Exp Brain Res (2011) 210:269–282
DOI 10.1007/s00221-011-2630-2
RESEARCH ARTICLE
Dynamic allocation of attention to metrical and grouping accents
in rhythmic sequences
Shu-Jen Kung • Ovid J. L. Tzeng • Daisy L. Hung
Denise H. Wu
Received: 13 October 2010 / Accepted: 7 March 2011 / Published online: 26 March 2011
Ó Springer-Verlag 2011
Abstract Most people find it easy to perform rhythmic
movements in synchrony with music, which reflects their
ability to perceive the temporal periodicity and to allocate
attention in time accordingly. Musicians and non-musi-
cians were tested in a click localization paradigm in order
to investigate how grouping and metrical accents in met-
rical rhythms influence attention allocation, and to reveal
the effect of musical expertise on such processing. We
performed two experiments in which the participants were
required to listen to isochronous metrical rhythms con-
taining superimposed clicks and then to localize the click
on graphical and ruler-like representations with and with-
out grouping structure information, respectively. Both
experiments revealed metrical and grouping influences on
click localization. Musical expertise improved the preci-
sion of click localization, especially when the click coin-
cided with a metrically strong beat. Critically, although all
participants located the click accurately at the beginning of
an intensity group, only musicians located it precisely
when it coincided with a strong beat at the end of the
group. Removal of the visual cue of grouping structures
enhanced these effects in musicians and reduced them in
non-musicians. These results indicate that musical
S.-J. Kung
O. J. L. Tzeng
D. L. Hung
Institute of Neuroscience, National Yang-Ming University,
Taipei, Taiwan
O. J. L. Tzeng
Institute of Linguistics, Academia Sinica, Taipei, Taiwan
D. L. Hung
D. H. Wu (&)
Institute of Cognitive Neuroscience, National Central University,
No, 300, Jhongda Rd., Jhongli City, Taoyuan County 32001,
Taiwan (R.O.C.)
e-mail: denisewu@cc.ncu.edu.tw
•
expertise not only enhances attention to metrical accents
but also heightens sensitivity to perceptual grouping.
Keywords Meter
Auditory perception
Beat induction

Metrical structure
Click localization paradigm

Musical training
Introduction
Perception of music, speech, and other complex human
behaviors require the processing of structured information
over time. When listening to musical rhythms, people syn-
chronize their movements regularly to metrically strong
beats (Drake et al. 2000b; Snyder and Krumhansl 2001),
despite the complex and irregular temporal patterns of
auditory signals. The ease of identifying and moving with
strong beats suggests that people effortlessly extract tem-
poral regularity and predict forthcoming events accordingly.
Although many studies have demonstrated that this ability
relies on the perception of a beat organization called met-
rical structure (Parncutt 1994; Snyder and Krumhansl 2001;
Large and Palmer 2002), and probably relates to the brain
activity in prefrontal, premotor, auditory association areas,
and basal ganglia (Grahn and Brett 2007; Chen et al. 2008a,
b; Grahn and Rowe 2009), the mechanism that underlies the
construction of metrical structure is still under debate.
Metrical structure is a hierarchical organization of
multiple levels of temporal regularity. It results in the
perception of periodically alternating strong (accented) and
weak (unaccented) beats. Rhythms that induce metrical
structure (i.e., metrical rhythms) are easier to remember
and reproduce (Essens and Povel 1985). Unexpected
changes in pitch (Jones et al. 1982, 2006) and time (Large
and Jones 1999) are also easier to detect when appearing in
123
270
metrical rhythms as compared to those in non-metrical
rhythms. The most salient temporal beats perceived in a
metrical rhythm are referred to as strong beats (Cooper and
Meyer 1960; Lerdahl and Jackendoff 1983; Handel 1989).
The saliency of strong beats is influenced by various
acoustic cues, such as intensity, duration, and pitch, which
create accents (Povel and Essens 1985; Parncutt 1994;
Snyder 2000; Hannon et al. 2004). In addition to being
induced by physical auditory cues, accents can also be
induced subjectively. Western tonal music has temporally
periodic meters. For instance, in a march and waltz, a
strong beat occurs at every two and three beats, respec-
tively. Listeners tend to impose subjective accents on tones
that occur simultaneously with strong beats (Parncutt
1994). These subjective accents are hence defined as
metrical accents (Lerdahl and Jackendoff 1983). Although
empirical studies have supported the psychological reality
of metrical structure (e.g., Palmer and Krumhansl 1990),
the cognitive process that contributes to such temporal
periodicity in metrical rhythms remains unknown. Some
musical theories propose that metrical structure is built on
abstract knowledge of the temporal periodicity embedded
in Western tonal music (Benjamin 1984), while other
theories suggest that metrical structure is emerged from the
periodicity of perceived accents (Berry 1976; Lerdahl and
Jackendoff 1983; Povel and Essens 1985).
A growing number of studies have demonstrated that
metrical structure drastically influences listeners’ attention
(Jones and Boltz 1989; Large and Jones 1999; Large 2001;
London 2004). The amount of attention to a specific event
is in accordance with the strength of inferred metrical
structure (Large and Palmer 2002). It is well known that
the allocation of extra resources to particular spatial posi-
tions and particular objects enhances the processing of
selectively attended locations and attributes, respectively
(for a review, see Yantis and Serences 2003). Similarly,
empirical evidence from the temporal domain indicates that
the regularity and predictability of the occurrence of strong
beats in metrical rhythms directs attention to these accented
events in a periodic manner and enhances the perception of
these events (Jones 1987; Jones et al. 2002). Consequently,
acoustic events that appear on strong beats generate more
accurate responses than those on weak beats (Large and
Palmer 2002). For example, detection of changes in met-
rical rhythms is more accurate when the target coincides
with a strong beat rather than a weak beat (Jones and
Ralston 1991; Repp 2010). Recent neurophysiological
studies also demonstrate that metrically accented tones
elicited stronger early auditory evoked responses than non-
accented tones (Vuust et al. 2005; Abecasis et al. 2009;
Geiser et al. 2009; Potter et al. 2009; Vuust et al. 2009).
Additionally, studies have reported that accented tones
are associated with gamma-band activity related to the
123
Exp Brain Res (2011) 210:269–282
mechanism of attention control (Snyder and Large 2005;
Fujioka et al. 2009). These findings provide further evi-
dence for the claim that metrically accented tones direct
attention dynamically.
In addition to the abstract knowledge, perceptual
mechanisms may also contribute to the construction of
metrical structure. Similar to visual perception, rhythmic
grouping structure in auditory perception follows the
principles of similarity and proximity of the Gestalt theory.
Consecutive tones that are close in time or share certain
physical characteristics (e.g., loudness) tend to be grouped
together and separated from other tones without the same
features (Bregman 1990; Deutsch 1999). For example, in a
group of physically identical tones, the relatively isolated
tones, the second tone in a two-tone group, and the
beginning and ending tones of a multi-tone group are
accented (Povel and Okkerman 1981). It has been dem-
onstrated that sequences that contain grouping accents with
temporal periodicity exhibit metrical structure as well
(Essens and Povel 1985; Povel and Essens 1985; Essens
1986, 1995). The current study investigates whether the
periodicity elicited by grouping accents contributes inde-
pendently from the periodicity elicited by metrical accents,
which are tones coinciding with strong beats, and whether
musical expertise modulates these contributions.
In contrast to the many empirical studies that have
investigated the effect of metrical and grouping structures
in rhythmic processes, a few attempts explore the percep-
tual effects of metrical and grouping accents in metrical
rhythms. Repp (2005) asked musicians to tap to metrical
rhythms at different tempi and examined their tapping
synchronization performance. Musicians found it easier to
tap to tones that carried a grouping accent; however, tap-
ping on tones that carried a metrical accent did not make
the task easier. Interestingly, metrical accents facilitated
tapping synchronization when musicians tapped to isoch-
ronous rhythms where metrical accents were self-induced
by musical notations (Repp 2007). These findings seem to
imply separable contributions in grouping and metrical
accents. However, these studies only employed the tapping
task, which might likely stimulate the vestibular system
and result in the induction of the sense of metrical accents
(Phillips-Silver and Trainor 2005, 2007; Repp 2005).
Whether these results would be revealed in a task that does
not direct participants’ attention to meter is still an open
question. Moreover, it is uncertain that musicians’ inten-
sive practicing and playing of musical pieces sharpens their
perceptual sensitivity to meter (Jones et al. 1995; Jones and
Pfordresher 1997) or enhances their accuracy of perform-
ing the tapping task manually (Sakai et al. 2004).
Repp (2010) recently examined the perceptual effect on
metrical accents. Musicians were found to detect the
change of a tone in loudness and duration more accurately
Exp Brain Res (2011) 210:269–282
when the tone was metrically accented. According to the
hypothesis of dynamic attention allocation (Jones 1976;
Jones and Boltz 1989; Large and Palmer 2002), this might
be caused merely by the increased attention to metrically
strong beats or by the ‘‘illusory phenomenal accents’’ (i.e.,
subjectively strengthened loudness resulting from
increased attention to metrically strong beats). However,
because the enhancement of the sensitivity to physical
changes was found regardless of increase or decrease in the
loudness and the duration of the tone, it seems that the
enhancement of attention results in the increment of sen-
sitivity rather than producing phenomenal accents in lis-
teners’ minds. Repp employed isochronous materials that
contained pitch-related accents but not rhythmic grouping
accents. Therefore, the relation between metrical and
grouping accents remains unclear. In addition, these studies
only evaluated musicians. It is well known that musicians
are more accurate than non-musicians are with regard to
synchronization (Kincaid et al. 2002) and reproduction of
metrical (Smith 1983; Franek et al. 1991; Drake and Pal-
mer 1993) and non-metrical rhythms (Watanabe et al.
2007). Furthermore, no studies have explored whether
musical training modulates the effect and interaction of
metrical and grouping accents.
Following the assumption of dynamic attention alloca-
tion (Jones 1976; Jones and Boltz 1989; Large and Palmer
2002), one may predict that enhanced attention improves
the sensitivity to specific time points and results in precise
detection of expected events occurring at these time points
(Yee et al. 1994; Jones and Yee 1997). Therefore, this
study employs the click localization paradigm to evaluate
temporal sensitivity on metrical and grouping accents and
to reveal the contributions of the two types of accents in
metrical rhythms. Ladefoged and Broadbent (1960) intro-
duced the click localization paradigm to investigate per-
ceptual units in speech. In the original study, participants
were required to report the location of a temporally
unpredictable click while listening to a spoken sentence.
Studies using this paradigm showed that people tend to
locate the click toward the nearest major boundaries of
subjective groups based on pre-existing syntactic knowl-
edge. The performance is significantly better when the
click is located at major boundaries of subjective groups
than when it is located within the groups (Ladefoged and
Broadbent 1960; Fodor and Bever 1965). In other words,
the localization of the click reflects the structure of sub-
jective grouping rather than disrupting it. Similar results
have also been observed with musical materials: clicks are
more likely to be located toward the nearest boundaries of
subjective groups based on the knowledge of musical
phrasing (Sloboda and Gregory 1980) and the grouping
features of the stimuli, such as temporal pulses and con-
tinuation of scores (Gregory 1978; Sloboda and Gregory
271
1980; Stoffer 1985). The click displacement, therefore,
provides information about underlying subjective group-
ings of events in a rhythmic sequence.
According to the proposal that attention to different
events in a sequence is directed by the metrical structure
(Large and Palmer 2002), we reason that the accuracy of
click localization would reflect the amount of attention
allocated to different events in time. If listeners allocate
attention based on the temporal regularity from pre-exist-
ing knowledge, we expect to observe the effect from
metrical accents by comparing the accuracy of click
localization coinciding with strong and weak beats at the
same positions within a group. That is, we expect to
observe performances that are more accurate when a click
coincides with metrically strong than with weak beats.
Furthermore, we predict that the difference should be more
salient in musicians than in non-musicians. On the other
hand, if listeners allocate attention according to the regu-
larity from grouping structure, we expect to observe the
effect from grouping accents by comparing the accuracy of
click localization coinciding with the beats with the same
metrical accentuation but at various positions in a per-
ceptual group. Specifically, we expect to observe improved
accuracy when the click coincides with the beginning and/
or the ending tone of a perceptual group. Furthermore, if
the advantage enjoyed by musicians is only from their
superior metrical representation/knowledge, their sensitiv-
ity to perceptual grouping should not differ from non-
musicians. In addition, if the two kinds of accents are
interactive or if either of them interacts with musical
training, we expect to observe corresponding interactions
from the accuracy of click localization. On the contrary, if
listeners do not allocate attention toward any temporal
regularity, we expect to observe null effects from either
metrical or grouping accents.
Experiment 1
Experiment 1 investigates how people extract temporal
regularity in metrical rhythms by manipulating metrical
and grouping accents independently in a click localization
paradigm. Furthermore, we recruited both musicians and
non-musicians as participants to explore how musical
training modulates temporal periodicity extraction.
Method
Participants
Twenty musicians (mean age 21.25, range 19–25) and 20
non-musicians (mean age 22.15, range 18–27) participated
in this experiment and received a small payment or course
123
272
credit as compensation. All participants had received reg-
ular musical education in elementary and high school
(about 1 h per week), which included singing melodies to a
piano accompaniment and acquiring elementary knowl-
edge of Western musical harmony, rhythm, and general
principles of musical notation. In addition to the minimal
musical training from school, all musicians had at least
10 years of professional music training (mean 13.55, range
10–21) and played a musical instrument for at least 1 h per
day within the training period. Categories of instruments
played included strings and piano. Non-musicians had
three or fewer years of musical training, and none of the
non-musicians had received training within the past
5 years. Both musicians and non-musicians were randomly
assigned in equal numbers to two presentation orders of the
experimental stimuli. All participants self-reported normal
hearing and were tested alone.
Stimuli and conditions
Five metrical rhythms consisting of physically identical
tones were adopted from rhythms that were demonstrated to
be able to induce metrical structure in Povel and Essens
(1985). All the rhythms were embedded in a 16-beat tem-
plate and always started on the beat. To investigate the
effect of grouping and metrical accents on accuracy of click
localization independently, metrical beat strength (Strong,
S; Weak, W) and grouping positions (Beginning, B; Middle,
M; End, E) were manipulated to determine the construction
of the stimuli. To reduce the physical markers of accents,
there was no physical alternation of the accented tones.
A quadruple meter was induced in all the rhythms by
having tones at the 1st, 5th, 9th, and 13th beats. In addition
to the consistency of meter throughout the experiment,
practice trials before the experimental session were also
constructed in quadruple meter to help listeners emerge the
sense of meter in the experimental trials. We further
modified each rhythm to create three sequences with
variations only between the 7th and 11th beats. Figure 1a–c
shows the three sequences created from one of the five
rhythms. Each sequence contained a critical 3-tone group
between the 7th and 11th beats such that the strong beat (S,
the 9th beat, receiving a metrical accent) fell on the
beginning (B, receiving a grouping accent), middle (M), or
end (E, receiving a grouping accent) of the group. Corre-
spondingly, the weak beats (W, the 8th and 10th beats)
were also located in the B, M, or E position of the group.
