Extraction of cues or underlying harmonic structure: Which guides recognition of familiar melodies?

Six highly familiar melodies were submitted to three transformations: reduction and two rhythmic group transformations. These three transformations offered the opportunity to compare the role of various means of melody recognition: melodic contour, harmonic structure, local surface cues. If melody recognition relies on melodic contour, an original melody would be easier to recognise after rhythmic group transformation than after reduction; the rhythmic group transformation, but not the reduction, preserves the melodic contour. If melody recognition depends on the harmonic structure, an original melody would be easier to recognise after reduction than after a rhythmic group transformation; the reduction, but not the rhythmic group transformation, respects the underlying harmonic structure. The results of two experiments, one with children and one with adults, showed that recognition was better for rhythmic group transformation but only when local surface cues were preserved, a result that could neither be predicted by the melodic contour hypothesis nor by the harmonic structure hypothesis. The results give support to the cue abstraction hypothesis, which suggests that melody recognition relies on the recognition of certain surface cues abstracted while hearing and which are then memorised. Recognition performances and speed of recognition served as dependent variables.