Article

Research Perspectives in Music Education Singers’ Responses to 16(2), 50-59 © 2014 Florida Music Conducting Gestures, Educators’ Association Piano Accompaniment, and Verbal Instructions Jessica Nápoles1

Abstract The purpose of this exploratory study was to examine three forms of communication in the choral rehearsal (verbal instructions, conducting gestures, and piano accompaniment) and to evaluate message congruence—operationally defined as a treatment condition with at least two of the three simultaneous communication forms exhibiting the same message for crescendo, decrescendo, or neither (no change). An ad hoc chorus (N =1, with 9 singers) viewed a video recording that asked them to sing “God Bless America” in a variety of ways. Verbal instructions indicated that they were to: (1) sing with a crescendo during the first phrase and a decrescendo during the second phrase, (2) sing with a decrescendo during the first phrase and a crescendo during the second phrase, or (3) just to sing “God Bless America.” Verbal instruction, conducting gestures and piano accompaniment either sent the same message or a combination of same (congruent) or different (incongruent) messages. Results indicated that participants responded best to verbal instructions and executed dynamics best under that condition. When congruent messages were delivered, desired dynamics were most accurately performed.

Keywords teacher talk, choral, teacher effectiveness, conducting

Introduction Choral rehearsals are unique in that they employ piano accompaniment with more regularity than orchestra or band rehearsals. Shenenberger (1997) claims that accompanists influence many aspects of a choral rehearsal, as the singers learn to rely on them for pitches, tempo, dynamics, and intonation. Conductors, on the other hand, are responsible for correcting errors, adjusting balance, and building tone. Choral conductors and accompanists play different roles in an ensemble rehearsal, yet empirical research has not yielded insight as to how ensemble members respond to the varied cues received from these sources. Conductors give instructions both verbally and nonverbally (through conducting gestures), and accompanists attempt to assist the conductor with aural references. However, it is possible the messages between conductor and accompanist are incongruent; for example, a conductor may be showing a gesture to indicate a forte dynamic while the accompanist plays the passage softly. In these cases, it is unclear how singers respond best. Research is needed to examine responses to these mixed messages. Much of the research on accompaniment has centered on the ways in which accompaniment affects performers’ ability to sing or play in tune or match pitch. Studies

1 University of Utah

Corresponding Author: Jessica Nápoles, University of Utah School of Music, 1375 East Presidents Circle, 204 David Gardner Hall, Salt Lake City, UT 84112, [email protected] Nápoles 51 conducted with children focused on the role of harmony and its perceived effects, and results have been mixed. Moog (1976) played six types of musical material (well known children’s songs, three combinations of words and rhythms, ‘pure’ rhythms, and ‘cacophonies’) and examined 500 preschool children’s tape recordings through observation and non-experimental procedures. He concluded that they could not experience harmony at all. When studying first and second graders, Stauffer (1985) found that students who received melodic echo- training with no harmonic context scored higher in singing ability than the students who had training with a harmonic accompaniment. In another study, first and third grade children sang familiar melodies better when accompanied by a melodic replication than when accompanied by a harmonic accompaniment (Sterling, 1984). Petzold (1966) was also interested in singing accuracy with varied forms of accompaniment. He concluded that simple harmonic accompaniment was more beneficial than complex harmonic accompaniments. Simple accompaniments also resulted in greater singing accuracy for children. Song acquisition seemed to be better for kindergarten students accompanied by a structured combination of melody and harmony when compared to harmonic accompaniment alone (Hale, 1977). Other researchers reported that accompaniment did not affect children’s tonal achievement or singing accuracy. Atterbury and Silcox (1993) had children sing with harmonic accompaniment or no accompaniment (singing alone) and reported that after a year of instruction, there were no differences between groups in singing accuracy. Similarly, in their study with second graders, Hedden and Baker (2010) discovered they were largely singing inaccurately irrespective of whether there was harmonic accompaniment or not. Guilbault (2004) experimented with the use of root melody accompaniment (playing the tonic of each chord as a bass line), and observed that, although kindergarten and first graders’ tonal achievement was not affected, children receiving this instruction were able to improvise better than those who did not receive the instruction. Studies with adult participants have also generated conflicting results with respect to intonation and singing accuracy, in performance and perception tasks. Music majors (Vorce, 1964), trained adult instrumentalists (Corso, 1954), and college vocalists (Small, 1977) matched pitch better and performed more in tune when accompanied than when unaccompanied, but Geringer and Madsen (1998) found that accompaniment did not affect ratings of intonation. When compared to no accompaniment or live accompaniment, intonation of solo instrumentalists was rated least favorably when using intelligent digital accompaniment and most favorably when not accompanied (Sheldon, Reese, & Grashel, 1999). Participants in Madsen, Geringer, and Heller’s (1991) study evaluated accompanied excerpts of string players and vocalists more in tune than unaccompanied examples. Geringer (1978) found that perceptual intonation was less accurate with unaccompanied scales, suggesting that accompaniment assisted with perceptions of intonation. Register placement and location of accompaniment also affected intonation of wind instrumentalists (Karrick, 1998), string players (Kantorski, 1986), and varied solo performers (Brittin, 1993). For string players, upper register performances with accompaniment below were significantly sharper than lower register performances. For instrumentalists, participants performed sharp more frequently and less in tune when performing below a stimulus pitch and more in tune when performing above it. In addition to intonation, accompaniment affected other musical ariables,v including tone quality (Geringer, Madsen, & Dunnigan, 2001; Madsen & Geringer, 1976; Madsen, Geringer, & Heller, 1993), ratings of phrasing/expression, rhythm, dynamics (Geringer & Madsen, 1998), and performance ratings (Brittin, 2002; Hamann & Banister, 1991). 52 Research Perspectives in Music Education