To reduce the possible physical confusion that the effect of
grouping accents might cause in the longer processing
intervals before and after a group (Povel and Okkerman
1981; Povel and Essens 1985), the beats between the tones
in each sequence were filled with softer but otherwise
identical tones (with 30% of the sound pressure level of the
123
Exp Brain Res (2011) 210:269–282
loud tones). Hence, each rhythm was composed of 16
isochronous tones occurring at an inter-onset-interval of
200 ms with two levels of loudness (see Sect. ‘‘Appendix’’
for all the materials).
Therefore, the critical 3-tone group was composed of
three consecutive loud tones between the 7th and 11th
beats with identical physical properties. Thus, these mate-
rials minimized the external physical markers of both
group and metrical accents and were suitable to test the
perceptual effects of grouping and metrical accents without
being contaminated by physical saliency. The interval
between Beats 1, 5, 9, and 13 was 800 ms, close to the
preferred tempo of strong beats (Fraisse 1982; Parncutt
1994). The total duration of each rhythm was 3 s, which
was within the estimated range of the 2–5 s for auditory
sensory memory and of rhythmic patterns typically found
in music (Krumhansl 2000). Each of the three versions of
the five rhythms was repeated 20 times in the experiment,
resulting in 300 trials.
Design
A click was superimposed at various positions across the
sequences. In 80% of the trials (i.e., 240 trials), the click
appeared simultaneously with one of the 7th to 11th tones
and occurred equally often at the beginning (B), middle
Fig. 1 Representative examples of the stimuli and the experimental
design. a–c Three quadruple meter sequences contain a 3-tone group
(indicated by the dotted rectangle) between the 7th and the 11th beat
(indicated by the gray rectangle). Long and short bars represent loud
and soft tones, respectively. See text for details about the manipu-
lations of metrical and grouping accents. d The loudness pattern of
the acoustic sequence in Fig. 1c, as depicted in the booklet for
participants to mark their responses in Experiment 1. The big and
small note-heads indicate loud and soft tones, respectively. The 32
dots below the staff notation represent the possible locations of the
click. e The ruler-like diagram representing the isochronous
sequences without showing the acoustic pattern as depicted in the
booklet in Experiment 2. B beginning; E end; M middle; S strong
beat; W weak beat
Exp Brain Res (2011) 210:269–282
(M), and ending (E) positions of a perceptual group. In the
remaining 60 filler trials, the click occurred before the 7th
tone or after the 11th tone. The click coincided with a tone
in half of these filler trials, whereas the click occurred
between tones (i.e., 100 ms after/before a tone) in the other
half of the filler trials. All 300 rhythmic sequences were
displayed in one of two presentation orders. Within each
order, all the trials were pseudo-randomly presented with
the following constraints: (a) no consecutive rhythms had
the same rhythmic pattern or the same click position, (b) no
three consecutive rhythms had clicks with the same
grouping/metrical accentuation, and (c) every five con-
secutive rhythms contained one or two filler trials.
Apparatus
The tones appearing in the sequences were 262 Hz sinu-
soids with 50-ms duration (10-ms rise time and 40-ms
steady-state duration). The superimposed click was 2 kHz
sinusoids with 5-ms duration. We constructed all the
sounds using Steinberg WaveLab v4.0 (Steinberg Media
Technologies GmbH) with a sampling rate of 44.1 kHz.
The intensity of the loud tone and the click were approx-
imately 75 dB (SPL), and it was around 60 dB for the soft
tones. Participants could adjust the overall loudness if they
wished. The sounds were delivered through NUKE Series
EM982 speakers (OZAKI International Corp.) located
about 1 m from the participant in a sound-attenuating
room. The experimental procedures were controlled by
PresentationÒ v.7 (Neurobehavioral Systems, Inc.) running
on a desktop computer (2.83 GHz, Intel Pentium 4, Win-
dows XP).
Procedure
A trial consisted of the presentation of one of the 15
rhythmic patterns (i.e., 16 tones) with a superimposed
click. Each participant received a booklet containing a
copy of the 300 rhythmic sequences that they would
encounter in staff notation, in which big and small note-
heads represented loud and soft tones, respectively
(Fig. 1d). Participants listened to the rhythm once and
followed along the corresponding sequence in the booklet.
We instructed participants to listen to the rhythm carefully
and to mark the position of the click in the booklet as soon
as they heard it. Participants were informed that there was
always one and only one click in each sequence and that
the click could occur either simultaneously with the onset
of one of the 16 tones or halfway between any two con-
secutive tones. They were required to indicate their
responses by circling one of the 32 dots printed below the
staff notation of each sequence. After marking the position
of the click, participants pressed the space bar on the
273
keyboard in front of them to initiate the next sequence. The
inter-trial interval was controlled by participants.
Participants received 10 practice trials without feedback
before the experimental session; the procedures of the
practice trials were identical to those in the experimental
trials. Rhythmic patterns in the practice trials were chosen
from the 15 patterns employed in the experimental session
with a superimposed click. At the end of the experiment,
each participant filled out a short questionnaire reporting
their musical background (musical training and prefer-
ences), their impression of the task, any strategy they
adopted, and subjective evaluation of their own perfor-
mance on the task. The experiment lasted about 1.5 h.
Analysis
We measured the accuracy of click localization in each
condition and used it as the dependent variable to deter-
mine the effect of grouping and metrical accents in met-
rical rhythms when the click coincided with either type of
accent or with both. We regarded the localization as correct
only when participants circled the dot corresponding to the
exact location of the click in the sequence, which resulted
in a 3.1% probability of guessing the correct response. We
refer to the guessing probability as the un-weighted chance
level below. Even if participants were aware of the uneven
distribution of the click position within a rhythmic
sequence, the probability of guessing a correct response
increased to only 11.9%.1 The guessing probability when
participants were aware of such uneven distribution is
referred to as the weighted chance level.
All the data excluding those from the filler trials and the
trials where the click coincided with the 7th and the 11th
tones were submitted to further analyses. The mean accu-
racy of click localization in the remaining 144 trials (i.e.,
the trials with the click coinciding with loud tones from the
8th to the 10th beats within the critical 3-tone group) from
each participant was submitted to a repeated-measures
analysis of variance (ANOVA). In a 2 9 3 9 2 mixed
factorial design, the two levels of metrical accentuation (S,
W) and three levels of grouping position (B, M, E) formed
the two within-subject variables, and the two levels of
musical expertise (musicians, non-musicians) were used as
the between-subject variable.
1
The weighted guessing probability is calculated by considering the
uneven distribution of the click position within the rhythmic
sequence. Specifically, the click coincided with the 7th, 8th, 9th,
10th, and 11th tones in 80% of the trials, while it appeared in the other
22 positions (i.e., from the 1st to the 6th tone, from the 12th to the
16th tone, and the midpoints between any two tones in these ranges)
in 20% of the trials. Therefore, the chance level of guessing a correct
response when taking such distribution probability into account would
be 11.9% (i.e., 1/(5 9 80% ? 22 9 20%) = 11.9%).
