In the following study, we have developed an assessment instrument for the practice-dependent skill of analytical hearing following a strict test theoretical validation, resulting in the Musical Ear Training Assessment (META). By means of three pilot studies, a developmental study, and a validation study, we verified a one-dimensional test model using item response theory identifying the best 53 items to measure a person’s ear training and analytical hearing skill. For better application, two test versions with 10 and 25 items have been compiled (META-10 and META-25). Aside from psychometric test development, it was possible to investigate a variety of moderator variables assumed to influence ear training skill. The participants’ main instrument did not influence the META score, nor did whether participants had learned some method of solmization. However, the most played genre (d = 0.20) and, unforeseen by us, the participants’ gender (d = 0.23; males outperforming females) had significant impacts on the test score. This test instrument enables empirical research into the relevance of ear training for general musical skills, intervention studies on skill acquisition, and standardized assessment for advanced music students and musicians.
AbellN.SpringerD. W.KamataA. (2009). Developing and validating rapid assessment instruments. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
2.
American Educational Research Association, American Psychological Association, & National Council on Measurement in Education. (2011). Standards for educational and psychological testing. Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.
3.
AndersenE. (1973). A goodness of fit for the Rasch model. Psychometrika, 38, 123–140. doi:10.1007/BF02291180
4.
BentleyA. (1966). Musical ability in children and its measurement. London, England: Harrap.
5.
BentleyA. (1969). Measurement and development of musical abilities. Journal of Research in Music Education, 17, 41–46. doi:10.2307/3344182
6.
BigandE.Poulin-CharronnatB. (2006). Are we “experienced listeners”? A review of the musical capacities that do not depend on formal musical training. Cognition, 100(1), 100–130. doi:10.1016/j.cognition.2005.11.007
7.
BozdoganH. (1987). Model selection and Akaike’s information criterion (AIC): The general theory and its analytical extensions. Psychometrika, 52(3), 345–370. doi:10.1007/BF02294361
8.
ColwellR. (1969). MAT: Music achievement tests 1 and 2: Interpretive manual. Chicago, IL: Follett educational corporation.
9.
ColwellR. (1970). MAT: Music achievement tests 3 and 4: Interpretive manual. Chicago, IL: Follett Educational Corporation.
CookN. (1987). The perception of large-scale tonal closure. Music Perception, 5(2), 197–205. doi:10.2307/40285392
12.
De AyalaR. J. (2009). Theory and practice of item response theory. New York, NY: Guilford Press.
13.
DooleyK.DeutschD. (2011). Absolute pitch correlates with high performance on interval naming tasks. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 130(6), 4097–4104. doi:10.1121/1.3652861
14.
EllisP. D. (2010). The essential guide to effect sizes: Statistical power, meta-analysis, and the interpretation of research results. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
15.
EricssonK. A. (2006). The influence of experience and deliberate practice on the development of superior expert performance. In EricssonK. A.CharnessN.FeltovichP. J.HoffmanR. R. (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of expertise and expert performance (pp. 683–704). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
16.
FineC. (2010). Delusions of gender. London, England: Icon Books.
17.
FischerG. H.MolenaarI. W. (1995). Rasch models: Foundations, recent developments, and applications. New York, NY: Springer.
18.
GaltonF. (1876). The history of twins as a criterion of the relative powers of nature and nurture. Royal Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland Journal, 6, 391–406.
19.
German Psychological Society. (2016). Berufsethische Richtlinien [Standards of professional ethics]. Retrieved from https://www.dgps.de/index.php?id=85
20.
GlasC. A. W.VerhelstN. D. (1995). Testing the Rasch model. In FischerG. H.MolenaarI. W. (Eds.), Rasch models: Foundations, recent developments, and applications (pp. 69–95). New York, NY: Springer.
21.
GordonE. E. (1970). Iowa tests of music literacy: Manual. Iowa City, IA: The Bureau of Educational Research and Service.
22.
GordonE. E. (1986). The nature, description, measurement, and evaluation of music aptitudes. Chicago, IL: GIA Publications.
23.
GordonE. E. (1989). Manual for the advanced measures of music audiation. Chicago, IL: GIA Publications.
24.
GregoryR. J. (2015). Psychological testing: History, principles, and applications. Boston, MA: Pearson.
25.
HallamS.BautistaA. (2012). Processes of instrumental learning: The development of musical expertise. In McPhersonG. E.WelchG. (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of music education (Vol. 1, pp. 658–676). Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
26.
HallamS.PrinceV. (2003). Conceptions of musical ability. Research Studies in Music Education, 20, 2–22. doi:10.1177/1321103X030200010101
27.
