“<< > Absolute Pitch: In Search of a Testable Model ‘Nayana Di Giuseppe Germano," Hugo Cogo-Moreira," Grazicla Bortz “Department of Music., UNE >, Sao Paulo Br ‘Department of Psychiatry, Federal University of Sao Paulo, Sao Paulo Brazil ABSTRACT ‘After an extensive bibliographical review regarding the cognitive trait known as absolute pitch (AP), we observed that its main characteristic Ties in the ability to recognize and identify tones using verbal labels without any kind of external reference. However, its. several definitions also include various non-consensual eriteia, Therefore, it {is important to find a proper approach to cope withthe indicators that classify AP, establishing cu-of? points with accuracy rates. to distinguish those who have AP from those who do not have it. The primary purpose is to suggest a set of indicators to assess what AP i, so that the resulting theoretical model could be tested in a future research phase. ‘The reproducible model for AP (which consists in the proposed indicators) can be established by using standardization of eniteria and constriction of validity evaluation, as conducted in the medical area, through guidelines such as Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders or Composite International Diagnostic Interview. The test ofthe resulting theoretical model shall use procedures from a Feld of statistics known as structural equation modelling, focused in testing theoretical models. The existence of diverse definitions forthe same latent pheaomenon using different criteria inevitably leads to distinct and non-diectly comparable models, For the study of any latent psychological trait, iis essential to identity a sot of observable indicators (c,criteria, expressions). Such criteria must moot content validity based on evidence from empirical observation and theoretical foundation, This is an important step for AP researchers, since an adequate testable model for this cognitive trait must be defined and ‘consequently evaluated regarding their fit with reality 1. INTRODUCTION The Absolute Pitch phenomenon (AP) has been widely rescarched and discussed during the last century. The catliest scientific description of AP appeared in a volume on psycho-acousties by Stumpf (1883). Since then, various aspects of AP have been investigated by a number of researchers (e-g., Abraham, 1901; Wellek, 1938; for reviews, see Takeuchi & Hulse, 1993; Ward, 1999 apud Miyazaki & Ogawa, 2006). From a general perspective, the AP phenomenon is usually. defined (with minor variations among different authors) as a rare ability that refers to a long-term internal representation for the pitches of tones. It is typically manifested behaviorally by the ability to identity, by the name of the musical note the piteh of any sound without reference to another sound or by producing a given musical tone on demand without external reference (Baggaley, 1974; Zatorre et.al, 1998; Ward, 1999; Parneutt & Levitin, 2001; Deutsch, 2002). After an extensive bibliographical review of AP definitions conducted by several researchers (Germano, 2015), it has been “observed that the main characteristic of this cognitive ability is the capacity that AP possessors have of tone identification using verbal labels (what Levitin, 1994, named as Pitch Labeling) without reference (e.g., without a diapason), On the ISBN 1-876346-65-5 @ ICMPC14 shotmail.com, ‘hugocogobrégmail.com, 110 ‘g_bortzthotmail.com other hand, by tying to delineate a more accurate description, some authors also include more specific and non-consensval criteria to the definition of AP. To illustrate these criteria, we ccan quote the time demanded to identify a tone and the degree of precision in tone identification (directly questioning the common sense which establishes that if a subject has problems with tone identification due to certain musical parameters, like register and timbre, he should be disqualified as an AP possessor). TThe existence of several definitions for the same cognitive phenomenon, each based on different non-consensval criteria, inevitably leads to significant variations among AP researches and, more importantly, in their conclusions. For example, there is @ general, although not universal, agreement that, to be considered an AP possessor, an individual must have the ability to recognize pitches immediately and involuntarily (c.g. Takeuchi & Hulse, 1993), however, in one of our previous studies (Germano et al., 2011), some selfreported AP ppossessors described the need of some time to identify them, There are also disparities regarding the degree of precision of AP possessors, as some authors consider halftone errors as partial successes (c-g., Athos et al., 2007), while others consider hat-tone errors as total successes considering subjects older than 45 years old (e.g,, Buharloo et al., 1998) and others consider total successes for any subject (c.g., Brady, 1970; Schulze et al., 2009; Vanzella & Schellenberg, 2010) ‘The issue with non-consensual criteria is that they might Iead to different AP definitions, which in turn lead to different theoretical models for the cognitive ability known as AP. As a result, one should question if these researches are in fact evaluating the same cognitive ability. In fact, one of the main problems regarding AP research is the difficulty that comes from the adoption of different and non-directly comparable models, making it nearly impossible to cross-relate the experimental results of these researches. Consequently, the primary purpose of this paper is to propose a set of indicators to assess what AP is, so that the resulting theoretical model could be tested in a future research phase. Il, ABSOLUTE PITCH POSSESSOR In light of the considerations above, a few questions ean be listed, such as: what are the necessary eriteria to define AP? Considering a set of defined criteria, are they able to explain, adequately and satisfactorily, the underlining latent psychological trait? ‘One of the difficulties regarding AP meaning is the amplitude of its definition. If one adopts a very restrictive definition (e-g., AP possessors must identify precisely every note on every instrument), there would be only & few subjects successfully classified as AP possessors. On the other hand, @ broader definition (e.g., AP possessors can take as much time ICMPC14, July 5-9, 2016, San Francisco, USA“<< as needed to identify 2 note or if they are freely allowed prone to semitone errors) can make it very diffieult, or even ‘impossible, to distinguish AP possessors from non-possessors, since so many answers are considered indicatives of the cognitive ability, To ponder on AP definition it is crucial to a scientific approach of the phenomenon, Without proper approach, itis not even possible to claim that the dichotomous theoretical ‘model commonly adopted to represent AP is in fact adequate. Observing current researches, it is possible to enumerate criteria used to address AP ability, which do not fit into a dichotomous model, although this model is usually presented oon the given definition of the cognitive trait. Instead, these authors should have evaluated alternative models for representing AP (e.., ifthe phenomenon is better represented by a continuous model or even a hybrid model) The previous paragraph points out to a nced of a deeper thinking regarding AP definition. In fact, many papers define AP generically, while others only quote definitions presented by reference authors, usually without any consideration of the correspondence of these definitions to the AP perspective discussed on these papers. ‘A better comprehension of the AP phenomenon can begin to take form by observing the consensual criteria identified on AP definitions of different authors, First, AP-possessors are capable of identifying pitches immediately, or almost immediately. Second, AP possessors are capable of associating pitches to verbal labels, an association stored on subject’s Tong-term memory, that is, a specific label is learned by the subject (ic, usually a name of one of the musical tones) in association” to a specific pith class. Although these associations are considered standardized by many, it is well known that some subjects (c.g, musicians who play ‘transposable instruments or that studied on an out of tune piano) usually show different patterns of associations than most Nonetheless, a vast number of researches highlight that AP possessors are rarely infallible, that is, most of them show a ‘few (or many) limitations, such as 1) Margin of errors of semitone on pitch evaluation (i. halftone errors are recurtent); 2) Difficulty in (or even incapacity of) singing # note ‘without external reference; 3) Limitations to certain registers; 4) Limitations to certain timbres. If many authors discuss these criteria, the question remains as to how should the scientific community cope with these variables. For example, what is the percentage of correct answers a subject must achieve to be considered an AP possessor? An AP possessor should be capable of identifying pitches on which timbres? Ifa subject only recognizes pitches fon the medium register, should he be considered an AP possessor? Ifthe subject cannot sing a demanded pitch without external reference, ean he be considered an AP possessor? Considering the above information, maybe one could contemplate the cognitive trait named AP heterogeneous according to the subject’s abilities. This leads to a hypothesis (already raised by previous researchers, as Bachem in 1937) that there could be different types of AP possessors. > II. MODEL EVALUATION To study any latent psychological phenomenon (ie., one that cannot be measured directly, such as AP), the identification of a set of structured, consistent, observable criteria based on evidence is essential. From’ a scientific perspective, it is of prior importance that these elaborated criteria can be tested in search for evidences supporting the theoretical model elected, It is ftom this experimental testing that the model ean be rejected or no, allowing its enhancement. ‘Most AP researches adopt experimental testing as their core methodology, in order to measure different patterns of subject response in relation to parameter variation (such as register, timbre, the time necessary for pitch identification or the proportion of correct/wrong answers). However, as highlighted in the previous section, the lack of consideration regarding correspondences between theoretical model and empirical data makes the process of knowledge acquisition extremely difficult It how well the proposed set of criteria for the definition of the AP phenomenon fits to the reality of the AP possessor and its abilities is unknown, then solving this matter should be the first phase in experimental research, In fact, the borderline that separates AP possessors from non-possessors has not been consensually defined, taking into account that both exhibit limitations on pitch’ identification, Considering that many researches adopl, as a starting point of their methodology, the segregation of AP_possessors from non-possessors, this problem becomes of great importance. Consequently, the scientific community should find a way to cope with the basic indicators used to classify AP, defining them properly and establishing cut-off points with accuracy rates, in order to separate those who have AP from those who do not have it, This demands the accomplishment of experiments specifically designed to test basic hypothesis on AD ability, based both on evidence from previous empirical ‘observations and on logical coherence provided by theoretical foundations. ‘Only when this basic step is achieved will researches dedicated to more specific aspects of AP ability have a solid ground to elaborate on. As pointed before, without the standardization of basic criteria inside the community dedicated to the AP studies, it is not possible to know if different researches are in fact evaluating the same cognitive ability, and even less to compare information resulting from these experiments A possible solution to this problem is the creation of a reproducible model for AP categorization using standardization of criteria and the construct validity