@article{TEXTUAL,
      recid = {6149},
      author = {Van Hedger, Stephen C. and Veillette, John and Heald,  Shannon L. M. and Nusbaum, Howard C.},
      title = {Revisiting discrete versus continuous models of human  behavior: The case of absolute pitch},
      journal = {PLOS ONE},
      address = {2020-12-28},
      number = {TEXTUAL},
      abstract = {<p>Many human behaviors are discussed in terms of discrete  categories. Quantizing behavior in this fashion may provide  important traction for understanding the complexities of  human experience, but it also may bias understanding of  phenomena and associated mechanisms. One example of this is  absolute pitch (AP), which is often treated as a discrete  trait that is either present or absent (i.e., with easily  identifiable near-perfect “genuine” AP possessors and  at-chance non-AP possessors) despite emerging evidence that  pitch-labeling ability is not all-or-nothing. We used a  large-scale online assessment to test the discrete model of  AP, specifically by measuring how intermediate performers  related to the typically defined “non-AP” and “genuine AP”  populations. Consistent with prior research, individuals  who performed at-chance (non-AP) reported beginning musical  instruction much later than the near-perfect AP  participants, and the highest performers were more likely  to speak a tonal language than were the lowest performers  (though this effect was not as statistically robust as one  would expect from prior research). Critically, however,  these developmental factors did not differentiate the  near-perfect AP performers from the intermediate AP  performers. Gaussian mixture modeling supported the  existence of two performance distributions–the first  distribution encompassed both the intermediate and  near-perfect AP possessors, whereas the second distribution  encompassed only the at-chance participants. Overall, these  results provide support for conceptualizing intermediate  levels of pitch-labeling ability along the same continuum  as genuine AP-level pitch labeling ability—in other words,  a continuous distribution of AP skill among all  above-chance performers rather than discrete categories of  ability. Expanding the inclusion criteria for AP makes it  possible to test hypotheses about the mechanisms that  underlie this ability and relate this ability to more  general cognitive mechanisms involved in other  abilities.</p>},
      url = {http://knowledge.uchicago.edu/record/6149},
}