Relatively little research exists regarding the role of the accompanist and how he/she functions in a choral rehearsal, including his/her contribution to intonation and singing accuracy. Pedagogues have provided advice to accompanists, largely advising them to defer to the conductor’s wishes and anticipate instructions (Griffith, 1998). Shenenberger (2007) relayed the ways in which accompanists are integral in choral rehearsals, in that they affect the musical environment, phrase direction, tension/release of harmonies, tempo, sound, color, literacy growth, intonation, timbre, and intonation of the choir. If this is true, then certainly more research is warranted to investigate this relationship between ensemble, conductor, and accompanist. Nonverbal behaviors of eye contact, facial expression, body movement (Johnson, Fredrickson, Achey, & Gentry, 2003) and pre-conducting behaviors (Fredrickson, Johnson, & Robinson, 1998) greatly affect perceptions of conductor competence. Some researchers investigated participants’ differential responses to nonverbal (conducting gesture) and verbal instructions (Napoles, 2014; Skadsem, 1997), and results suggested that choral students performed more accurately when given verbal instructions. However, given the influential role of an accompanist in rehearsal, it seems prudent to examine these three cues relative to each other, especially because researchers have not examined responses in combination. For example, verbal cues and conducting gestures have been compared, including when the two modes were congruent or incongruent, in choral settings, but the accompaniment (a vital element for choirs, as cited above) has not been explored relative to these other modes. The purpose of this exploratory study was to examine three forms of communication in the choral rehearsal (verbal instructions, conducting gestures, and piano accompaniment) and to evaluate message congruence— operationally defined as a treatment condition with at least two of the three simultaneous communication forms exhibiting the same message for crescendo, decrescendo, or neither (no change). Two research questions guided this study: (1) Do singers respond better to dynamic instructions across two musical phrases (<>, ><, or no change) delivered verbally, through conducting gestures, or piano accompaniment? and (2) Do singers respond better to dynamics through messages that are congruent or incongruent?

Method Participants Participants were nine senior music education students, three females and six males, who had all taken a minimum of two conducting courses from different instructors (none with the researcher) and agreed to sing together as a group chorus. Two identified themselves as choral in emphasis, and the other seven identified themselves as instrumental in emphasis. They were all recruited from the current music education course offerings and met the criteria of having taken two conducting courses and being seniors. Preparation of the Stimulus Recording The first eight measures of God Bless America were chosen because the tune was familiar to the singers, it was of a moderate tempo, and it had two distinct musical ideas, which offered opportunities for expressivity. A student pianist was audio recorded after being asked to play these eight measures in three ways: (1) with a crescendo across the first four measures, followed by a decrescendo across the second four measures (< >), (2) with a decrescendo across the first four measures, followed by a crescendo across the second four measures (> <), and (3) with no change in dynamics (strict). The pianist also provided a two-measure introduction, which established a tonality and assisted singers with finding their first pitches.A university choral Nápoles 53 ensemble conductor with 20 years of teaching experience conducted with those same three conditions (displayed by an increase, decrease, or no change in the size of the pattern) while being videotaped. The pianist and conductor were each recorded multiple times in order to provide several “takes” of each condition. Three independent observers (graduate conductors) watched and listened to each recording (of the pianist and of the conductor) and selected a superior example for all three conditions, with a reliability of 94.4%. The audio from the pianist was then superimposed over the conductor’s gesture, in all nine combinations [(1) <> for both pianist and conductor, (2) >< for both pianist and conductor, (3) no change for both pianist and conductor, (4) <> for pianist/>< for conductor, (5) >< for pianist/<> for conductor, (6) no change for pianist, <> for conductor, (7) <> for pianist, no change for conductor, (8) >< for pianist, no change for conductor, and (9) no change for pianist, >< for conductor]. In addition, verbal instructions were inserted using video editing software, asking singers to sing with a crescendo for the first four measures then a decrescendo, the opposite, or just to sing God Bless America. The three communication modes (verbal, conducting gesture, and accompaniment) in three conditions yielded 27 different possibilities for responses, which the researcher considered a tiresome task for singers with diminishing returns. The nine stimuli with a decrescendo/ crescendo conducting gesture were eliminated, with the justification that participant fatigue would pose a threat to internal validity and similar information would be received as with the crescendo/decrescendo gesture. The final 18 stimuli are presented inT able 1. They erew arranged in a random order on the master DVD, which was 10 minutes and 19 seconds in duration.

Table 1. Conditions Defined Condition Verbal Conducting Performed Matching Agreement Instruction Gesture Accompaniment Modes A < > < > < > VGA Congruent B > < < > > < VA Congruent C < > < > > < VG Congruent D > < < > < > GA Congruent E none < > < > GA Congruent F none < > > < none Incongruent G < > < > strict VG Congruent H > < < > strict none Incongruent I none < > strict VA Congruent J < > strict < > VA Congruent K < > strict > < none Incongruent L > < strict > < VA Congruent M > < strict < > none Incongruent N none strict < > VG Congruent O none strict > < VG Congruent P none strict strict VGA Congruent Q < > strict strict GA Congruent R >< strict strict GA Congruent 54 Research Perspectives in Music Education

Design and Procedure In this exploratory study, participants reported to the university’s choral rehearsal room, sitting in two rows in the front center (four in the first row and five in the second row) and were taught the first eight measures of God Bless America. Text was written on the board during the rote learning process in a “my turn/your turn” phrase by phrase echoing (which did not involve conducting), continuing until pitches and rhythms were secure according to participants’ verbal affirmations. They were then directed to focus on the video screen (which was set up approximately 10 feet away, directly in front of them) and to sing those eight measures in a variety of ways, 18 different times. The master DVD video was projected onto that screen, with the speakers twelve feet apart, on both the left and right sides of the room, approximately 10 feet from the participants. The researcher recorded participants’ performances using a Zoom H2 recorder, with 16-bit resolution at a sampling rate of 44.1 kHz. The recorder was placed on a music stand directly in front of the ensemble/participants, about eight feet away, with the built-in microphone in the 90-degree directivity angle/front setting so that aural cues from the screen (behind the microphone) were less prominent. Input settings were in the medium microphone gain position, with the recording level at the default of 100dB, so that the meter indication would not exceed 100dB in the loudest passages. Analysis The 18 recorded audio (.wav) files were transferred to computer hard disk. The resulting sound files were analyzed using the computer software program Praat, designed to analyze frequency and other sound parameters with high accuracy (Boersma & Weenink, 2005). Praat has been used in music studies investigating pitch (Geringer & Allen, 2004; Geringer, Allen, & MacLeod, 2005) and dynamics (MacLeod, 2008). In the current study, Praat was used to analyze intensity/volume in order to determine objectively whether participants executed an increase in volume (crescendo) or a decrease in volume (decrescendo).

Results There were three data points: the first note of the first phrase (“God”), the last note of the first phrase (“love”), and the last note of the second phrase (“above”). These three data points were used to answer the research questions related to two phrases and dynamic direction for both. Because of the high sampling rate, an average (intensity score) was taken across a full beat at each of these data points. Differences in intensity yielded information about whether a crescendo or decrescendo had occurred in the first and second phrases.A positive difference in intensity ratings between “love” and “God,” for example, indicated that a crescendo was performed in the first phrase. Similarly, a negative difference between “above” and “love” indicated that a decrescendo was performed in the second phrase. When there was no difference in intensity (or less than one decibel), it was considered an appropriate response to a “no change” condition. Complete results are shown in Table 2, along with information regarding whether singers chose to follow instructions given verbally, through conducting gesture, or through accompaniment cues, arranged by condition and magnitude. Instances where decibel differences were smaller than 1dB were coded as strict, indicating neither a crescendo nor a decrescendo was perceptible. As can be seen, participants’ responses were consistent with verbal instructions 5 times, accompaniment cues 1 time, combined verbal and accompaniment 3 times, combined verbal and gesture 2 times, combined gesture and accompaniment 1 time, and combined verbal/gesture/accompaniment 1 time. Nápoles 55

There were no instances when participants responded to conducting gestures exclusively, and there were 5 instances when responses were inconsistent with all cues. Looking at the data a different way, there were 11 instances when verbal instructions were followed (whether alone or in combination with other cues), six instances when accompaniment cues were followed, and four instances when conducting gestures were followed. A chi square “goodness of fit” test was conducted with these three categories, testing the null hypothesis that observations would be even across the three categories, using an alpha level of .05. Results indicated a significant deviation from the expectation: X 2 (df = 2) = 3.71, p < .05. Singers responded better to requested dynamic changes across two phrases when following verbal instructions and least to conducting gestures.

Table 2. Singers’ Actual Performances: Mean dB Differences inI ntensity per Phrase by Condition Congruence and Magnitude Condition Mean Difference Mean Difference Actual Performance Consistent withb Middle-Beginninga Ending-Middle* A 11.23 -14.04 <, > VGA B -8.92 8.38 >, < VA C 4.06 -6.55 <, > VG D 1.69 3.33 <, < none E 6.41 -6.79 <, > GA F -0.11 -0.28 strict, strict V G 9.06 -12.45 <, > VG H -6.48 7.67 >, < V I -0.07 -5.24 strict, > none J 8.48 -16.43 <, > VA K 0.48 -7.96 strict, > none L -9.7 10.09 >, < VA M -4.9 6.38 >, < V N 0.9 -2.04 strict, > none O -1.15 3.23 >, < A P 0.16 -6.94 strict, > none Q 5.37 -8.6 <, > V R -6.1 5.74 >, < V

Discussion The purpose of this exploratory study was to compare three forms of communication in the choral rehearsal (verbal instructions, conducting gestures, and piano accompaniment) and determine whether singers respond to requested dynamics across two phrases better through one form or another. Results of this study indicate that singers responded most accurately to verbal instructions. Further, larger dynamic changes were evidenced when verbal instructions were reinforced by conducting gesture or piano accompaniment, suggesting that singers perform dynamic differences better when congruent messages are transmitted. This finding is important, in that a piano accompanist who follows the conductor’s instructions and/ or gestures could potentially assist singers through aural cues. Conversely, an accompanist who sends an incongruent message may confuse singers and possibly interfere with the 56 Research Perspectives in Music Education communication process in a choral rehearsal. Shenenberger (1997) discusses the unique role of the accompanist, and perhaps “assisting the conductor in communication” could be added to this list of responsibilities, given these results. When examining the results (Table 2), it is clear that the combination of verbal instructions, conducting gesture, and piano accompaniment yielded the most accurate response. When all cues were the same, the singers executed the desired crescendo and decrescendo with the largest mean dB difference. Some of the smaller mean differences occurred when conflicting cues were present. In some of these cases, participants were unsure which cue to follow, so their performance was a minimal crescendo or decrescendo, or none at all. This is perhaps one of the most interesting findings from this study and has practical applications for choral directors. When singers are told to follow an instruction, but the conducting gesture (visual cue) or piano accompaniment (aural cue) indicates a different instruction, they may choose not to follow the instruction or to follow it half-heartedly. It is unclear whether these choices are deliberate or subconscious. This study’s results parallel those of Napoles (2014) and Skadsem (1997) in that participants performed dynamic differences most accurately in response to verbal instructions than to other cues. It is possible that verbal instructions are simply more clearly understood, given participants’ experience with language is more prevalent than their experience with the conducting gesture. Further, perhaps there is less room for misunderstanding when a direct verbal instruction is given, as there is not an additional process of decoding. As with Napoles (2014), more effective performances were delivered when congruent messages were sent than when incongruent messages were sent. However, the added element of piano accompaniment had not been investigated in previous empirical studies. It is evident that the accompaniment facilitated or hindered the performance goal set forth; thus, further research is warranted with respect to the role of the accompanist in the choral rehearsal. While there are many fine pianists who accompany choral ensembles, the task of an accompanist is clearly unique (Shenenberger, 1997). Unlike the goals of a performer, which include executing correct pitches and rhythms in an expressive musical manner, the accompanist’s goals are to follow and support the choral director’s musical goals and facilitate the singers’ learning. Future studies could endeavor to determine strategies for assisting piano accompanists with following choral director’s instructions—both verbally and nonverbally. There were several limitations to this study. Because participants had printed instructions across the screen, it is possible that they believed their task was to follow those instructions exclusively, irrespective of the conducting gesture and piano cues. Verbal communication, whether written or aural, is most common to students at every level, whereas conducting gestures and aural piano cues may be more novel, requiring an additional step in the decoding process. In addition, the conductor on the videotape was not the participants’ regular conductor, so there may have been some interpretation needed in order to execute instructions delivered nonverbally. These results are not generalizable, as this exploratory study was conducted at one institution, in one context, with these particular singers. Further, these singers did not constitute an established chorus. Additional research in other contexts, with existing choirs and multiple teachers, would isolate the variables more successfully and specifically. It is important for researchers to continue examining issues related to effective communication in the choral rehearsal, as singers receive a variety of cues and are expected to follow instructions. Given that conducting gestures have become the primary form of nonverbal communication, especially in performances when verbal instructions are not possible, further research is needed in order to understand and assist students’ recognition of Nápoles 57 these gestures. Future investigations that examine the role of the accompanist as a collaborator with the conductor and ensemble can enhance this relationship and the musical experience in choral settings.

