@article{01JXEVE9H7BGAW2RFD3RQ7XGMS,
  abstract     = {{Our ability to predict upcoming events is a fundamental component of human cognition. One way in which we do so is by exploiting temporal regularities in sensory signals: the ticking of a clock, falling of footsteps and the motion of waves each provide a structure that may facilitate anticipation. But how strong is the effect of rhythmic anticipation on perception? And to what degree do people vary in their ability to capitalize on these regularities? In 2015, Hickok et al. introduced a behavioural paradigm to assess how a rhythmic auditory stimulus affects perception of subsequent targets (Hickok G, Farahbod H, Saberi K. 2015 The rhythm of perception: entrainment to acoustic rhythms induces subsequent perceptual oscillation. Psychol. Sci. 26, 1006-1013. (doi:10.1177/0956797615576533)). They tested five listeners and found that perception (target detection accuracy) fluctuated rhythmically just like the sound rhythm. Here, we replicate the original finding, assess how likely the finding is to be observed for any individual, and quantify effect size in a large sample of adult listeners (n = 149). We introduce a model-based analysis approach that allows separate estimates of amplitude and phase information in target detection responses, and quantifies effect size for individual listeners. Together our results strongly support the presence of oscillatory influences on target detection accuracy, as well as substantial variability in the magnitude of this effect across listeners.}},
  articleno    = {{220497}},
  author       = {{Henry, Molly J. and Obleser, Jonas and Crusey, Maria R. and Fuller, Emily R. and Lee, Yune Sang and Meyer, Martin and Acosta, Elizabeth A. M. and Van Hedger, Stephen C. and Inbar, Maya and Oderbolz, Chantal and Dunham, Sienna A. and Anankul, Yathida and Sabo, Lauren E. and Keitel, Christian and Maddox, Ross K. and Mehl, Kendra and Aslan, Gizem and Martens, Peter A. and Sauppe, Sebastian and Horovitz, Meir and Kinghorn, Elizabeth E. and Koukouvinis, Stratos and Bosker, Hans Rutger and Huviyetli, Mert and Leung, Carole and Symons, Ashley Elizabeth and Strauß, Antje and Chait, Maria and Hu, Mingyue and Eulitz, Carsten and Salagovic, Cailey A. and Davis, Chris and Severijnen, Giulio Glauco Adriaan and Kosachenko, Alexandra I. and Alain, Claude and Kim, Jeesun and Grahn, Jessica A. and Sidhu, Riya K. and Megighian, Carlo and Butler, Blake E. and Sears, David R. W. and Herrmann, Björn and Griffiths, Megan Louise and Landau, Ayelet N. and Razin, Raha and Grassi, Massimo and Levitsky, Andrew and Holt, Lori L. and Belfi, Amy M. and Stewart, Hannah J. and Shinn-Cunningham, Barbara G. and Gomez, Christi and Brookes, Faye and Smith, Erin D. and Axler, Ethan and Bakardjian, Karin and Hochstrasser, Daniel and Guiotto Nai Fovino, Lucrezia and Tune, Sarah and Pavlov, Yuri G. and Lee, Kalysta A. and Xavier, Ashlynne G. and Keitel, Anne and Rogers, Chad S. and Maltseva, Ann and Strauss, Julia L. and Lodol, Facundo F. and Arsiwala, Naeem and Peelle, Jonathan E.}},
  issn         = {{2054-5703}},
  journal      = {{ROYAL SOCIETY OPEN SCIENCE}},
  keywords     = {{auditory perception,rhythm perception,entrainment,NEURONAL OSCILLATIONS,AUDITORY-STIMULATION,PHASE ENTRAINMENT,SPEECH,MECHANISM,CORTEX}},
  language     = {{eng}},
  number       = {{6}},
  pages        = {{19}},
  title        = {{How strong is the rhythm of perception? A registered replication of Hickok et al. (2015)}},
  url          = {{http://doi.org/10.1098/rsos.220497}},
  volume       = {{12}},
  year         = {{2025}},
}

Altmetric

View in Altmetric

Web of Science

Times cited: