The purpose of this study was to investigate the effects of two listening strategies on rhythmic dictation scores. In a within-subjects design, 54 undergraduate music majors completed two-measure rhythmic dictations under each of three conditions: (a) no prescribed approach, (b) required listening before writing, and (c) required writing while listening. The first condition gauged participants’ baseline preference for the approach of the second or third condition. Repeated-measures t tests revealed a significant difference in test scores between the second and third conditions but no significant difference as a function of participants’ preferred strategy. Results suggest that some amount of simultaneous sketching may be helpful to students as they take dictation of rhythms, a common task in aural skills development both in and of itself and as a first phase of melodic dictation. Aural skills instructors should consider the potential benefits of sketching as an anchoring activity during dictation and discuss strategies explicitly with students. Helping high school and college students see how and why various strategies for dictation may be appropriate for particular task parameters can help them integrate component skills of listening, comprehension, and notation most effectively.
AbrilC.FlowersP. (2007). Attention, preference, and identity in music listening by middle school students of different linguistic backgrounds. Journal of Research in Music Education, 55(3), 204–215. https://doi.org/10.1177/002242940705500303
2.
AcevedoS.TemperleyD.PfordresherP. (2014). Effects of metrical encoding on melody recognition. Music Perception: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 31(4), 372–386. https://doi.org/10.1525/mp.2014.31.4.372
BeckettC. A. (1997). Directing student attention during two-part dictation. Journal of Research in Music Education, 45(4), 613–625. https://doi.org/10.2307/3345426
5.
BenwardB.KolosickJ. T. (2010). Ear training: A technique for listening. McGraw-Hill.
6.
BerzW. L. (1995). Working memory in music: A theoretical model. Music Perception: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 12(3), 353–364. https://doi.org/10.2307/40286188
7.
BuiD. C.MyersonJ. (2014). The role of working memory abilities in lecture note-taking. Learning and Individual Differences, 33, 12–22. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2014.05.002
8.
BuonviriN. O. (2014). An exploration of undergraduate music majors’ melodic dictation strategies. Update: Applications of Research in Music Education, 33(1), 21–30. https://doi.org/10.1177/8755123314521036
9.
BuonviriN. O. (2015). Effects of a preparatory singing pattern on melodic dictation success. Journal of Research in Music Education, 63(1), 102–113. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022429415570754
10.
BuonviriN. O. (2017). Effects of two listening strategies for melodic dictation. Journal of Research in Music Education, 65(3), 347–359. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022429417728925
11.
BuonviriN. O.PaneyA. S. (2015). Melodic dictation instruction: A survey of AP music theory teachers. Journal of Research in Music Education, 63(2), 224–237. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022429415584141
DesainP. (1992). A (de)composable theory of rhythm perception. Music Perception: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 9(4), 439–454. https://doi.org/10.2307/40285564
14.
DesprésJ. P.BurnardP.DubéF.StévanceS. (2017). Expert western classical music improvisers’ strategies. Journal of Research in Music Education, 65(2), 139–162. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022429417710777
15.
DiazF. M. (2015). Listening and musical engagement: An exploration of the effects of different listening strategies on attention, emotion, and peak affective experiences. Update: Applications of Research in Music Education, 33(2), 27–33. https://doi.org/10.1177/8755123314540665
16.
DukeR. (1994). When tempo changes rhythm: The effect of tempo on nonmusicians’ perception of rhythm. Journal of Research in Music Education, 42(1), 27–35. https://doi.org/10.2307/3345334
17.
FaulF.ErdfelderE.LangA. G.BuchnerA. (2007). G*Power 3: A flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences. Behavior Research Methods, 39, 175–191. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03193146
18.
FitchW.RosenfeldA. (2007). Perception and production of syncopated rhythms. Music Perception: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 25, 43–58. https://doi.org/10.1525/mp.2007.25.1.43
19.
FlowersP.O’NeillA. M. (2005). Self-reported distractions of middle school students in listening to music and prose. Journal of Research in Music Education, 53(4), 308–321. https://doi.org/10.1177/002242940505300403
20.
FrühaufJ.KopiezR.PlatzF. (2013). Music on the timing grid: The influence of microtiming on the perceived groove quality of a simple drum pattern performance. Musicae Scientiae, 17(2), 246–260. https://doi.org/10.1177/1029864913486793
21.
GorowR. (2000). Hearing and writing music. September Publishing.
22.
HewittM. P. (2001). The effects of self-evaluation, self-listening, and modeling on junior high instrumentalists’ music performance and practice attitude. Journal of Research in Music Education, 49(4), 307–322. https://doi.org/10.2307/3345614
23.
HofstetterF. (1981). Computer-based recognition of perceptual patterns and learning styles in rhythmic dictation exercises. Journal of Research in Music Education, 29(4), 265–277. https://doi.org/10.2307/3345003
24.
KarpinskiG. S. (2000). Aural skills acquisition. Oxford University Press.
25.
KarpinskiG. S. (2007). Manual for ear training and sight singing. Norton.
KraftL. (1999). A new approach to ear training. Norton.
28.
LouhivuoriJ. (1999). Memory strategies in writing melodies. Bulletin of the Council for Research in Music Education, 141, 81–85. http://www.jstor.org/stable/40318989
29.
MadsenC.CoggiolaJ. (2001). The effect of manipulating a CRDI dial on the focus of attention of musicians/nonmusicians and perceived aesthetic response. Bulletin of the Council for Research in Music Education, 149, 13–22.
30.
MadsenC. K.GeringerJ. M. (2000–2001). A focus of attention model for meaningful listening. Bulletin of the Council for Research in Music Education, 147, 103–108.
31.
MadsenC. K.GeringerJ. M. (2008). Reflections on Puccini’s La Boheme: Investigating a model for listening. Journal of Research in Music Education, 56(1), 33–42. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022429408323072
32.
MarcozziR. (2009). Strategies and patterns for ear training. Prentice Hall.
MayfieldC. E. (2013). Theory essentials. Schirmer.
35.
MclaughlinP.BoalsA. (2010). Perceptual organization can affect performance on rhythmic tasks. Psychology of Music, 38(4), 395–401. https://doi.org/10.1177/0305735609351916
36.
MillerG. A. (1956). The magical number seven, plus or minus two: Some limits on our capacity for processing information. Psychological Review, 63(2), 81–97. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0043158
37.
PaananenP. A. (2007). Melodic improvisation at the age of 6–11 years: Development of pitch and rhythm. Musicae Scientiae, 11(1), 89–119. https://doi.org/10.1177/102986490701100104
38.
PaneyA. S.BuonviriN. O. (2017). Developing melodic dictation pedagogy: A survey of college theory instructors. Update: Applications of Research in Music Education, 36(1), 51–58. https://doi.org/10.1177/8755123316686815
39.
PembrookR. G. (1986). Interference of the transcription process and other selected variables on perception and memory during melodic dictation. Journal of Research in Music Education, 34(4), 238–261. https://doi.org/10.2307/3345259
40.
PhillipsJ.MurphyP.MarvinE. W.ClendenningJ. P. (2011). The musician’s guide to aural skills: Ear training and composition. Norton.
ShehanP. (1987). Effects of rote versus note presentations on rhythm learning and retention. Journal of Research in Music Education, 35(2), 117–126. https://doi.org/10.2307/3344987
43.
SilvaS.CastroS. L. (2018). The time will come: Evidence for an eye-audiation span in silent music reading. Psychology of Music, 47(4), 504–520. https://doi.org/10.1177/0305735618765302
TrubittA.HinesS. (1979). Ear training and sight singing: An integrated approach. Schirmer.
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.
