Effects of Listening Conditions, Error Types, and Ensemble Textures on Error Detection Skills

Abstract

This study was designed with three main purposes: (a) to investigate the effects of two listening conditions on error detection accuracy, (b) to compare error detection responses for rhythm errors and pitch errors, and (c) to examine the influences of texture on error detection accuracy. Undergraduate music education students (N = 18) listened to purposefully incorrect performances of band literature in two formats, on recordings and while conducting a live ensemble. Pitch and rhythm errors were inserted into the music excerpts to investigate responses to different types of errors. Half of the excerpts were played by the full ensemble and half by a single section. Participants served as their own controls by completing the error detection tasks under all conditions. Results indicated that participants were significantly more successful in identifying errors in the recording condition than in the conducting condition. A significant interaction existed between the error type (pitch or rhythm) and the ensemble texture (single section or full ensemble). Participants identified rhythm errors more accurately in the single section texture and diagnosed pitch errors more successfully in the full ensemble excerpts.Keywords error detection, score study, listening skills Error detection skills are vitally important for conductors. Over the past 40 years, researchers have published a wealth of literature indicating that these skills are necessary. Thirty years ago, practicing educators indicated that the ability to detect errors was the most

Differences in Error Detection Skills by Band and Choral Preservice Teachers

“…Of course, a teacher needs to address errors while they are teaching on the podium and not merely in listening contexts. In an effort to bring more ecological validity to the task of error detection, Waggoner (2011) asked instrumental majors to detect errors in full band and sectional settings, both while conducting an ensemble and while simply listening to a recording. Candidates were more successful at identifying errors when just listening.…”

“…While recordings allow for controlled stimuli and more efficient testing, they compromise ecological validity for the task teachers actually do. Future studies should continue to examine error detection in both recorded and live-listening contexts (Waggoner, 2011).…”

The Relationships Among Interval Identification, Pitch Error Detection, and Stimulus Timbre by Preservice Teachers

“…Error detection (a teacher’s or conductor’s ability to identify errors in performance) is one of those critical, complex tasks (Sheldon, 2004). Waggoner (2011) suggested that understanding how specific factors affect error detection skill may lead to the development of more effective curricula. Interval perception and error detection have long histories of study in music education and music cognition research, yet researchers have only included them within the same empirical design in general ways.…”

Effects of Two Listening Strategies for Melodic Dictation

“…2008), match pitch accurately (e.g., Demorest & Clements, 2007), take dictation efficiently (Buonviri, 2014;Potter, 1990), conduct effectively (e.g., Waggoner, 2011), compose original tunes (e.g., Kennedy, 2002), and learn to improvise (e.g., Hickey, 2009). Therefore, the ways students acquire and use listening skills may strongly influence their overall development as musicians.…”

“…Research has shown that seemingly complementary musical tasks may detract from focused listening. Waggoner (2011) discovered that undergraduate music majors were less adept at error detection when conducting a piece than when listening to a recording of it. She concluded that their attention to conducting may have inhibited their attention to listening.…”