123
274
Fig. 2 The accuracy of click
localization in Experiment 1 (a,
b) and Experiment 2 (c,
d) divided by strong and weak
beats (as indicated by solid and
broken lines, respectively) and
by different positions in a
perceptual group (B: beginning,
M: middle, E: end) in non-
musicians (NMu) and musicians
(Mu). Data are reported as
means, ±SE
Results
The following two observations ensured that most partici-
pants were capable of performing the task: (a) the overall
mean accuracy (31.44%, range 11.67–60%) was signifi-
cantly higher than the un-weighted chance level (i.e., 3.1%;
ts(19) [ 3.12, Ps \ .006)2 and (b) the click was located
five or more tones away from the exact position in only less
than 3% of all trials.
As predicted, musicians identified the click position
more accurately than non-musicians did [F(1, 38) = 5.98,
P \ .05, g2P = .14]. A click coinciding with a strong beat
was localized more accurately than that coinciding with a
weak beat [F(1, 38) = 38.31, P \ .001, g2P = .50]. The
accuracy of click localization among the three positions
within a perceptual group was also significantly different
[F(2, 76) = 31.85, P \ .001, g2P = .46]. Critically, the
interaction between strong/weak beats and musical training
was significant [F(1, 38) = 18.70, P \ .001, g2P = .33],
2 in non-musicians [F(2, 38) \ 1].
In Experiment 1, the accuracy of all conditions was significantly
higher than the chance level of 3.1% in both musicians and non-
musicians. When considering the awareness of the uneven distribu-
tion of the click position, all conditions were significantly above the
guessing probability of 11.9% in musicians (ts(19) [ 2.58,
Ps \ .018), except when the click coinciding with a weak beat was
located in the middle of a group (t(19) = 2.01, P = .059). For non-
musicians, however, among the total six conditions where four of
them were accented, three accented conditions were significantly
above the weighted guessing probability: SB condition (i.e., the click
coinciding with a strong beat was localized in the beginning of the
3-tone group; t(19) = 4.33, P \ .001), SE condition (t(19) = 2.82,
P = .011), and WB condition (t(19) = 4.14, P = .001).
123
Exp Brain Res (2011) 210:269–282
indicating that musical training influenced the effect of
metrical accentuation in accuracy of click localization
(Fig. 2a–b). The interaction between metrical and grouping
accents was also significant [F(2, 76) = 3.93, P \ .05,
g2P = .09], suggesting that the effects of these two types of
accents on click localization were interactive rather than
additive.
To further evaluate whether musical training modulated
the effects of metrical and grouping accents in the accu-
racy of click localization, the data from musicians and
non-musicians were analyzed separately. Non-musicians
located the click more accurately when it coincided with a
strong beat rather than a weak beat [F(1, 19) = 4.44,
P \ .05, g2P = .19] (Fig. 2a). Their performance was also
affected by grouping accents [F(2, 38) = 13.95, P \ .001,
g2P = .42]: relatively accurate localization at the begin-
ning of a group was demonstrated [Tukey’s honestly
significant difference (HSD) test: B vs. M, P = .001; M
vs. E, P [ .77; B vs. E, P = .08)]. The interaction
between metrical and grouping accents was not significant
In musicians, the effect of metrical accentuation was
very robust [F(1, 19) = 34.37, P \ .001, g2P = .64]
(Fig. 2b). Musicians performed better than non-musicians
only when the click coincided with strong beats [F(1,
38) = 13.54, P = .001, g2P = .26]. However, this was
not the case when the click coincided with weak beats
[F(1, 38) \ 1], suggesting that musicians were more
effective at selectively allocating attention in synchrony
with metrically strong beats. According to the ANOVA for
the musicians, the influence of grouping accentuation was
Exp Brain Res (2011) 210:269–282
also significant [F(2, 38) = 18.76, P \ .001, g2P = .50].
Critically, the interaction between grouping and metrical
accents was significant as well [F(2, 38) = 3.33, P \ .05,
g2P = .15]. When the click coincided with strong beats, the
localization accuracy was the highest at the beginning and
end of a group and the lowest at the middle (Tukey’s HSD
test: B vs. M, P \ .001; M vs. E, P \ .05; B vs. E,
P [ .20). When the click coincided with weak beats,
however, the localization accuracy was only higher at the
beginning of a group, while no difference was detected
between the middle and end positions (B vs. M, P = .01;
M vs. E, P [ .84; B vs. E, P \ .05). These results suggest
that both grouping and metrical accents influence musi-
cians’ temporal judgments and that these two factors
interact with each other.
Discussion
The main goal of Experiment 1 was to evaluate how
grouping and metrical accents interact in the perception
of metrical rhythms by musicians and non-musicians. The
effect of both types of accents was assessed by the accuracy
of click localization. The results indicated that both grouping
and metrical accents affected participants’ perception of
acoustic events, suggesting that listeners allocated attention
dynamically in accordance with the temporal regularity
emerged from the abstract knowledge of meter and from the
perceived grouping accents. Specifically, participants iden-
tified the click position precisely when it coincided with a
metrically strong beat or with a beginning tone of a per-
ceptual group. These findings suggest that musical training
enables effective detection of temporal regularity and effi-
cient construction of metrical structure, which results in
musicians performing better on strong beats than non-
musicians do.
Although musicians’ superior performance in temporal
judgment was attributed to their musical expertise and was
consistent with previous findings, some may argue that
such an effect might be caused, at least partially, by the
task requirement of performing click localization on the
staff notation. Because musicians were familiar with
the form and the symbols on the staff, which could
potentially serve as a visual cue for the rhythmic sequence,
they may have benefited from making temporal judgments
on the notation. On the other hand, non-musicians were not
as familiar with the staff notation, and it may have been
intimidating to them.
One could argue that the staff notation in the answer
booklet unintentionally provided information to selectively
increase participants’ sensitivity to grouping accents but
not to metrical accents. We did observe that both musicians
and non-musicians were sensitive to grouping accents.
However, it is possible that the perception of temporal
275
regularity induced by grouping accents was dependent on
or was facilitated by the rhythmic pattern demonstrated on
the staff. The rhythmic pattern on the staff notation clearly
indicated the grouping structure, while it did not visually
indicate the metrical structure. Therefore, both musicians
and non-musicians may have adopted grouping structure
from vision, but only musicians captured additional met-
rical structure from audition.
We conducted Experiment 2 to directly control for these
potential confounds by replacing the response format of the
staff notation with a ruler-like representation. By not pro-
viding a context that is more familiar to one group or another,
we could unambiguously evaluate the effect of musical
expertise in extracting grouping and metrical accents.
Experiment 2
Experiment 2 addresses two possible confounds from
Experiment 1, namely, the visual cues of the grouping
structure of metrical sequences and musicians’ superior
familiarity with the staff notation. Participants localized the
click on a ruler-like diagram representing the isochronous
sequence of each trial. If visual patterns of grouping struc-
ture facilitated the performance of click localization in
Experiment 1, we expected to observe reduced a grouping
effect in the current experiment. In addition, if the perfor-
mance of musicians and non-musicians in Experiment 1 was
modulated by their familiarity with the staff notation, we
expected to observe worse performance by musicians and
better performance by non-musicians in Experiment 2. If the
visual information provided by the staff notation only played
a minor role, however, we expected to observe similar per-
formance patterns in Experiment 2 to those of Experiment 1.
Method
Experiment 2 was identical to Experiment 1 in methodol-
ogy, except for the modifications indicated below.
Participants
Twenty musicians (mean age 21.10, range 18–26) and 20
non-musicians (mean age 21.20, range 19–25) participated
in this experiment and received a small payment or course
credit as compensation. The criteria for selection of
musicians and non-musicians remained the same as those
in Experiment 1. Musicians had practiced at least one
musical instrument for more than 10 years (mean 14.3,
range 10–20). Categories of instruments played included
strings, percussion, and piano. None of the participants in
Experiment 2 took part in Experiment 1. All participants
self-reported normal hearing and were tested alone.