HarrisonC. S.AsmusE. P.SerpeR. T. (1994). Effects of musical aptitude, academic ability, music experience, and motivation on aural skills. Journal of Research in Music Education, 42, 131–144. doi:10.2307/3345497
28.
KarmaK. (2007). Musical aptitude definition and measure validation: Ecological validity can endanger the construct validity of musical aptitude tests. Psychomusicology, 19, 79–90. doi:10.1037/h0094033
29.
KarnoM.KonečniV. J. (1992). The effects of structural interventions in the first movement of Mozart’s symphony in G minor K. 550 on aesthetic preference. Music Perception, 10, 63–72. doi:10.2307/40285538
30.
KarpinskiG. S. (2000). Aural skills acquisition. The development of listening, reading, and performing skills in college-level musicians. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
KollerI.AlexandrowiczR.HatzingerR. (2012). Das Rasch Modell in der Praxis. Eine Einführung im eRm [The Rasch model in practice. An introduction with eRm]. Wien: facultas.wuv.
KollerI.MaierM. J.HatzingerR. (2015). An empirical power analysis of quasi-exact tests for the Rasch model: Measurement invariance in small samples. Methodology, 11(2), 45–54. doi:10.1027/1614-2241/a000090
35.
KopiezR.PlatzF. (2009). The role of listening expertise, attention, and musical style in the perception of clash of keys. Music Perception, 26, 321–334. doi:10.1525/MP.2009.26.4.321
36.
LawL. N. C.ZentnerM. (2012). Assessing musical abilities objectively: Construction and validation of the profile of music perception skills. PLOS ONE, 7, e52508. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0052508
37.
LehmannA. C. (2014). Using admission assessments to predict final grades in a college music program. Journal of Research in Music Education, 62, 245–258. doi:10.1177/0022429414542654
38.
LehmannA. C.HempelC. (1992). Zur Erforschung von Lernmöglichkeiten im Fach Gehörbildung. Eine explorative Studie unter Berücksichtigung des Einsatzes von Computern im Gehörbildungsunterricht [The exploration of learning possibilities in ear-training classes: An exploratory study considering computer applications in ear training]. Musikpsychologie, 9, 82–96.
39.
LinacreJ. M. (2002). What do infit and outfit mean-square and standardized mean?Rasch Measurement Transactions, 16(2), 878.
40.
LippaR. A. (2005). Gender, nature, and nurture. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
41.
MairP.HatzingerR. (2007a). CML based estimation of extended Rasch models with the eRm package in R. Psychology Science, 49(1), 26–43.
42.
MairP.HatzingerR. (2007b). Extended Rasch modeling: The eRm package for the application of IRT models in R. Journal of Statistical Software, 20(9). doi:10.18637/jss.v020.i09
McFaddenD. (2008). What do sex, twins, spotted hyenas, ADHD, and sexual orientation have in common?Perspectives on Psychological Science, 3(4), 309–323. doi:10.1111/j.1745-6924.2008.00082.x
45.
McPhersonG. E. (1995). Five aspects of musical performance and their correlates. Bulletin of the Council for Research in Music Education, 127, 115–121.
46.
McPhersonG. E.BaileyM.SinclairK. E. (1997). Path analysis of a theoretical model to describe the relationship among five types of musical performance. Journal of Research in Music Education, 45, 103–129. doi:10.2307/3345469
47.
McPhersonG. E.GabrielssonA. (2002). From sound to sign. In McPhersonG. E.ParncuttR. (Eds.), The science and psychology of music performance: Creative strategies for teaching and learning (pp. 99–116). Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
48.
MishraJ. (2014). Factors related to sight-reading accuracy: A meta-analysis. Journal of Research in Music Education, 61, 452–465. doi:10.1177/0022429413508585
49.
MorleyA. P.NarayananM.MinesR.MolokhiaA.BaxterS.CraigG.. . . CraigI. (2012). AVPR1A and SLC6A4 polymorphisms in choral singers and non-musicians: A gene association study. PLOS ONE, 7, e31763. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0031763
50.
MüllensiefenD.GingrasB.MusilJ.StewartL. (2014). The musicality of non-musicians: An index for assessing musical sophistication in the general population. PLOS ONE, 9(2), e89642. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0089642
51.
MüllensiefenD.HarrisonP.CapriniF.FancourtA. (2015). Investigating the importance of self-theories of intelligence and musicality for students’ academic and musical achievement. Frontiers in Psychology, 6, 1702. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01702
PalmerC. M. (2016). Instrumental jazz improvisation development characteristics of novice, intermediate, and advanced improvisers. Journal of Research in Music Education, 64, 360–378. doi:10.1177/0022429416664897
54.
