Attention
Melody Continuation Task
Also called: melodic expectation, melodic expectancy, continuation ratings, continuation tone ratings, implication-realization model tests
Measure which melody continuations sound right: listeners hear the start of a melody through headphones, then one more note, and rate how well it continues. Ratings are scored against pitch proximity and reversal.
5-7 minUntimed
Free to start: 10 free participants per account, then $0.99 per participant for academic research, or any yearly plan. Try it here first, with no account.
- Papers, 2021 to 2025
- 34
- Evidence grade
- D
- Registered clinical studies
- 0
What it measures
Measures which melody continuations sound right to a listener. Participants hear two notes as the start of a melody, then a third note, and rate how well it continues the melody. Scores relate the ratings to how near the third note is and whether it turns back after a leap. There is no correct rating.
Constructs
- Melodic expectation
- Pitch proximity
- Music perception
Research uses
- Music perception research
- Musical experience research
- Music cognition research
How the paradigm works
Melodic expectation research asks which next notes listeners expect. Two notes heard as the start of a melody are followed by a third, and listeners rate how well it continues the melody. Cuddy and Lunney's listeners rated nearer third notes, and third notes that returned toward the first note, as better continuations, with no difference between musically trained and untrained listeners.
More about the paradigm
Set a comfortable volume and take the 6-trial headphone check. A failed check stops the task by default; researchers can continue with a quality flag.
Beginnings: a major second (2 semitones) and a major sixth (9 semitones), up and down. Third notes: 1, 2, 3, 5, 7 and 9 semitones up and down from the second note.
The first note lasts 1,200 ms and the second 400 ms, then the third plays for 800 ms, back to back. Each note has harmonics 1 to 8 at amplitude 1/harmonic number and 10 ms ramps. The second and third notes play 10 dB below the volume-setting tone and the first note 40% higher in amplitude, as in Cuddy and Lunney (1995).
Press Play, listen once, then rate from 1 (very bad continuation) to 7 (very good continuation), with no time limit. There is no correct rating.
Every beginning with every third note gives 48 melodies in a seeded order: 48 scored ratings. The second note is C4 in half of them and F#4 in the other half, balanced over beginnings, steps and directions. With 2 repetitions every melody plays again from the other second note: 96 ratings.
2 practice ratings on a rising fourth used nowhere else, followed by the chosen number for 1,000 ms. The task gives no advice on which notes fit.
The primary score is the Pearson correlation between ratings and pitch proximity, coded so that nearer third notes give a positive fit. The correlation with a reversal code (1 for turning back after the major sixth, plus 1 for landing within 2 semitones of the first note), the multiple correlation of both, ratings after the major sixth for turning back minus going on, mean ratings by step and the mean rating accompany it. Answers under 100 ms from the rating buttons opening leave scores.
Scores
- Proximity fitscore
- Pearson correlation between ratings and the nearness of the third note (minus its step in semitones). Null with fewer than three ratings or no variation.
- Higher means nearer third notes were rated as better continuations; descriptive
- Reversal fitscore
- Pearson correlation between ratings and the reversal code: 1 for turning back after the major sixth, plus 1 for landing within 2 semitones of the first note.
- Higher means turning back was rated as a better continuation; descriptive
- Two-factor fitscore
- Multiple correlation of ratings with proximity and the reversal code together.
- Higher means the two codes account for more of the ratings; descriptive
- Turn after a leapscore
- After the major sixth, mean rating of third notes that turn back minus those that go on in the same direction; scale points.
- Descriptive; no better direction
- Ratings by stepscore
- Mean rating for each step of the third note in semitones: + keys go on in the direction of the first two notes, - keys turn back.
- Descriptive; no better direction
- Mean ratingscore
- Average usable rating on the 1 to 7 scale.
- Descriptive; no better direction
- Median answer timems
- Median time after rating buttons open.
- Informational
- Anticipationscount
- Ratings under 100 ms, excluded from scores.
- Informational
- Completed trialstrials
- Valid ratings in the selected run.
- Informational
- Planned trialstrials
- Number planned in the selected run.
- Informational
- Headphone check passedscore
- 1 for a passed equipment check, 0 for a failed check.
- Informational
- Headphone check correctcount
- Correct equipment-check responses out of six.
- Informational
- Reported output delayms
- Output delay reported by the browser, empty when unavailable.
- Informational
Use and evidence
34 papers from 2021 to 2025 name this task in their title or abstract, up 36% compared with 2016 to 2020. That ranks it 417 of 582 test families in our census. See the counts for every test.
