Research has repeatedly demonstrated that people with experience within a particular domain have exceptional cognitive abilities for domain-specific information. Chess masters, for instance, are far better at memorizing visually presented chess positions than amateurs, and professional American football experts are highly sensitive to semantic changes in domain-related scenes. However, for non-domain-related material, experts’ performance becomes similar to novice performance. But how does this apply to music? We compared experienced musicians’ and novices’ attentional function and visual working memory using the change blindness flicker paradigm. The task was to detect minor changes between two otherwise identical music scores of differing styles: traditional (C-major, regular rhythms), contemporary (atonal, irregular rhythms), and random (nonsense music). We expected that (1) experienced musicians would detect changes faster, (2) the between-group difference would be larger for traditional than contemporary music, and (3) the groups’ performance would be more similar for random music. The experienced musicians detected changes significantly faster in both the contemporary and traditional music material, whereas the difference was nonsignificant for the random condition. The difference between groups was largest for contemporary music, despite its higher level of complexity. We discuss these results in relation to existing literature on expertise in visual information processing.
AgresK. R. (2019). Change detection and schematic processing in music. Psychology of Music, 47, 173–193.
2.
AielloR. (2000). Memorizing two piano pieces: The recommendations of concert pianists. In WoodsC.LuckG.BrochardR.SeddonF.SlobodaJ. A (Eds.), Proceedings of the sixth international conference on music perception and cognition [CD]. Keele, UK: Keele University, Department of Psychology. Retrieved from http://www.escom.org/proceedings/ICMPC2000/Tue/Aiello.html
3.
BavelierD.GreenC. S.PougetA.SchraterP. (2012). Brain plasticity through the life span: Learning to learn and action video games. Annual Review of Neuroscience, 35, 391–416.
4.
BeanK. L. (1938). An experimental approach to the reading of music. Psychological Monographs, 50(6), i–80. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/h0093540
5.
BootW. R.BlakelyD. P.SimonsD. J. (2011). Do action video games improve perception and cognition?Frontiers in Psychology, 2, 226.
6.
BukachC. M.GauthierI.TarrM. J. (2006). Beyond faces and modularity: The power of an expertise framework. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 10, 159–166.
7.
ChaseW. G.SimonH. A. (1973a). The mind’s eye in chess. In ChaseW. G. (Ed.), Visual information processing (pp. 215–281). New York, NY: Academic Press.
8.
ChaseW. G.SimonH. A. (1973b). Perception in chess. Cognitive Psychology, 4(1), 55–81.
9.
de BeeckH. P. O.BakerC. I. (2010). The neural basis of visual object learning. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 14(1), 22–30.
10.
de GrootA. D. (1978). Thought and choice in chess (2nd ed.). The Hague, The Netherlands: Mouton. Original work published1946.
11.
EganD. E.SchwartzB. J. (1979). Chunking in recall of symbolic drawings. Memory & Cognition, 7, 149–158.
12.
EhrlichK.SolowayE. (1984, February). An empirical investigation of the tacit plan knowledge in programming. Human Factors in Computer Systems, 16, 113–134.
13.
EricssonK. A.KintschW. (1995). Long-term working memory. Psychological Review, 102(2), 211.
14.
EricssonK. A.KrampeR. T.Tesch-RomerC. (1993). The role of deliberate practice in the acquisition of expert performance. Psychological Review, 100, 363–406.
15.
EricssonK. A.PatelV.KintschW. (2000). How experts’ adaptations to representative task demands account for the expertise effect in memory recall: Comment on Vicente and Wang (1998). Psychological Review, 107, 578–592.
16.
FasanaroA. M.SpitaleriD. L. A.ValianiR.GrossiD. (1990). Dissociation in musical reading: A musician affected by alexia without agraphia. Music Perception: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 7, 259–272.
17.
FiserJ.AslinR. N. (2001). Unsupervised statistical learning of higher-order spatial structures from visual scenes. Psychological Science, 12, 499–504.
18.
GauthierI.SkudlarskiP.GoreJ. C.AndersonA. W. (2000). Expertise for cars and birds recruits brain areas involved in face recognition. Nature Neuroscience, 3, 191–197.
19.
GrimesJ. (1996). On the failure to detect changes in scenes across saccades. Perception, 2, 89–110.
