BregmanA.S.CampbellJ. (1971). Primary auditory stream segregation and perception of order in rapid sequences of tones, Journal of Experimental Psychology, 89, 244–249.
2.
CutlerA.DahanD.van DonselaarW. (1997). Prosody in the comprehension of spoken language: A literature review. Language and Speech, 40, 141–210.
3.
DaweL.A.PlattJ.R.WelshE. (1998). Spectral motion after-effects and the tritonc paradox among Canadian subjects. Perception & Psycho-physics, 60, 209–220.
4.
DeutschD. (1975). Two-channel listening to musical scales. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 57, 1156–1160.
5.
DeutschD. (1986). A musical paradox. MUSIC PERCEPTION3, 275–280.
6.
DeutschD. (1987). The tritone paradox: Effects of spectral variables. Perception & Psychophysics, 41, 563–575.
7.
DeutschD. (1991). The tritone paradox: An influence of language on music perception. Music Perception, 8, 335–347.
8.
DeutschD. (1994). The tritone paradox: Some further geographical correlates. Music Perception, 32, 125–136.
9.
DeutschD. (1996). Mothers and their children hear a musical illusion in strikingly similar ways. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 93, 2482.
10.
DeutschD.KuyperW.L.FisherY. (1987). The tritone paradox: Its presence and form of distribution in a general population. Music Perception, 5, 79–92.
11.
DeutschD.NorthT.RayL. (1990). The tritone paradox: Correlate with the listener's vocal range for speech. Music Perception, 7, 371–384.
12.
DolsonM. (1994). The pitch of speech as a function of linguistic community. Music Perception, 11, 321–331.
13.
FemaldA. (1992). Human maternal vocalisations to infants as biologically relevant signals: An evolutionary perspective. InBarkowJ.H.CosmidesL.ToobyJ. (Eds.), The adapted mind: Evolutionary psychology and the generation of culture (pp.391–427), New York: Oxford University Press.
14.
GiangrandeJ. (1998), The tritone paradox: Effects of pitch class and position of the spectral envelope. Music Perception, 15, 253–264.
15.
HuntF.V. (1978). Origins in acoustics. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
16.
PenroseL.S.PenroseR. (1958). Impossible objects: A special type of illusion. British Journal of Psychology, 49, 31–33.
17.
RagozzineF.DeutschD. (1994). A regional difference in perception of the tritone paradox within the United States. Music Perception, 12, 213–225.
18.
RissetJ.C. (1971). Paradoxes de hauteur. Proceedings of the 7th International Congree of Acoustics, 3, 613–616.
19.
RockI. (1986). The description and analysis of object and event perception. InBoffK.R.KaufmanL.ThomasJ.P. (Eds.), Handbook of perception and human performance (chap. 33), New York: Wiley.
20.
SchererK.R. (1985), Vocal affect signaling: A comparative approach. Advances in the Study of Behavior, 35, 189–244.
21.
SchoutenJ.F. (1940). The perception of pitch. Philips Technical Review, 5, 286–294.
22.
SeebeckA. (1843). Ueber die Sirene. Annalen für Physik und chemie, 60, 449–481.
23.
ShepardR.N. (1964). Circularity in judgments of relative pitch. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 36, 2346–2353.
24.
Van NoordenL.P.A.S. (1975). Temporal coherence in the perception of tone sequences.Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Techniche Hogeschoel, Eindhoven, The Netherlands.