Show the numbers
| Year | Papers |
|---|---|
| 2025 | 7 |
| 2024 | 15 |
| 2023 | 2 |
| 2022 | 4 |
| 2021 | 6 |
| 2020 | 7 |
| 2019 | 3 |
| 2018 | 4 |
| 2017 | 3 |
| 2016 | 8 |
| 2015 | 7 |
| 2014 | 2 |
| 2013 | 4 |
| 2012 | 7 |
| 2011 | 1 |
| 2010 | 0 |
| 2009 | 3 |
| 2008 | 3 |
| 2007 | 1 |
| 2006 | 3 |
| 2005 | 2 |
| 2004 | 2 |
| 2003 | 5 |
| 2002 | 3 |
| 2001 | 0 |
| 2000 | 5 |
Use grade D
30 to 99 papers from 2021 to 2025.
Evidence grade D
Little published measurement evidence found.
- Papers on test-retest reliability
- 0
- Papers on reliability or validity
- 3
- Registered clinical studies using it as an outcome
- 0
Measured on ConductCognition
Pooled across the studies that feed our platform norms, by device group. A figure needs 50 or more people.
No pooled figure yet.
How the grades work
Use: A is 1,000 or more papers from 2021 to 2025, B 300 to 999, C 100 to 299, D 30 to 99 and E fewer than 30. Evidence: A means at least 25 papers report its test-retest reliability and at least 25 registered clinical studies use it as an outcome; B, at least 8 test-retest papers, and either 5 registered clinical studies or 150 reliability or validity papers; C, at least 2 test-retest papers, 30 reliability or validity papers or 3 registered clinical studies; D, little published measurement evidence found. The counts measure use. They include every paper that names the task in its title or abstract. Grades describe the published research on this task, not ConductCognition's version of it.
Source: ConductCognition test census 0.39.0, counted 10 November 2026 from OpenAlex and ClinicalTrials.gov.
Task design
The trial sequence as the test runs in ConductCognition.
- Sound setup
- Set a comfortable volume and take the 6-trial headphone check. A failed check stops the task by default; researchers can continue with a quality flag.
- Melodies
- Beginnings of a major second (2 semitones) and a major sixth (9 semitones), up and down, each followed by a third note 1, 2, 3, 5, 7 or 9 semitones up or down: 48 melodies. The second note is C4 or F#4, balanced over beginnings, steps and directions.
- Sound
- A 1,200 ms first note, a 400 ms second note and an 800 ms third note, back to back. Harmonics 1 to 8 at amplitude 1/harmonic number, 10 ms ramps; the second and third notes 10 dB below the volume-setting tone and the first 40% higher in amplitude.
- Trial
- Press Play, listen once, then rate from 1 (very bad continuation) to 7 (very good continuation), with no time limit. There is no correct rating.
- Trials
- 48 scored ratings in a seeded order. With 2 repetitions every melody plays again from the other second note: 96 ratings.
- Practice
- 2 practice ratings on a rising fourth used nowhere else, followed by the chosen number for 1,000 ms. The task gives no advice on which notes fit.
- Scores
- The primary score is the Pearson correlation between ratings and pitch proximity, coded so that nearer third notes give a positive fit. The correlation with a reversal code (turning back after the major sixth, plus landing within 2 semitones of the first note), the multiple correlation of both, turning back minus going on after the major sixth, mean ratings by step and the mean rating accompany it. Answers under 100 ms from the rating buttons opening leave scores.
Our generated melodies follow the continuation-rating method of Cuddy and Lunney (1995), with 48 of their 200 patterns and our own reversal code. The scores describe ratings within this task, with no percentile. Headphones, normal hearing and a comfortable volume are required; levels are relative rather than calibrated. Results do not assess hearing or musical ability.
Quality checks
Each session is marked valid, needs review or invalid, with the reason, before you see its scores.
Scored rows: melody_continuation_test from the selected run, ratings from 1 to 7 after the third note. Ratings have no correct answer. One rating throughout and an incomplete run are flagged for review; ratings under 100 ms leave scores and invalidate when at least half. A failed headphone check is flagged when continued, and a stopped check leaves no results.
Why these rules
There is no correct option to compare with chance, so accuracy is not judged against chance. A listener can hear any continuation as fitting or rate every melody alike, so repeated ratings flag review only. Answer buttons open after the third note finishes.
No percentile. Scores and quality flags only.