123
276
Design
The design was identical to that in Experiment 1 with one
exception: instead of using two presentation orders as in
Experiment 1, the presentation orders of trials in different
conditions were pseudo-randomly determined and varied
across participants. The same trial-to-trial constraints
employed in Experiment 1 still applied.
Procedure
The procedure was identical to that used in Experiment 1,
with the following exceptions: (a) each participant received
a booklet containing 300 ruler-like diagrams, representing
the isochronous sequences that they would encounter
(Fig. 1e), (b) participants were allowed to make marks on
the booklet as long as they could accurately report the
perceived location of the click, and (c) to help the partic-
ipants understand the procedure and correctly localize the
click on the ruler-like diagrams, which provided no clue for
the rhythmic pattern, participants received 15 practice trials
before the experimental session without feedback.
Analysis
The responses of click localization were analyzed in a
similar fashion as in Experiment 1. In addition, direct
comparisons between the results of Experiment 1 and 2 in
musicians and in non-musicians were conducted separately
to further examine whether the visual cue of grouping
structure affected the accuracy of click localization of these
two groups of participants in different manners. In two
2 9 3 9 2 mixed factorial ANOVAs, two levels of met-
rical accentuation (S, W) and three levels of grouping
position (B, M, E) formed the two within-subject variables,
and two experiment levels (Exp1, Exp2) as the between-
subject variable.
Results
The overall mean accuracy (35.04%, range 12–85.66%) was
higher than the un-weighted chance level (ts(19) [ 3.82,
Ps \ .005),3 and the click was located five or more tones
3 robust [F(1, 19) = 48.47, P \ .001, g2P = .72] (Fig. 2d).
In Experiment 2, the accuracy of all conditions surpassed the
chance level of 3.1% in both musicians and non-musicians. In
musicians, the accuracy of all conditions was also above the weighted
guessing probability (ts(19) [ 3.05, Ps \ .008). In non-musicians,
however, only the conditions including grouping accents showed the
tendency to reach the significant difference from the chance level of
11.9% (SB condition, t(19) = 2.07, P = .052; WB condition:
t(19) = 2.37, P = .029).
123
Exp Brain Res (2011) 210:269–282
away from the exact position in less than 3% of all trials.
These results confirmed that participants were able to follow
the instruction to perform the task.
Similar to the results of Experiment 1, musicians
identified the click position more accurately than non-
musicians [F(1, 38) = 90.23, P \ .001, g2P = .70]
(Fig. 2c, d). A click coinciding with a strong beat was
localized more accurately than a click coinciding with a
weak beat [F(1, 38) = 44.87, P \ .001, g2P = .54]. The
response accuracy among the three positions within a
perceptual group was also significant [F(2, 76) = 19.98,
P \ .001, g2P = .35]. The remarkable interactions between
strong/weak beats and musical training [F(1, 38) = 40.23,
P \ .001, g2P = .51] and between metrical and grouping
accents [F(2, 76) = 11.72, P \ .001, g2P = .24] suggested
that metrical accentuation has different influences in
musicians and non-musicians and that the effects of these
two types of accents on click localization are interactive.
Interestingly, the interaction between grouping accents and
musical training was also significant [F(2, 76) = 7.71,
P = .001, g2P = .17], indicating that the extraction of
temporal regularity from grouping accents was modulated
by musical experience as well. More importantly, the
three-way interaction among metrical accent, grouping
accent, and musical training was also significant [F(2,
76) = 3.53, P \ .05, g2P = .09], suggesting that the
interaction between the two accentuations was further
affected by musical experience.
To determine whether musical training influenced the
effects of metrical and grouping accents in click locali-
zation accuracy, we analyzed the data from musicians and
non-musicians separately. Different from the results of
Experiment 1, non-musicians showed null effect of met-
rical accents [F(1, 19) \ 1] (Fig. 2c), though the effect of
grouping accents was still significant [F(2, 38) = 5.32,
P = .009, g2P = .22]. Click localization was the most
accurate at the beginning of a group (Beginning: M = .20,
SE = .03; Middle: M = .15, SE = .02; Ending: M = .14,
SE = .02), but the accuracy difference among within
group locations was not robust enough to reach signifi-
cance in the Tukey’s HSD test (Ps [ .19). Similar to
Experiment 1, the interaction between metrical and group
accents was not significant in non-musicians [F(2,
38) = 2.05, P [ .14].
The main findings in musicians replicated the results of
Experiment 1. The effect of metrical accents was very
The influence of grouping accentuation was also significant
[F(2, 38) = 17.59, P \ .001, g2P = .48]. Critically, the
interaction between grouping and metrical accents was
significant as well [F(2, 38) = 10.83, P \ .001, g2P = .36].
For the click coinciding with strong beats, the localization
accuracy was the highest at the beginning and the end of a
Exp Brain Res (2011) 210:269–282
group and the lowest at the middle (Tukey’s HSD test: B
vs. M, P \ .05; M vs. E, P = .005; B vs. E, P [ .89). For
the click coinciding with weak beats, however, the locali-
zation accuracy was only higher at the beginning of a
group, while no difference was detected between the
middle and end positions (B vs. M, P \ .05; M vs. E,
P = 1; B vs. E, P \ .05). These results confirmed that both
grouping and metrical accents influence musicians’ tem-
poral judgments and that these two factors interact with
each other.
The between-experiment analysis of musicians’ perfor-
mance showed a significant experimental effect. Contrary
to the speculation that musicians’ familiarity with the staff
notation resulted in superior temporal judgment, the
accuracy of click localization in Experiment 2 was higher
than that in Experiment 1 [F(1, 38) = 12.47, P = .001,
g2P = .25]. In addition, the significant three-way interaction
among metrical accents, grouping accents, and two
experiments [F(2, 76) = 4.07, P \ .05, g2P = .10] revealed
that although both experiments showed significantly better
performance in strong beats, especially when the click
coincided with the beginning and ending tones of a group
(all Ps \ .01), only Experiment 1 demonstrated a signifi-
cant difference between the beginning (M = .71, SE =
.05) and ending positions (M = .58, SE = .06; P \ .05).
That is, in Experiment 2 when the click coincided with
strong beats, musicians’ accuracy of the ending position
increased and resulted in no difference in performance
between the beginning (M = .81, SE = .04) and ending
(M = .84, SE = .03) tones for a perceptual group. These
results indicated that the accentuation from the end of a
group was surprisingly salient in Experiment 2. The
interactions between the two experiments and grouping
accents, and between the two experiments and metrical
accents were not significant (Ps [ .19).
The analysis of the data from non-musicians also
revealed the experimental effect. Contrary to the specula-
tion that the inferior temporal judgment in Experiment 1
resulted from unfamiliarity with the staff notation, non-
musicians’ accuracy of click localization in Experiment 2
was lower than that in Experiment 1 [F(1, 38) = 4.53,
P \ .05, g2P = .11]. That is, the visual cue of grouping
structure seemed to assist non-musicians in extracting
temporal regularity embedded in the rhythm. Furthermore,
the significant interaction between grouping and experi-
mental effects [F(2, 76) = 6.34, P = .003, g2P = .14]
demonstrated that non-musicians performed more accu-
rately when the click coincided with the beginning of a
perceptual group than when it coincided with other posi-
tions in Experiment 1 (Tukey’s HSD test: B vs. M and B
vs. E, Ps \ .01), but not in Experiment 2. These results,
again, support the reasoning that non-musicians’ grouping
277
effect in Experiment 1 resulted from the visual information
of the staff notation. The two-way interaction between
metrical accents and experimental effects [F(1, 38) = 1.61,
P [ .21] and the three-way interaction [F(2, 76) = 1.12,
P [ .33] were both insignificant.
