Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
This study examines pitch discrimination and its relationship with frequency range and age in normal-hearing adults, showing a bias towards higher frequencies.
Purpose of the study: This study investigated pitch discrimination abilities in normal-hearing adults using ecologically valid piano tones to assess how frequency range (C3 vs. C4 scales) and age influence performance. Basic procedures: Twenty participants (aged 36–72) completed two interval discrimination tasks comparing reference tones (C3: 130 Hz; C4: 261 Hz) with eight semitone-spaced comparison tones. Stimuli were presented via an acoustic piano in a sound-attenuated room, and responses ("higher," "lower," or "same") were recorded. Statistical analyses included paired t-tests, correlation, and binomial tests. Main findings: No significant difference emerged between C3 (64.4% accuracy) and C4 (65.6%) tasks, though C4 performance showed greater variability. Participants excelled at reference tones and perfect fifths but struggled with semitone discrimination (45–55% ac-curacy). A perceptual bias in the C4 range led to higher frequencies being misclassified as "lower." Age negatively correlated with C4 performance (r = −0.52, p = 0.02), while gender had no effect. Principal conclusion: Pitch discrimination in normal-hearing adults is influenced by frequency range, interval size, and age, with high-frequency perception declining in older adults. These findings provide baseline data for auditory rehabilitation and music training paradigms.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Salah et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: