
ments 2 and 4 enhances subjects’ mean performance com-
pared to Experiments 1 and 3, respectively, giving higher
values for the full-range sensitivity index D⬘, and lowering
JNDs by 2 or 3 cents 共Table IV兲. Comparison of mean data
for major thirds in Experiment 1 and Experiment 2 with
those of Experiment 3 and Experiment 4 shows that the ad-
dition of extra melodic content leads to lower values for the
full-range sensitivity index D⬘ and an increase of 2 or
3 cents in JND, reflecting the greater complexity of the task.
However, this reduction of performance is not seen for the
better subjects—they maintain a similar performance, pre-
sumably because the increased complexity of the task is bal-
anced by the additional cues available within the more com-
plex stimuli.
As mentioned above, a significant variation of inter-
stimulus d⬘might be expected across the stimulus range—for
example, sensitivity might be less around unfamiliar inter-
vals, such as the neutral third 共approximately 350 cents兲 and
2382 J. Acoust. Soc. Am., Vol. 121, No. 4, April 2007
Redistribution subject to ASA license or copyright; see http://acousticalsociety.org/content/terms. Download to IP: 144.173.6.37 On: Wed, 06 Aug 2014 12:16:58
greater around familiar intervals, such as the major and mi-
nor thirds 共equal tempered at 400 and 300 cents and just
intonation at 386 and 316 cents兲. However, in the results
from Experiments 1 and 2, the perceptual landscape appears
generally featureless—Fig. 2 shows that within each experi-
ment there is little variation of inter-stimulus 共nearest neigh-
bor兲 d⬘ across the stimulus range. This is true for small
movements within the stimulus range 共as shown by the indi-
vidual lines in Fig. 2兲 and also for larger movements within
the stimulus range 共i.e., moving between major, neutral and
minor thirds in the data shown in Fig. 2兲. The grossly mis-
tuned intervals 共365 and 335 cents兲 and the “halfway” neu-
tral third 共350 cents兲 are not distinguished much better or
worse than the stimuli representing “in tune” musical inter-
vals 共equal-tempered thirds at 400 and 300 cents and just-
intonation thirds at 386 and 316 cents兲. The statistically sig-
nificant variation for neutral thirds in Experiment 1 is not
observed in Experiment 2, and may thus be viewed with
some uncertainty. The statistically significant variation for
major thirds in Experiment 2 is not observed in Experiment
1—however, a similar significant variation is also observed
in Experiments 3 and 4, and hence, on the basis of these
results for major thirds, it may be concluded that the percep-
tual landscape is not entirely featureless. In fact, results from
all four experiments suggest that the b : c discrimination be-
tween major thirds of 415 and 400 cents is reduced com-
pared to the other pairs of nearest-neighbor major thirds—
indicated by the dip in all four lines in Fig. 3. 共As an
alternative statistical treatment, a simple binomial analysis
suggests a probability of less than 3% for chance observation
that one discrimination from four is consistently easier or
harder than the rest over the four experiments—hence we
may conclude that, for this particular subject group, the b : c
discrimination is significantly different from the rest.兲 It is
not obvious why perceptual cues should be weaker for this
particular discrimination. The variation across the range of
major-third stimuli 共Fig. 3兲 is more marked in Experiments 3
and 4 共where, in principle, there are cues from the tuning of
the major seconds as well as from the major thirds兲 than in
Experiments 1 and 2 共where cues are only available from the
major thirds兲.
IV. CONCLUSIONS
In the quasi-musical context of these experiments, cat-
egory widths for identification were measured at around
70 cents and JNDs in frequency for the complex tones were
measured at around 10 cents. 共As expected, the addition of
the continuous upper tone in Experiments 2 and 4 produced
an enhancement of subjects’ mean performance compared to
Experiments 1 and 3, apparently due to the availability of
beat cues.兲 The measured values for category width r and
JND compare well with the semitone 共around 100 cents兲,
which forms the basis of conventional musical practice, and
the comma 共around 20 cents兲 which distinguishes intervals
such as just intonation and Pythagorean major thirds. The
measured category width in less than a semitone, indicating
that intervals of a semitone or more will be reliably identi-
fied; the measured JND is less than a comma, suggesting that
T. Hill and I. Summers: Discrimination of interval size
 differences between intervals such as just intonation and
Pythagorean major thirds are likely to be apparent to the
listener. The measured values for category width and JND
also compare quite well with the findings of Parncutt and
Cohen 共1995兲—falloff in performance for a melodic identi-
fication task was observed when the melody was constructed
with step sizes less than 40 cents, and close-to chance per-
formance was observed with a step size of 10 cents.