20.
HalpernA. R.BowerG. H. (1982). Musical expertise and melodic structure in memory for musical notation. American Journal of Psychology, 95, 31–50.
21.
HansenM.WallentinM.VuustP. (2012). Working memory and musical competence of musicians and non-musicians. Psychology of Music, 41, 779–793. http://doi.org/10.1177/0305735612452186
22.
HarelA. (2016). What is special about expertise? Visual expertise reveals the interactive nature of real-world object recognition. Neuropsychologia, 83, 88–99.
23.
HilgardJ.SalaG.BootW. R.SimonsD. J. (2019). Overestimation of action-game training effects: Publication bias and salami slicing. Collabra: Psychology, 5(1), 30.
24.
JänckeL. (2009). The plastic human brain. Restorative Neurology and Neuroscience, 27, 521–538.
25.
JolicoeurP.GluckM. A.KosslynS. M. (1984). Pictures and names: Making the connection. Cognitive Psychology, 16, 243–275.
26.
KleinsmithA. L.SheridanH. (2019). The perceptual specificity of expertise in music reading: Evidence from eye movements. In Martinez-CondeS.Martinez-OteroL.CompteA.GronerR. (Eds.), Abstracts of the 20th European Conference on Eye Movements, Alicante, 18 - 2 August 2019. Journal of Eye Movement Research, 12(7), 163.
27.
KristjánssonÁ. (2006a). Rapid learning in attention shifts: A review. Visual Cognition, 13, 324–362.
KristjánssonÁ. (2013). The case for causal influences of action videogame play upon vision and attention. Attention, Perception & Psychophysics, 75, 667–672. http://doi.org/10.3758/s13414-013-0427-z
30.
KristjánssonÁ.MoldoveanuA.JóhannessonÓ. I.BalanO.SpagnolS.ValgeirsdóttirV. V.UnnthorssonR. (2016). Designing sensory-substitution devices: Principles, pitfalls and potential1. Restorative Neurology and Neuroscience, 34, 769–787. http://doi.org/10.3233/RNN-160647
31.
LeighR. J.ZeeD. S. (2006). The saccadic system. In LeighR. J.ZeeD. S. (Eds.), The neurology of eye movements (4th ed., pp. 108–187). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
32.
LuckS. J.VogelE. K. (1997). The capacity of visual working memory for features and conjunctions. Nature, 390, 279–281.
33.
MadellM.HebertS. (2008). Eye movements and music: Where do we look next?Music Perception, 26, 157–170.
34.
McCandlissB. D.CohenL.DehaeneS. (2003). The visual word form area: Expertise for reading in the fusiform gyrus. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 7, 293–299.
35.
McConkieG. W.ZolaD. (1979). Is visual information integrated across successive fixations in reading?Perception & Psychophysics, 25, 221–224.
36.
McKoneE.KanwisherN. (2005). Does the human brain process objects of expertise like faces? A review of the evidence. In DehaeneS.DuhamelJ.-R.HauserM.D.RizzolattiG. (Eds.), From monkey brain to human brain: A Fyssen foundation symposium (pp. 339–356). Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
37.
MeinzE.HambrickD. (2010). Deliberate practice is necessary but not sufficient to explain individual differences in piano sight-reading skill: The role of working memory capacity. Psychological Science, 21, 914–919.
MongelliV.DehaeneS.VinckierF.PeretzI.BartolomeoP.CohenL. (2017). Music and words in the visual cortex: The impact of musical expertise. Cortex, 86, 260–274.
40.
MostS. B.SchollB. J.CliffordE. R.SimonsD. J. (2005). What you see is what you set: Sustained inattentional blindness and the capture of awareness. Psychological Review, 112(1), 217.
41.
MuayqilT.Davies-ThompsonJ.BartonJ. J. (2015). Representation of visual symbols in the visual word processing network. Neuropsychologia, 69, 232–241.
O’ReganJ. K.RensinkR. A.ClarkJ. J. (1999). Change-blindness as a result of “mudsplashes”. Nature, 398, 34. https://doi.org/10.1038/17953
46.
PeirceJ. W. (2007). PsychoPy—Psychophysics software in Python. Journal of Neuroscience Methods, 162, 8–13.
47.
PeirceJ. W. (2009). Generating stimuli for neuroscience using PsychoPy. Frontiers in Neuroinformatics, 2, 10.
48.
PenttinenM. (2013). Skilled development in music reading (Doctoral dissertation), University of Turku, Turku, Finland.
49.
PinkertonR. C. (1956). Information theory and melody. Scientific American, 194, 77–87.
50.
R Core Team. (2015). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing. Retrieved from https://www.R-project.org
51.
ReingoldE. M.CharnessN.PomplunM.StampeD. M. (2001). Visual span in chess players: Evidence from eye movements. Psychological Science, 12, 48–55.
52.
RensinkR. A.O’ReganJ. K.ClarkJ. J. (1997). To see or not to see: The need for attention to perceive changes in scenes. Psychological Science, 8, 368–373. http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.1997.tb00427.x
53.
RhodesG.BrakeS.TaylorK.TanS. (1989). Expertise and configural coding in face recognition. British Journal of Psychology, 80, 313–331.
RStudio Team. (2015). RStudio: Integrated development for R. Boston, MA: Rstudio Inc. Retrieved from http://www.rstudio.com
56.
SalaG.GobetF. (2017). Working memory training in typically developing children: A meta-analysis of the available evidence. Developmental Psychology, 53, 671–685.
57.
SalisD. L. (1980). Laterality effects with visual perception of musical chords and dot patterns. Perception and Psychophysics, 28, 284–292.
58.
SigurdardottirH. M.DanielsdottirH. B.GudmundsdottirM.HjartarsonK. H.ThorarinsdottirE. A.KristjánssonÁ. (2017). Problems with visual statistical learning in developmental dyslexia. Scientific Reports, 7, 606.
59.
SigurdardottirH. M.GauthierI. (2015). Expertise and object recognition. In TogaA. W. (Ed.), Brain mapping (pp. 523–527). Oxford, UK: Elsevier.
60.
SigurdardottirH. M.IvarssonE.KristinsdottirK.KristjánssonÁ. (2015). Impaired recognition of faces and objects in dyslexia: Evidence for ventral stream dysfunction?Neuropsychology, 29(5), 739–750.
61.
SimonsD. J. (2000). Current approaches to change blindness. Visual Cognition, 7(1–3), 1–15.
62.
SimonsD. J.RensinkR. A. (2005). Change blindness: Past, present, and future. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 9(1), 16–20.
63.
SlobodaJ. A. (1976). The effect of item position on the likelihood of identification by inference in prose reading and music reading. Canadian Journal of Psychology/Revue Canadienne de Psychologie, 30, 228.
64.
SlobodaJ. A. (1978). The psychology of music reading. Psychology of Music, 6, 3–20.
65.
SoaresA. (2015). Memorisation of atonal music (Unpublished doctoral thesis, Guildhall School of Music and Drama). Retrieved from http://openaccess.city.ac.uk/15964/
66.
TalaminiF.AltoèG.CarrettiB.GrassiM. (2017). Musicians have better memory than nonmusicians: A meta-analysis. PLoS ONE, 12(10), e0186773. http://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0186773
67.
TanakaJ. W.TaylorM. (1991). Object categories and expertise: Is the basic level in the eye of the beholder?Cognitive Psychology, 23, 457–482.
68.
Turk-BrowneN. B.JungéJ. A.SchollB. J. (2005). The automaticity of visual statistical learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 134, 552.
69.
WatersA. J.TownsendE.UnderwoodG. (1998). Expertise in musical sight reading: A study of pianists. British Journal of Psychology, 89, 123–149.
70.
WatersA. J.UnderwoodG.FindlayJ. M. (1997). Studying expertise in music reading: Use of a pattern-matching paradigm. Perception & Psychophysics, 59, 477–488.
71.
WernerS.ThiesB. (2000). Is “Change Blindness” attenuated by domain-specific expertise? An expert-novices comparison of change detection in football images. Visual Cognition, 7, 163–173. http://doi.org/10.1080/135062800394748
72.
WilliamonA. (1999). The value of performing by memory. Psychology of Music, 27, 84–95.
73.
WolfT. (1976). A cognitive model of musical sight-reading. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 5, 143–171.
74.
WongY. K.GauthierI. (2010). A multimodal neural network recruited by expertise with musical notation. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 22, 695–713.
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.