References A tterbury, B. W., & Silcox, L. (1993). The effect of piano accompaniment on kindergartners’ developmental singing ability. Journal of Research in Music Education, 41, 40-47. doi: 10.2307/3345478 Boersma, P., & Weenink, D. (2005). Praat: Doing phonetics by computer (version 4.3). [Computer software]. Amsterdam. The NetherlandsI nstitute of Phonetic Sciences. University of Amsterdam. Brittin, R. V. (1993). Effects of upper register and lower register accompaniment on intonation. Journal of Band Research, 29, 43-50. Brittin, R. V. (2000). Children’s preference for sequenced accompaniments: The influence of style and perceived tempo. Journal of Research in Music Education, 48, 237-248. doi: 10.2307/3345396 Brittin, R. C. (2000/2001). Preferences for children’s music: Effects of sequenced accompaniments, school culture, and media association. Bulletin of the Council for Research in Music Education, 147, 40-45. Brittin, R. V. (2002). Instrumentalists’ assessment of solo performances with compact disc, piano, or no accompaniment. Journal of Research in Music Education, 50, 63-74. doi: 10.2307/3345693 Corso, J. F. (1954). Unison tuning of musical instruments. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 26, 745-750. Fredrickson, W. E., Johnson, C. M., & Robinson, C. R. (1988). The effect of pre-conducting and conducting behaviors on the evaluation of conductor competence. Journal of Band Research, 33, 1-13. Geringer, J. M. (1978). Intonational performance and perception of ascending scales. Journal of Research in Music Education, 26, 32-40. doi: 10.2307/3344787 Geringer, J. M., & Allen, M. L. (2004). An analysis of vibrato among high school and university violin and cello students. Journal of Research in Music Education, 52, 167-178. doi: 10.2307/3345438 Geringer, J. M., Allen, M. L., & MacLeod, R. B. (2005). Initial movement and continuity in vibrato among high school and university string players. Journal of Research in Music Education, 53, 248-259. doi: 10.1177/002242940505300306 Geringer, J. M., & Madsen, C. K. (1998). Musicians’ ratings of good versus bad vocal and string performances. Journal of Research in Music Education, 46, 522-534. doi: 10.2307/3345348 Geringer, J. M., Madsen, C. K., & Dunnigan, P. (2001). Trumpet tone quality versus intonation revisited: Two extensions. Bulletin of the Council for Research in Music Education, 148, 65- 76. Griffith, B. (1998, July 25). Expectations for an accompanist [Electronic mailing list message]. Retrieved from www.choralnet.org/view/220362. Guilbault, D. M. (2004). The effect of harmonic accompaniment on the tonal achievement and tonal improvisations of children in Kindergarten and first grade. Journal of Research in Music Education, 52, 64-76. doi: 10.2307/3345525 58 Research Perspectives in Music Education