The sensitivity index d⬘ for a 15 cent increment was
typically calculated in the range 1.0–2.0. No significant dif-
ference in response was found between discrimination of ma-
jor, minor or neutral thirds, although sensitivity was slightly
higher for major thirds. Similarly, little significant difference
in response was found between intervals within each of the
major, minor or neutral stimulus sets 共although, for major
thirds, discrimination of the 15 cent increment between 400
and 415 cents was reduced compared to discrimination of
other 15 cent increments within the stimulus sets兲. This is in
line with the findings of Parncutt and Cohen 共1995兲, whose
results for a melodic identification task with various step
sizes in the range 25–133 cents showed no peak in perfor-
mance at the “in tune” step size of 100 cents. However, re-
sults for the present study do not correspond with the find-
ings of some previous studies 共Burns and Ward, 1978; Burns
and Campbell, 1994兲 which indicated nonuniformity across
the stimulus range. In the latter study, the average sensitivity
index d⬘ for a 25 cent increment was found to be around 1.0,
but with periodic minima in d⬘ across the range of stimulus
tunings 共for intervals at multiples of 100 cents兲. It should be
noted that, in that study, the response categories 共with
50 cent increments兲 did not match the stimulus categories.
This hinders comparison with the present study, but it may
be conjectured that the relatively constant d⬘ values observed
in the present study may be a consequence of the experimen-
tal paradigm, which may have encouraged subjects to disre-
gard their previous musical experience. However, the lack of
evidence for anchors or landmarks does not necessarily im-
ply that these have no effect on perception in the context of
these experiments—it may simply be that they stretch and
compress perceptual space so as to produce little effect over-
all.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The authors thank the participants for their generosity.
This work was supported by the UK Engineering and Physi-
cal Sciences Research Council. Comments by an anonymous
reviewer were particularly helpful.
Braida, L. D., and Durlach, N. I. 共1972兲. “Intensity perception: II. Resolu-
tion in one-interval paradigms,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 51, 483–502.
Burns, E. M., and Campbell, S. L. 共1994兲. “Frequency and frequency-ratio
resolution by possessors of absolute and relative pitch—examples of cat-
egorical perception,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 96, 2704–2719.
Burns, E. M., and Ward, W. D. 共1978兲. “Categorical perception—
phenomenon or epiphenomenon: Evidence from experiments in the per-
ception of melodic musical intervals,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 63, 456–468.
Creel, S. C., Newport, E. L., and Aslin, R. N. 共2004兲. “Distant. melodies:
Statistical learning of nonadjacent dependencies in tone sequences,” J.
Exp. Psychol. Learn. Mem. Cogn., 30, 1119–1130.
Deutsch, D. 共1980兲. “The processing of structured and unstructured tonal
J. Acoust. Soc. Am., Vol. 121, No. 4, April 2007
The author has requested enhancement of the downloaded file. All in-text references underlined in blue are linked to publications on ResearchGate.
Redistribution subject to ASA license or copyright; see http://acousticalsociety.org/content/terms. Download to IP: 144.173.6.37 On: Wed, 06 Aug 2014 12:16:58
sequences,” Percept. Psychophys. 28, 381–389.
Hall, D. E., and Hess, J. T. 共1984兲. “Perception of musical interval tuning,”
Music Percept. 2, 166–195.
Harris, J. D. 共1952兲. “Pitch discrimination,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 24, 750–
755.
Hill, T. J. W. 共2000兲. “Experiments on the perception of pitch increments in
simple tone sequences,” Unpublished Ph.D. thesis, University of Exeter,
Exeter, UK.
Kameoka, A., and Kuriyagawa, M. 共1969a兲. “Consonance theory. I. Conso-
nance of dyads,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 45, 1451–1459.
Kameoka, A., and Kuriyagawa, M. 共1969b兲. “Consonance theory. II. Con-
sonance of complex tones and its calculation method,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am.
45, 1460–1469.
Kidd, G. R., and Watson, C. S. 共1992兲. “The ‘proportion-of-the-total dura-
tion 共PTD兲 rule’ for the discrimination of auditory patterns,” J. Acoust.
Soc. Am. 92, 3109–3118.
Miller, G. A. 共1955兲. “Note on the bias of information estimates,” in Infor-
mation Theory in Psychology: Problems and Methods, edited by H. Quas-
tler 共Free Press, Glencoe, IL兲, pp. 95–100.
Miller, G. A., and Nicely, P. E. 共1955兲. “An analysis of perceptual confu-
sions among English consonants,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 27, 338–352.
Moore, B. C. J., and Glasberg, B. R. 共1990兲. “Frequency discrimination of
complex tones with overlapping and non-overlapping harmonics,” J.
Acoust. Soc. Am. 87, 2163–2177.
Mori, S., and Ward, L. M. 共1995兲. “Pure feedback effects in absolute iden-
tification,” Percept. Psychophys. 57, 1065–1079.
Nelson, D. A., Stanton, M. E., and Freyman, R. L. 共1983兲. “A general
equation describing frequency discrimination as a function of frequency
and sensation level,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 73, 2117–2123.
Parncutt, R., and Cohen, A. J. 共1995兲. “Identification of microtonal
melodies—effects of scale-step size, serial order, and training,” Percept.
Psychophys. 57, 835–846.
Perlman, M., and Krumhansl, C. L. 共1996兲. “An experimental study of in-
ternal interval standards in Japanese and Western musicians,” Music Per-
cept. 14, 95–116.
Rasch, R. A. 共1983兲. “Description of regular twelve-tone musical tunings,”
J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 73, 1023–1035.
Rasch, R. A. 共1985兲. “Perception of melodic and harmonic intonation of
two-part musical fragments,” Music Percept. 2, 441–458.
Schellenberg, E. G., and Trehub, S. E. 共1994兲. “Frequency ratios and the
discrimination of pure-tone sequences,” Percept. Psychophys. 56, 472–
478.
Sek, A., and Moore, B. C. J. 共1995兲. “Frequency discrimination as a func-
tion of frequency, measured in several ways,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 97,
2479–2486.
Smith, N. A., and Schmuckler, M. A. 共2004兲. “The perception of tonal
structure through the differentiation and organization of pitches,” J. Exp.
Psychol. Hum. Percept. Perform. 30, 268–286.
Spiegel, M. F., and Watson, C. S. 共1984兲. “Performance on frequency-
discrimination tasks by musicians and nonmusicians,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am.
76, 1690–1695.
Thompson, W. F., Hall, M. D., and Pressing, J. 共2001兲. “Illusory conjunc-
tions of pitch and duration in unfamiliar tone sequences,” J. Exp. Psychol.
Hum. Percept. Perform. 27, 128–140.
Tufts, J. B., Molis, M. R., and Leek, M. R. 共2005兲. “Perception of disso-
nance by people with normal hearing and sensorineural hearing loss,” J.
Acoust. Soc. Am. 118, 955–967.
Vos, J. 共1986兲. “Purity ratings of tempered fifths and major thirds,” Music
Percept. 3, 221–258.
Vos, J. 共1988兲. “Subjective acceptability of various regular twelve-tone tun-
ing systems in two-part musical fragments,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 83,
2383–2392.
Vos, J., and van Vianen, B. G. 共1985兲. “Thresholds for discrimination be-
tween pure and tempered intervals: The relevance of nearly coinciding
harmonics,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 77, 176–187.
Watson, C. S., Wroton, H. W., Kelly, W. J., and Benbassat, C. A. 共1975兲.
“Factors in the discrimination of tonal patterns. I. Component frequency,
temporal position and silent intervals,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 57, 1175–
1185.
Watson, C. S., Kelly, W. J., and Wroton, H. W. 共1976兲. “Factors in the
discrimination of tonal patterns. II. Selective attention and learning under
various levels of stimulus uncertainty,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 60, 1176–
1186.
T. Hill and I. Summers: Discrimination of interval size 2383