evaluation as conducted in the medical area, throughout guidelines stated in sourees such as Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders ot Composite International Diagnostic Interview. ‘The resulting theoretical model could then be tested by using procedures from a field of statistics known as structural equation modelling, focused specifically on testing theoretical models. IV. ABSOLUTE PITCH INDICATORS What are the criteria necessary to define AP? Considering a designed set of criteria, are they capable of adequately explaining the latent psychological trait? mi“<< From a scientific perspective, it is important that che designed criteria can be tested in order to provide evidences supporting of falsifying the core theoretical model adopted, allowing its enhancement, Based on researched bibliography, more specifically those discussed in Germano (2015), we propose a preliminary hypothetical model (construct) for AP: Absolute Pitch Halrtone Errors Figure 1. Preliminary hypothetical model for AP. This model is a starting point for future researches. Therefore, it is open to modifications and corrections due to results obtained within the preliminary test that should evaluate this hypothetical proposition. From a theoretical perspective, the proposed model ‘considers that AP is a dichotomous phenomenon (to possess or not to possess) and embodies the following indicators: 1) Pitch Labeling: ability to keep long-term stable representations of specific pitches on memory and to access them when needed, associating them to learned verbal labels (Levitin, 1994) 2) Time of identification: according to AP bibliography, the identification of stimuli in AP possessors is immediate. Our {question is: what is immediate? How many seconds does the subject need to identify a tone? 3 and 4) Number of timbres and registers: these items ‘measure the capacity of the subject to identify pitches in two parameters, describing how many timbres and registers a subject is capable of recognizing (from identifying in just one timbre and one register to all timbres and their respective registers), ') Half-tone errors: how many halftone errors does an AP possessor make? The lower degree of accuracy would be 100% halftone errors and the higher degree would be 0% half-tone crrors. However, it should be questioned if a large quantity of halftone errors is actually caused by the subject's mistakes, or iit is due toa different memorization reference, As pointed out before, many studies highlight that AP possessors acquire pitch ‘memory according to the reference presented to them on the first years of study, For example, if a child possessing AP grows studying in an out of tune piano (tuned half-tone bellow the A=440 Hz standard), this child will certainly make consistent half-tone errors in tests, although the variation in errors would possibly be near zero (Levitin & Rogers, 2005). > Due to this fact, Ward considers that the best AP possessor is not the one who makes fewer mistakes, but the one who exhibits fewer variations in answers (WARD, 1999). ‘Although we have adopted a dichotomous perspective, itis important to emphasize that the proposed indicators can collectively provide a mapping of the cognitive abilities of AP possessors in all its diverse capacities and limitations, therefore providing a model which is believed to be better capable to fit the reality of AP possessors” abilities. Consequently, this hypothetical model cam provide a solid perspective to AP phenomenon. Through test, it can supply solid evidences to indicate if AP can be described as a continuous ability (with a continuous line from minimal to ‘maximal pitch identification), or if itis better described as @ hybrid ability (with the possible verification of different AP types, as already proposed by Bachem). V. CONCLUSION TThe primary purpose of this paper was to propose a set of | indicators to assess what AP is, so that the resulting theoretical model could be tested in a future research phase, The claboration of this model started by observing the consensual criteria present on AP definitions of different authors, Based on the information provided, the scientific question of | what in fact is the AP ability and how it has been measured remains open on researches up to date. We highlighted the ‘main non-consensual AP characteristics, which show that AP possessors commonly exhibit some kind of limitation (be it regarding timbre, register or halftone errors). We also questioned the common (undiscussed) view that AP is @ dichotomous cognitive trait Based on researched bibliography, more specifically those discussed in Germano (2015), we proposed a preliminary hypothetical model (construct) for AP. First, it will be evaluated, leading to modifications and corrections according to results oblained within the preliminary test aimed at testing this hypothetical proposition. As mentioned before, the elaboration of a well-formulated (testable) model for AP categorization, formed by a coherent set of eriteria, is an essential step for AP researchers, It is only by its test that the scientific community will be able to evaluate the capacity of the model to fit reality, ie, the mapping of the cognitive abilities of AP possessors in all its diverse capacities and also limitations REFERENCES Athos, E. A., Levinson, B., Kistler, A, Zemansky, J, Bostrom, A., Freimer, N., & Gitschier, J. (2007). Dichotomy and perceptual distortions in absolute pitch ability. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 104 (37), 1479-14800. Abraham, ©. (1901). Das absolute Tonbewusstsein. Psychologisch-musikaische Studie, Sammelbande der indernationalen Musikgesellschaft, 3, 1-86 Bacher, A. (1937). Various types of absolut pitch, Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 9, 146-181 Baggaley, J. (1974). Measurement of absolute pitch. Paychology of ‘Music, 2 (2), 1-17 Baharioo, 8, Johnston, P. A., Service, . K, Gitschie, J, & Freimer, "N.B. (1998). Absolute Pitch: An Approach for Kéetifcation of Genetic and Nongenetic Components, The American Journal of Human Genetics, 62 2), 224-231 m2