PanJ.ThompsonR. (2007). Quasi-Monte Carlo estimation in generalized linear mixed models. Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, 51, 5765–5775. doi:10.1016/j.csda.2006.10.003
55.
PaneyA. S. (2016). The effect of directing attention on melodic dictation testing. Psychology of Music, 44, 15–24. doi:10.1177/0305735614547409
56.
PapageorgiI.CreechA.HaddonE.MortonF.De BezenacC.HimonidesE.. . . WelchG. (2010). Perceptions and predictions of expertise in advanced musical learners. Psychology of Music, 38, 31–66. doi:10.1177/0305735609336044
57.
PlatzF.KopiezR.LehmannA. C.WolfA. (2014). The influence of deliberate practice on musical achievement: A meta-analysis. Frontiers in Psychology, 5, 646. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00646
58.
PonocnyI. (2001). Nonparametric goodness-of-fit tests for the Rasch model. Psychometrika, 66(3), 437–459. doi:10.1007/BF02294444
59.
PulliK.KarmaK.NorioR.SistonenP.GöringH.JärveläI. (2008). Genome-wide linkage scan for loci of musical aptitude in Finnish families: Evidence for a major locus at 4q22. Journal of Medical Genetics, 45(7), 451–456. doi:10.1136/jmg.2007.056366
60.
R Core Team. (2016). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Retrieved from http://www.R-project.org
61.
RammsayerT. H.TrocheS. J. (2012). On sex-related differences in auditory and visual sensory functioning. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 41(3), 583–590. doi:10.1007/s10508-011-9880-8
62.
RaschG. (1960). Probabilistic models for some intelligence and attainment tests. Copenhagen, Denmark: Danish Institute for Educational Research.
ReipsU.-D. (2012). Using the Internet to collect data. In CooperH. (Ed.), APA Handbook of Research Methods in Psychology: Vol. 2. Research designs (pp. 291–310). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
65.
SchumannR. (2002). Musikalische Haus- und Lebensregeln [Advices to young musicians] . Sinzig: Studio. (Original work published 1848)
66.
SeashoreC. E. (1919). The psychology of musical talent. Boston, MA: Silver, Burdett and Company.
67.
SeashoreC. E.LewisD.SaetveitJ. G. (1960). Seashore measures of musical talent. New York, NY: The Psychological Corporation.
68.
UkkolaL. T.OnkamoP.RaijasP.KarmaK.JärveläI. (2009). Musical aptitude is associated with AVPR1A-haplotypes. PLOS ONE, 4, e5534. doi:10.1371/ journal.pone.0005534
69.
UllénF.MosingM. A.HolmL.ErikssonH.MadisonG. (2014). Psychometric properties and heritability of a new online test for musicality, the Swedish musical discrimination test. Personality and Individual Differences, 63, 87–93. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2014.01.057
70.
VandenBosG. R. (Ed.). (2015). APA dictionary of psychology. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
71.
VoyerD.VoyerS.BrydenM. P. (1995). Magnitude of sex differences in spatial abilities: A meta-analysis and consideration of critical variables. Psychological Bulletin, 117(2), 250–270. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.117.2.250
72.
WesolowskiB. C. (2016). Assessing jazz big band performance: The development, validation, and application of a facet-factorial rating scale. Psychology of Music, 44, 324–339. doi:10.1177/0305735614567700
73.
WesolowskiB. C.WindS. A.EngelhardG. (2015). Rater fairness in music performance assessment: Evaluating model-data fit and differential rater functioning. Musicae Scientiae, 19, 147–170. doi:10.1177/1029864915589014
74.
WingH. D. (1939). Standardized tests of musical intelligence. The Mere, England: National Foundation for Educational Research.
75.
WingH. D. (1961). Standardized tests of musical intelligence. Windsor, England: National Foundation for Educational Research.
76.
WolfA.KopiezR. (2014). Do grades reflect the development of excellence in music students? The prognostic validity of entrance exams at universities of music. Musicae Scientiae, 18, 232–248. doi:10.1177/1029864914530394
77.
WoodyR. H.LehmannA. C. (2010). Student musicians’ ear-playing ability as a function of vernacular music experiences. Journal of Research in Music Education, 58, 101–115. doi:10.1177/0022429410370785
78.
WrightC. R. (2016). Aural and the university music undergraduate. Newcastle upon Tyne, England: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
79.
ZaltzY.RothD. A.-E.GoverH.LiranS.Kishon-RabinL. (2014). The effect of gender on a frequency discrimination task in children. Journal of Basic and Clinical Physiology and Pharmacology, 25(3), 293–299. doi:10.1515/jbcpp-2014-0048
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