Running this test
Settings you can change
| Setting | Standard | Allowed |
|---|---|---|
| When the headphone check fails | Stop the test | Stop the test, Continue the test |
| Repetitions | 1 | 1 to 2 |
Yearly plans can change settings within these limits. Free and pay-as-you-go studies use the standard settings.
Need a setting this test does not have?
Devices and languages
- Untimed test: runs on desktops, laptops, tablets and phones. Needs headphones. Participant devices
- Languages: English, Spanish, French, German, Italian, Portuguese (Brazil), Chinese (Simplified) and Japanese.
- Available on: Every plan, including the free plan.
- No percentile. Scores and quality flags only. How norms work
- Recruiting online? See the setup guides for Prolific, Sona Systems, CloudResearch Connect and Qualtrics.
Cite and describe
Participants completed the Melody Continuation Task in a web browser (ConductCognition task version 1.0.0, scoring version 1.0.0; Cuddy and Lunney, 1995; Schmuckler, 1989), with the standard settings (when the headphone check fails: Stop the test; repetitions: 1). The main score was proximity fit (pearson correlation between ratings and the nearness of the third note (minus its step in semitones)).
ConductCognition versions: task version 1.0.0, scoring version 1.0.0. Every export records the versions each session used, for a methods section.
- Cuddy, L. L., & Lunney, C. A. (1995). Expectancies generated by melodic intervals: Perceptual judgments of melodic continuity. Perception & Psychophysics, 57(4), 451-462. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03213071Two-note beginnings, third notes, note lengths and levels, the 1 to 7 continuation scale and the codes for proximity, registral direction and registral return.
- Schmuckler, M. A. (1989). Expectation in music: Investigation of melodic and harmonic processes. Music Perception, 7(2), 109-149. https://doi.org/10.2307/40285454Perceptual expectancies for melodic continuations in musically trained listeners; our melodies are generated rather than taken from its passages.
- Pearce, M. T., & Wiggins, G. A. (2006). Expectation in melody: The influence of context and learning. Music Perception, 23(5), 377-405. https://doi.org/10.1525/mp.2006.23.5.377Describes the two-factor model of pitch proximity and pitch reversal and its fit to Cuddy and Lunney's ratings.
- Woods, K. J. P., Siegel, M. H., Traer, J., & McDermott, J. H. (2017). Headphone screening to facilitate web-based auditory experiments. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 79(7), 2064-2072. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13414-017-1361-2The shared headphone check.
Source papers
- Cuddy, L. L., & Lunney, C. A. (1995). Expectancies generated by melodic intervals: Perceptual judgments of melodic continuity. Perception & Psychophysics, 57(4), 451-462.Paradigm source, Adults
Questions
How long does the Melody Continuation Task take?
About 5 to 7 minutes, as listed in the test library.
What device does a participant need?
Untimed test: runs on desktops, laptops, tablets and phones. Needs headphones. The browser must be Chrome, Edge, Firefox or Safari.
What scores does it produce?
Proximity fit, Reversal fit, Two-factor fit, Turn after a leap, Ratings by step, Mean rating, Median answer time, Anticipations, Completed trials, Planned trials, Headphone check passed, Headphone check correct and Reported output delay. Each session is also marked valid, needs review or invalid, with the reason.
How widely is the Melody Continuation Task used in research?
34 papers from 2021 to 2025 name it in their title or abstract, up 36% compared with 2016 to 2020. That ranks it 417 of 582 test families in the ConductCognition test census (use grade D). Source: ConductCognition test census 0.39.0, counted 10 November 2026 from OpenAlex and ClinicalTrials.gov.
How much reliability evidence does the Melody Continuation Task have?
In the published research, 0 papers report its test-retest reliability and 0 registered clinical studies use it as an outcome (evidence grade D in the ConductCognition test census).
Does it report a percentile?
No. Scores and quality flags only.
Which settings can a researcher change?
When the headphone check fails (Stop the test, Continue the test) and repetitions (1 to 2). Settings can be changed on yearly plans; free and pay-as-you-go studies use the standard settings.
Which languages can participants use?
Participants can take this test in English, Spanish, French, German, Italian, Portuguese (Brazil), Chinese (Simplified) and Japanese. English is on every plan, and the other languages come with yearly plans. Have a native speaker read the machine-translated text before launch.
Is this a clinical test?
No. ConductCognition is for research use only. It runs, scores and exports the test; clinical interpretation is outside the platform.
Every test: the full test list.
Run this test in your next study
Start free with 10 free participants on any test, then use participant credits or a yearly plan.