Talk:Amusia: Difference between revisions
Justindchien (talk | contribs) |
Justindchien (talk | contribs) |
||
| Line 17: | Line 17: | ||
The title "history" is a little misleading because when I first read it, i thought it was a history of the disease and how it progressed. It seems to be more of the history of research or discovery of the disease which could possibly be incorporated into the introduction or with further elaboration, become it's own section. Maybe renaming the section "discovery" could clarify initial confusion. |
The title "history" is a little misleading because when I first read it, i thought it was a history of the disease and how it progressed. It seems to be more of the history of research or discovery of the disease which could possibly be incorporated into the introduction or with further elaboration, become it's own section. Maybe renaming the section "discovery" could clarify initial confusion. |
||
Also, in "social and emotional impact," there seems only to be issues involving social problems and does not address emotional impact. Either addition of emotional impacts or changing the title to "social impacts" could be more appropriate. |
Also, in "social and emotional impact," there seems only to be issues involving social problems and does not address emotional impact. Either addition of emotional impacts or changing the title to "social impacts" could be more appropriate. |
||
This is an interesting topic and you guys do a good job in addressing many points. keep up the good work! [[User:Justindchien|Justindchien]] ([[User talk:Justindchien|talk]]) 01:20, 29 November 2009 (UTC) |
This is an interesting topic and you guys do a good job in addressing many points. keep up the good work! |
||
: [[User:Justindchien|Justindchien]] ([[User talk:Justindchien|talk]]) 01:20, 29 November 2009 (UTC) |
|||
Revision as of 01:20, 29 November 2009
 | Medicine: Neurology B‑class Mid‑importance | ||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||
Relationship to Tone deafness?
How does this relate to Tone deafness? DavidRF 04:01, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
- Tone deafness is also called congenital amusia, but amusia is a more general neurological term for any kind of music processing impairment, while tone deafness is specific to pitch processing.
- I will try to come back again with more references and beef this up a bit better. The dissociation between rhythm, melody and emotional processing is pretty clearly demonstrated at this point, but Sacks isn't the best reference for it. He's not, honestly, a great reference for anything. He's kind of fast and loose with his bibliography, but he does highlight some cool case studies that might be worth describing in this article.
- --Hurtstotouchfire (talk) 01:23, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
Although you said that there is no known treatment to amusia, you touch upon tone differentiation techniques. It is interesting that you wrote that only children responded well - why is this? Can you go into any more detail about these techniques? For what reason did adults find it "annoying"? Lildevil3221 (talk) 01:43, 23 November 2009 (UTC)
I think it would be good to include a picture of the brain with the areas responsible for pitch recognition. There is also a BBC link on the Science frontiers that talks about amusia, where a test for amusia is also included. You might want to include the link to that test in this page. I also think that it's important to include the role of Broca's area in processing musical sytax and the role of wernickes area in music perception. This is one of the articles that discussed the role of broca's area in music syntax, Nature Neuroscience 4, 540 - 545 (2001) doi:10.1038/87502. I'm sure there were other articles relating to it. Good luck!Kristaqkoci (talk) 28:08, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
Peer Reviews
You claim that there is no effective treatment to Amusia but is there any current research going on to help it? Plus, since there are no effective treatments, some must have been attempted. Perhaps going over a few of the treatments which failed and why they failed may give a good insight to the subject. The title "history" is a little misleading because when I first read it, i thought it was a history of the disease and how it progressed. It seems to be more of the history of research or discovery of the disease which could possibly be incorporated into the introduction or with further elaboration, become it's own section. Maybe renaming the section "discovery" could clarify initial confusion. Also, in "social and emotional impact," there seems only to be issues involving social problems and does not address emotional impact. Either addition of emotional impacts or changing the title to "social impacts" could be more appropriate. This is an interesting topic and you guys do a good job in addressing many points. keep up the good work!