Discussion
The main goal of Experiment 2 was to determine whether
staff notation caused the effect of grouping accents and
provided an advantage to musicians in Experiment 1. The
current findings argue against both speculations and sup-
port the validity and sensitivity of the click localization
paradigm. The robust and consistent findings of the effects
of metrical and grouping accents among musicians in both
experiments indicated that music experts extracted tem-
poral regularities from both types of accents through
audition, regardless of whether visual information provided
grouping structure or not. In contrast, non-musicians ben-
efited from visual grouping patterns to detect temporal
regularity, which guided their attention allocation to the
predicted accentuations in metrical rhythms, as reflected in
higher accuracy of click localization of non-musicians in
Experiment 1.
Consistent with previous research, these results dem-
onstrate that musical training enables effective detection of
temporal regularity and efficient construction of metrical
structure. In addition, visual cues of grouping structure
might also enhance the abilities of non-musicians to detect
and organize metrical structure when they listen to an
auditory rhythm.
General discussion
The current study examined the impact of grouping and
metrical accents on the accuracy of click localization in
musicians and non-musicians when the grouping structure
was visually presented (Experiment 1) or not (Experiment
2). We assumed that the accuracy of click localization
reflects the attentional resources allocated to particular
points in time (Large and Jones 1999). The results from the
two experiments indicate that attention is dynamically
allocated to different time points in metrical rhythms.
Specifically, metrical structure is constructed by inferred
temporal regularities from both pre-existing knowledge
and grouping structure, and the two mechanisms are dis-
tinct but interactive. Moreover, musical training modulates
both processes of perceiving metrical and grouping
accents.
Consistent with previous studies in showing that metri-
cal representation is strongly influenced by musical
123
278
training (Palmer and Krumhansl 1990; Drake et al. 2000a;
Geiser et al. 2010), musical expertise improves musicians’
performance by enhancing their temporal sensitivity to
both metrically strong and weak beats. Such results suggest
that long-term training enables listeners to detect temporal
regularity effectively and to construct metrical structure
efficiently. These findings also support the hypothesis
proposed by Snyder and Krumhansl (2001), indicating that
musicians and non-musicians may possess different per-
ceptual abilities for extracting temporal periodicity. In the
current study, because the invariant quadruple meter can be
inferred from all sequences, it is possible that intensive
musical training improves musicians’ ability to sustain the
detected metrical structure and apply it to the subsequent
rhythm.
Non-musicians’ perception of acoustic events is clearly
affected by metrical accents, especially when grouping
structures were visually presented in Experiment 1.
Interestingly, this effect disappeared when we removed the
visual indication of grouping structures in Experiment 2.
That is, when there was no visual information of grouping
structures, the effect of metrical accent vanished. There-
fore, these results might support the idea that one can infer
metrical structure from grouping structures (Essens and
Povel 1985; Povel and Essens 1985; Essens 1986, 1995).
The results from non-musicians, however, seem to be
contradictory to people’s ease in synchronizing move-
ments to the strong beats of metrical structure in rhythmic
sequences and music (Drake et al. 2000a; Snyder and
Krumhansl 2001). They also seem to be inconsistent with
the findings that adults and infants use rhythmic grouping
accents to perceive meter (Hannon et al. 2004; Hannon
and Johnson 2005). If extracting metrical structure is one
of the basic skills that even untrained people possess, non-
musicians should be able to demonstrate the effect of
metrical accents even when the grouping structure is not
presented visually. The inconsistent performance of non-
musicians may have resulted from the lack of prominent
physical markers of grouping and metrical accents in the
materials.
Real music contains many salient physical changes,
such as intensity, duration, pitch, as well as temporal
variations. All of these variations may function as time
markers and help non-musicians extract temporal regu-
larity and consequently construct metrical structure (Ellis
and Jones 2009). Indeed, it has been demonstrated that in
temporal- and pitch-varied sequences, rhythmic grouping
accents, tempo, and melodic accents are salient markers
for perception of meter (Hannon et al. 2004). In tem-
porally varied sequences of monotones, even infants
could discriminate metrical differences by perceived
rhythmic grouping accents (Hannon and Johnson 2005).
123
Exp Brain Res (2011) 210:269–282
Similarly, in isochronous sequences with no temporal
variations, melodic accents function as time markers to
help listeners perceive the implied meter (Hannon et al.
2004).
To evaluate the perceptual influence of grouping and
metrical accents in metrical rhythms, we minimized
the possible physical markers of grouping and metrical
accents. It has been argued that the effect of rhythmic
grouping accents in the sequences of physically identical
tones results from the longer processing intervals before
and after a perceptual group (Povel and Okkerman 1981;
Povel and Essens 1985). In this study, however, we
reduced the effect of accentuation resulting from a varia-
tion in duration by filling in soft tones to equate the
intervals between tones at the boundary and within a group.
In other words, the grouping accents in the current study
might not have been perceived as saliently as the rhythmic
grouping accents in previous studies. However, the present
grouping accents still affected click localization: the per-
formance was more precise at the beginning of a perceptual
group than at other positions, regardless of metrical
accentuation, in both musicians and non-musicians. These
findings provide support for the contribution of grouping
accents to the extraction of metrical structure (Povel and
Essens 1985).
One may argue that the intensity change at the bound-
aries of a perceptual group might function as a grouping
accent, and the effect of grouping accents probably stem-
med from the physical shift from a soft to a loud tone.
Although we cannot completely exclude the possibility,
this argument is not entirely consistent with the current
results. If the speculation were true, one may predict that
the effect of grouping accents would be similar in both
Experiments 1 and 2 because they employed the same
auditory materials. Although the performance of musicians
did reveal similar effects of grouping accents between the
two experiments, non-musicians demonstrated a significant
grouping effect in Experiment 1 only. Such findings sug-
gest that grouping accents can be induced by other per-
ceptual mechanisms as well as the temporal distance and
physical shifts between acoustic events (Cooper and Meyer
1960; Handel 1989).
In addition to the lack of physical markers in the
materials, the relatively irregular periodicity inferred from
grouping accents may be another potential reason for the
poor performance by non-musicians. Metrical accents
induced robust temporal regularity, namely, a metrical
accent was inferred every 800 ms (4 beats). In contrast,
the regularity of grouping accents varied from 400 ms to
800 ms; hence, it was less regular than metrical accents.
The relative irregularity may increase the task difficulty
for non-musicians to extract temporal regularity from
Exp Brain Res (2011) 210:269–282
grouping accents only, especially when no grouping pat-
tern was visually cued. On the other hand, with top–down
knowledge of metrical representation, musicians were able
to overcome the irregular pattern and allocate their
attention to the metrically strong beats, which conse-
quently increased their temporal sensitivity to grouping
accents.
The poor performance of non-musicians may further
suggest that click localization heavily depends on the
temporal sensitivity elicited from dynamic attention allo-
cation. Non-musicians performed accurately when
grouping structure was visually cued in Experiment 1;
however, they did not under the no cue condition in
Experiment 2. It is possible that visual cues provided
salient time markers for non-musicians to evoke temporal
regularity, and as a result, to allocate their attention in
accordance to the regularity, which enhances their tem-
poral sensitivity to the expected event. Furthermore, the
fact that visual cues enhance temporal sensitivity in non-
musicians may suggest that they require more physical
time markers than musicians do to develop temporal
regularity and allocate attention accordingly. Following
this reasoning, we suggest that in addition to long-term
training, temporal regularity can be inferred from the
immediate context within a sequence to influence atten-
tion allocation. That is, if the metrically or group accented
tones are physically highlighted, even non-musicians
should be able to track the regularity and allocate their
attention accordingly.
