Effects of Two Listening Strategies for Melodic Dictation

Abstract

The purpose of this research was to examine effects of two listening strategies on melodic dictation scores. Fifty-four undergraduate music majors completed short tonal melodic dictations in a within-subjects design with three conditions: (a) no specified strategy in the instructions, (b) required listening before writing, and (c) required writing while listening. The purpose of the first condition was to determine subjects’ preference for listening before writing or writing while listening prior to requiring each. Two repeated measures t tests revealed no significant difference in test scores between the second and third conditions and no significant difference in test scores between subjects’ demonstrated preferred strategy and nonpreferred strategy. Results corroborate prior research suggesting that both may be viable strategies for melodic dictation, each offering unique benefits to aural memory and musical comprehension. Implications for high school and college aural skills instructors include the need to offer students options for dictation strategies and help them choose when and how to use them. Students who have tried multiple strategies in practice and considered their relative benefits might be better prepared to make wise decisions during dictation.

Effects of Two Approaches to Rhythmic Dictation

“…Scores from participants’ demonstrated preferred strategy were not significantly higher than scores from their nonpreferred strategy, corroborating previous findings from a study of melodic dictation (Buonviri, 2017) and suggesting that students’ typical strategy may not necessarily be their best choice. Given the lack of a statistically significant difference in scores as a function of participants’ preferred strategy, the significant difference between writing while listening and listening before writing bears more weight.…”

“…Target rhythms were all two measures long, were in 4/4 meter, and incorporated combinations of quarter notes, eighth notes, sixteenth notes, and eighth rests (see Appendix S1 in the supplementary files included with the online version of this article for all target rhythms). In a previous study (Buonviri, 2017), two-measure melodies were effective for prompting students to choose which listening strategy to use, because they were long enough (10–12 notes each) to warrant some amount of sketching but short enough to commit to memory without sketching (Pembrook, 1986). In the current study, the use of sixteenth notes produced more notes per target than in Buonviri’s (2017) study, but I determined that the two-measure length would again be effective because the targets did not include pitch, serving to balance the increased number of notes in each.…”

“…I scored target rhythms from Conditions 2 (writing while listening) and 3 (listening before writing) 1 point per half beat, a protocol adapted from Buonviri’s (2017) study, in which 1 point was possible per beat for pitch and 1 point per beat for rhythm. Given the frequent incorporation of sixteenth notes in the target rhythms of the current study, I determined that scoring per half beat would yield the most precise indicator of participants’ accuracy.…”

“…When taking rhythmic dictation, students must be able to maintain what they hear in short-term memory clearly and correctly while they are placing the target into contexts, such as pulse, subdivision, and meter. Miller's (1956) seminal work in psychology demonstrating the limits of short-term memory has been cited and applied in studies focused on aural memory during dictation (e.g., Buonviri, 2017;Pembrook, 1986), confirming the need for specific strategies designed to help students remember fully to comprehend correctly.…”

Developing Melodic Dictation Pedagogy: A Survey of College Theory Instructors

“…In a more recent study, Buonviri (in press) found that both strategies worked equally well for undergraduate music majors taking short tonal melodic dictations; his results corroborate Pembrook’s (1987) recommendation that both may be viable options.…”