One logical place to start in a wider search is to look for perception of auditory rhythm in diverse species. Celma-Miralles and Toro (see record 2019-59892-001), in this issue's Featured Article, report such a study. They tested whether rats and humans could detect deviations from one component of auditory rhythm, isochrony (a constant interval between sounds; Ravignani & Madison, 2017). Rats learned to poke their noses through an aperture, and humans learned to tap the spacebar on a keyboard, following an isochronous series of tones, and to refrain from these actions following an anisochronous series of tones (a Go/No go paradigm; Figure 1). In the anisochronic series of tones, the authors described the stimuli as having auditory jitter. Subsequently, the participants were presented with a mixture of familiar sound sequences and novel isochronous and anisochronous sound sequences at new tempi and with new absolute durations. Humans responded more than twice as frequently and rats just over 5% more frequently to the novel isochronous sound sequences than to the novel anisochronous sound sequences. Thus, both species provide evidence of discriminating jittery sounds from rhythmic sounds, and humans were more accurate at this task than rats. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).

中文翻译：

---

大鼠（Rattus norvegicus）和人类（Homo sapiens）一样，也会检测到听觉抖动。

在更广泛的搜索中开始的一个合逻辑的地方是寻找不同物种的听觉节奏感知。Celma-Miralles和Toro（参见记录2019-59892-001）在本期特刊中报​​告了此类研究。他们测试了大鼠和人类是否可以检测到与听觉节奏，等时性（声音之间的恒定间隔; Ravignani＆Madison，2017）某一组成部分的偏差。老鼠学会了通过一个孔戳鼻子，人类学会了在一系列等时同步的音调后敲击键盘上的空格键，并在一系列等时不同步的音调后避免了这些动作（Go / No go范例；图1）。 ）。在等时的一系列音调中，作者将刺激描述为具有听觉抖动。后来，在新的节奏和新的绝对持续时间下，向参与者展示了熟悉的声音序列以及新颖的等时和非等时声音序列的混合体。人类对新型等时声音序列的响应频率是人类的两倍，而大鼠对新型等时声音序列的响应频率则高出5％以上。因此，这两种物种都提供了将有节奏的声音与有节奏的声音区分开的证据，并且人类比老鼠更能准确地完成这项任务。（PsycINFO数据库记录（c）2020 APA，保留所有权利）。两种动物都提供了区分节奏声音和抖动声音的证据，人类比老鼠更准确地完成这项任务。（PsycINFO数据库记录（c）2020 APA，保留所有权利）。两种动物都提供了区分节奏声音和抖动声音的证据，人类比老鼠更准确地完成这项任务。（PsycINFO数据库记录（c）2020 APA，保留所有权利）。