The contributions from grouping and metrical accents to
perceiving metrical structure are distinct but not indepen-
dent. Specifically, both experiments demonstrated that the
performance of click localization coinciding with the
ending tone of a perceptual group was enhanced for strong
beats only, especially for musicians. These results suggest
that the perceptual enhancement of the temporal accuracy
at the end of a perceptual group may stem from the solid
representation of metrical structure and the precise
expectation of the location of the strong beat. Long-term
intensive training facilitates such attentional modulation,
so musicians are more proficient in allocating attention
according to prespecified metrical structure (Yee et al.
1994; Jones and Yee 1997; Drake et al. 2000b). The precise
and additional attention allocation to the strong beat
enhances the perceptual salience of the grouping accents
and may therefore improve the accuracy of click locali-
zation. In other words, when listening to a rhythmic
sequence, both metrical knowledge and superior sensitivity
to perceptual groups help musicians construct the metrical
structure embedded in acoustic events.
In contrast to the tapping task, which seems to be natural
for non-musicians and is commonly employed by previous
279
studies (e.g., Repp 2005, 2007), click localization might be
regarded as a task that is more familiar to musicians than to
non-musicians. Musicians are trained to track scores during
music reading and performance, while non-musicians are
relatively unfamiliar with such an activity. Following this
reasoning, one might suspect that musicians’ superior
performance in click localization is simply due to their
familiarity with the task rather than their enhanced atten-
tion allocation in metrical structure. Our results in two
experiments, however, demonstrated that the advantage
enjoyed by musicians was not general; it was only
observed when the click coincided with a metrical and/or
grouping accent. This effect supports our hypothesis that
the accuracy of click localization reflects temporal sensi-
tivity, which is enhanced by allocating additional attention
to expected events, even without the involvement of motor
skills in musical performance. Such findings therefore
suggest that the difference of the localization between
musicians and non-musicians is not caused fully by task-
related factors, but instead by the temporal regularities
induced from grouping and/or metrical structure in rhyth-
mic sequences.
Although the hypothesis of attention allocation in
metrical structure elegantly elucidates the relationships
between attention and metrical perception, it is possible
that the performance of click localization is also influ-
enced by mechanisms other than directing attention to
different points in time. Although we encouraged partici-
pants to make their responses as soon as they heard a
click, we cannot fully rule out the possibility that they
remembered and/or interpreted the click as happening at a
position that corresponded to other internal representations
of the accented stimuli, such as internal simulation of
actions, auditory images of accented tones, and perceptual
enhancement of loudness and/or sensitivity to the accented
tones (Repp 2007, 2010). Furthermore, it is very likely
that musical expertise modulates these mechanisms of
metrical interpretation. Further studies are needed to
explore the related issues. In addition, it is difficult to
separate the effect of the perceptual salience of the click
from that of the tone stimulus, despite the identical sound
level of loud tones and the click. With the clear demon-
stration of distinct and interactive contributions from both
metrical and grouping accents to metrical structure by the
current study, future research with online neurophysio-
logical measurements might be able to determine the locus
of the effect of these accents on participants’ temporal
judgments.
Recently, Repp (2010) systematically evaluated musi-
cians’ metrical representation in tasks of duration and
intensity detection of isochronous melodies. It was found
that perceptual sensitivity to a stimulus was enhanced by
123
280 Exp Brain Res (2011) 210:269–282

improved attention to a metrically strong beat, rather than

by increased loudness of the accented tone. Interestingly,
the lack of loudness enhancement in metrical accents is
phenomenally different from the observation where
grouping-accented tones are perceived as being louder
than physically identical but unaccented tones (Povel and
Okkerman 1981). The results of different representations
in metrical and grouping accents, as well as the inde-
pendent effects of the two kinds of accents in the current
study, are consistent with the proposal that grouping and
metrical accents involve different processes. The present
study further suggests that increased attention to a met-
rically strong beat enhances perceptual sensitivity to the
temporal (Yee et al. 1994; Jones and Yee 1997) and non-
temporal (e.g., Repp 2010) attributes of an accented
event.
In conclusion, this study demonstrates that both pre-
existing knowledge and grouping structure provide distinct
but interactive influences on the allocation of attention to
different time points in metrical structure. Such internal
organization helps listeners track and compare the con-
structed metrical structure with continuously incoming
acoustic events, and consequently helps them pay attention
to the structure of the rhythm. Processing of metrical and
grouping accents in subsequent streams is in turn modu-
lated by the allocated attention. Critically, one’s amount
of musical training modulates the relative importance of
grouping and metrical accents to the formation of metrical
structure. Musicians not only benefit from rich metrical
knowledge but also demonstrate sharp perceptual sensi-
tivity to acoustic events, implying that the effect of musical
expertise penetrates the mechanisms of perceptual pro-
cessing through periodic and regular allocation of attention
to metrical structure. Such results highlight the interactive
and dynamic nature of attention allocation to metrical
structure.

Acknowledgments We are grateful to Dr. Bruno Repp for his

helpful discussions and comments on earlier versions of the manu-
script. We are also grateful to Dr. Mari Riess Jones and the anony-
mous reviewers for their helpful and constructive comments. This
study was supported by grants from Academia Sinica (AS-99-TP-
AC1) and National Science Council (NSC 98-2517-S-004-001-MY3
& NSC 99-2410-H-008-023-MY3) in Taiwan. References

Abecasis D, Brochard R, Del Rio D, Dufour A, Ortiz T (2009) Brain

Appendix
All rhythmic materials used in the present study. The angle
bracket ([) indicates the metrically strong beat. Long and
short bars represent loud and soft tones, respectively.
lateralization of metrical accenting in musicians. Ann N Y Acad
Sci 1169:74–78
Benjamin WE (1984) A theory of musical meter. Music Percept
1:355–413
Berry W (1976) Structural functions in music. Courier Dover
Publications, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey

123
Exp Brain Res (2011) 210:269–282
Bregman AS (1990) Auditory scene analysis. MIT Press, Cambridge
Chen JL, Penhune VB, Zatorre RJ (2008a) Listening to musical
rhythms recruits motor regions of the brain. Cereb Cortex
18:2844–2854
Chen JL, Penhune VB, Zatorre RJ (2008b) Moving on time: brain
network for auditory-motor synchronization is modulated by
rhythm complexity and musical training. J Cogn Neurosci
20:226–239
Cooper GW, Meyer LB (1960) The rhythmic structure of music.
Chicago University Press, Chicago
Deutsch D (1999) Grouping mechanisms in music. In: Deutsch D (ed)
The psychology of music. Academic Press, New York,
pp 299–348
Drake C, Palmer C (1993) Accent structure in music performance.
Music Percept 10:343–378
Drake C, Jones MR, Baruch C (2000a) The development of rhythmic
attending in auditory sequences: attunement, referent period,
focal attending. Cognition 77:251–288
Drake C, Penel A, Bigand E (2000b) Tapping in time with
mechanically and expressively performed music. Music Percept
18:1–24
Ellis RJ, Jones MR (2009) The role of accent salience and joint accent
structure in meter perception. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept
Perform 35:264–280
Essens PJ (1986) Hierarchical organization of temporal patterns.