Hale, M. R. (1977). An experimental study of the comparative effectiveness of harmonic and melodic accompaniment in singing as it relates to the development of a sense of tonality. Bulletin of the Council for Research in Music Education, 53, 23-30. Hamann, D. L., & Banister, S. (1991). Factors contributing to high school band students’ ratings at solo and ensemble festival. Contributions to Music Education, 18, 57-65. Hedden, D. G., & Baker, V. A. (2010). Perceptual and acoustical analyses of second graders’ pitch-matching ability in singing a cappella or with piano. Bulletin of the Council for Research in Music Education, 184, 35-48. Johnson, C., M., Fredrickson, W. E., Achey, C. A., & Gentry, G. R. (2003). The effect of nonverbal elements of conducting on the overall evaluation of student and professional conductors. Journal of Band Research, 38, 64-79. Kantorski, C. J. (1986). String instrument intonation in upper and lower registers: The effects of accompaniment. Journal of Research in Music Education, 34, 200-210. doi: 10.2307/3344749 Karrick, B. (1998). An examination of the intonation tendencies of wind instrumentalists based on their performance of selected harmonic musical intervals. Journal of Research in Music Education, 46, 112-127. doi: 10.2307/3345764 MacLeod, R. B. (2008). Influences of dynamic level and pitch registers on the vibrato rates and widths of violin and viola players. Journal of Research in Music Education, 56, 43-54. doi: 10.1177/0022429408323070 Madsen, C. K., & Geringer, J. M. (1976). Preferences for trumpet tone quality versus intonation. Bulletin of the Council for Research in Music Education, 46, 13-22. Madsen, C. K., & Geringer, J. M., & Heller, J. (1991). Comparison of good versus bad intonation of accompanied and unaccompanied vocal and string performances using a continuous response digital interface (CRDI). Canadian Music Educator: Special Research Edition, 33, 123-130. Madsen, C. K., & Geringer, J. M., & Heller, J. (1993). Comparison of good versus bad tone quality of accompanied and unaccompanied vocal and string performances. Bulletin of the Council for Research in Music Education, 119, 93-100. Moog, H. (1976). The development of musical experience in children of preschool age. Psychology of Music, 4, 38-45. Napoles, J. (2014). Verbal instructions and conducting gestures: Examining two modes of communication. Journal of Music Teacher Education, Advance online publication. doi: 10.1177/1057083712474936 Petzold, R. (1966). Auditory perception of musical sounds by children in the first six grades. Washington, DC: U. S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, Cooperative Research Project No. 1051. Sheldon, D. A., Reese, S., & Grashel, J. (1999). The effects of live accompaniment, intelligent digital accompaniment, and no accompaniment on musicians’ performance quality. Journal of Research in Music Education, 47, 251-265. doi: 10.2307/3345783 Shenenberger, M. (2007). The new role of the accompanist: From the perspective of the accompanist. In J. Jordan (Ed.) Evoking Sound. The Choral Rehearsal, volume 1 (pp. 185- 200). Chicago: GIA. Skadsem, J. A. (1997). Effect of conductor verbalization, dynamic markings, conductor gesture, and choir dynamic level on singers’ dynamic responses. Journal of Research in Music Education, 45, 509-520. doi: 10.2307/3345419 Nápoles 59

Small, A. R. (1977). The effect of a simultaneous melodic stimulus on harmony intonation of college singers. (Doctoral dissertation, The Florida State University, 1977). Dissertation Abstracts International, 38, 5118-A. Stauffer, S.L . (1985). An investigation of the effects of melodic and harmonic context on the development of singing ability in primary grade children (Doctoral dissertation, The University of Michigan). Dissertation Abstracts International, 46, 1862A. Sterling, P. A. (1984). A developmental study of the effects of accompanying harmonic context on children’s vocal pitch accuracy of familiar melodies. (Doctoral dissertation, University of Miami). Dissertation Abstracts International, 45, 2436A. Vorce, F. W., Jr. (1964). The effect of simultaneous stimulus on vocal pitch accuracy (Doctoral dissertation, The Florida State University, 1964). Dissertation Abstracts International, 25, 5327.