Percept Psychophys 40:69–73
Essens P (1995) Structuring temporal sequences: comparison of
models and factors of complexity. Percept Psychophys 57:519–
532
Essens PJ, Povel DJ (1985) Metrical and nonmetrical representations
of temporal patterns. Percept Psychophys 37:1–7
Fodor JA, Bever TG (1965) The psychological reality of linguistic
segments. J Verbal Learn Verbal Behav 4:414–420
Fraisse P (1982) Rhythm and tempo. In: Deutsch D (ed) The
psychology of music. Academic Press, New York, pp 149–181
Franek M, Mates J, Radil T, Beck K, Poppel E (1991) Finger tapping
in musicians and nonmusicians. Int J Psychophysiol 11:277–279
Fujioka T, Trainor LJ, Large EW, Ross B (2009) Beta and gamma
rhythms in human auditory cortex during musical beat process-
ing. Ann N Y Acad Sci 1169:89–92
Geiser E, Ziegler E, Jancke L, Meyer M (2009) Early electrophys-
iological correlates of meter and rhythm processing in music
perception. Cortex 45:93–102
Geiser E, Sandmann P, Jancke L, Meyer M (2010) Refinement of
metre perception—training increases hierarchical metre process-
ing. Eur J Neurosci 32:1979–1985
Grahn JA, Brett M (2007) Rhythm and beat perception in motor areas
of the brain. J Cogn Neurosci 19:893–906
Grahn JA, Rowe JB (2009) Feeling the beat: premotor and striatal
interactions in musicians and nonmusicians during beat percep-
tion. J Neurosci 29:7540–7548
Gregory AH (1978) Perception of clicks in music. Percept Psycho-
phys 24:171–174
Handel S (1989) Listening: an introduction to the perception of
auditory events. MIT Press, Cambridge
Hannon EE, Johnson SP (2005) Infants use meter to categorize
rhythms and melodies: implications for musical structure
learning. Cogn Psychol 50:354–377
Hannon EE, Snyder JS, Eerola T, Krumhansl CL (2004) The role of
melodic and temporal cues in perceiving musical meter. J Exp
Psychol Hum Percept Perform 30:956–974
Jones MR (1976) Time, our lost dimension: toward a new theory of
perception, attention, and memory. Psychol Rev 83:323–355
Jones MR (1987) Dynamic pattern structure in music: recent theory
and research. Percept Psychophys 41:621–634
281
Jones MR, Boltz M (1989) Dynamic attending and responses to time.
Psychol Rev 96:459–491
Jones MR, Pfordresher PQ (1997) Tracking melodic events using
joint accent structure. Can J Exp Psychol 51:271–291
Jones MR, Ralston JT (1991) Some influences of accent structure on
melody recognition. Mem Cognit 19:8–20
Jones MR, Yee W (1997) Sensitivity to time change: the role of
context and skill. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 23:693–
709
Jones MR, Boltz M, Kidd G (1982) Controlled attending as a function
of melodic and temporal context. Percept Psychophys
32:211–218
Jones MR, Jagacinski RJ, Yee W, Floyd RL, Klapp ST (1995) Tests
of attentional flexibility in listening to polyrhythmic patterns.
J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 21:293–307
Jones MR, Moynihan H, MacKenzie N, Puente J (2002) Temporal
aspects of stimulus-driven attending in dynamic arrays. Psychol
Sci 13:313–319
Jones MR, Johnston HM, Puente J (2006) Effects of auditory pattern
structure on anticipatory and reactive attending. Cogn Psychol
53:59–96
Kincaid AE, Duncan S, Scott SA (2002) Assessment of fine motor
skill in musicians and nonmusicians: differences in timing versus
sequence accuracy in a bimanual fingering task. Percept Mot
Skills 95:245–257
Krumhansl CL (2000) Rhythm and pitch in music cognition. Psychol
Bull 126:159–179
Ladefoged P, Broadbent DE (1960) Perception of sequences in
auditory events. Q J Exp Psychol 12:162–170
Large EW (2001) Periodicity, pattern formation, and metric structure.
J New Music Res 30:173–185
Large EW, Jones MR (1999) The dynamics of attending: how people
track time-varying events. Psychol Rev 106:119–159
Large EW, Palmer C (2002) Perceiving temporal regularity in music.
Cogn Sci 26:1–37
Lerdahl F, Jackendoff R (1983) A generative theory of tonal music.
MIT Press, Cambridge
London J (2004) Hearing in time. Psychological aspects pf musical
meter. Oxford University Press, New York
Palmer C, Krumhansl CL (1990) Mental representations for musical
meter. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 16:728–741
Parncutt R (1994) A perceptual model of pulse salience and metrical
accent in musical rhythms. Music Percept 11:409–464
Phillips-Silver J, Trainor LJ (2005) Feeling the beat: movement
influences infant rhythm perception. Science 308:1430
Phillips-Silver J, Trainor LJ (2007) Hearing what the body feels:
auditory encoding of rhythmic movement. Cognition 105:533–
546
Potter DD, Fenwick M, Abecasis D, Brochard R (2009) Perceiving
rhythm where none exists: event-related potential (ERP) corre-
lates of subjective accenting. Cortex 45:103–109
Povel DJ, Essens P (1985) Perception of temporal patterns. Music
Percept 2:411–440
Povel DJ, Okkerman H (1981) Accents in equitone sequences.
Percept Psychophys 30:565–572
Repp BH (2005) Rate limits of on-beat and off-beat tapping with
simple auditory rhythms: 2. The roles of different kinds of
accent. Music Percept 23:165–187
Repp BH (2007) Hearing a melody in different ways: multistability of
metrical interpretation, reflected in rate limits of sensorimotor
synchronization. Cognition 102:434–454
Repp BH (2010) Do metrical accents create illusory phenomenal
accents? Atten Percept Psychophys 72:1390–1403
Sakai K, Hikosaka O, Nakamura K (2004) Emergence of rhythm
during motor learning. Trends Cogn Sci 8:547–553
123
282
Sloboda JA, Gregory AH (1980) The psychological reality of musical
segments. Can J Psychol 34:274–280
Smith J (1983) Reproduction and representation of musical rhythms:
the effects of musical skill. Plenum, New York
Snyder B (2000) Music and memory: an instruction. MIT press,
Cambridge
Snyder JS, Krumhansl CL (2001) Tapping to ragtime: cues to pulse
finding. Music Percept 18:455–489
Snyder JS, Large EW (2005) Gamma-band activity reflects the metric
structure of rhythmic tone sequences. Brain Res Cogn Brain Res
24:117–126
Stoffer TH (1985) Representation of phrase structure in the perception
of music. Music Percept 2:191–220
Vuust P, Pallesen KJ, Bailey C, van Zuijen TL, Gjedde A, Roepstorff
A, Ostergaard L (2005) To musicians, the message is in the
123
Exp Brain Res (2011) 210:269–282
meter pre-attentive neuronal responses to incongruent rhythm are
left-lateralized in musicians. Neuroimage 24:560–564
Vuust P, Ostergaard L, Pallesen KJ, Bailey C, Roepstorff A (2009)
Predictive coding of music—brain responses to rhythmic
incongruity. Cortex 45:80–92
Watanabe D, Savion-Lemieux T, Penhune VB (2007) The effect of
early musical training on adult motor performance: evidence for
a sensitive period in motor learning. Exp Brain Res 176:332–340
Yantis S, Serences JT (2003) Cortical mechanisms of space-based and
object-based attentional control. Curr Opin Neurobiol
13:187–193
Yee W, Holleran S, Jones MR (1994) Sensitivity to event timing in
regular and irregular sequences: influences of musical skill.
Percept Psychophys 56:461–471