Humans can find rhythm in randomly timed sounds

Humans are keen pattern-seekers and take advantage of regularities present in their environment. In the temporal domain, we may call these patterns rhythms, but what is rhythm? Definitions vary, but all presuppose a categorical distinction between rhythm and randomness. Here, we challenge this view and show that two types of random sound sequences-classically considered arrhythmic by experimenters-differ in the amount of regularity humans reconstruct from them. When asked to synchronize to randomly timed sounds, participants leverage statistics to estimate the underlying tempo of the sequence, similar to linear statistical estimators. Theoretically, our results challenge current definitions of rhythm by showing that rhythmicity and randomness are instances of a continuum. Methodologically, our data and mathematical model show that a common method for creating random timing, namely the jittering of event onsets, introduces an undesirable regularity that humans readily exploit. New experiments should aim to maximize temporal randomness, and past experiments' outcomes require reconsideration.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Royal Society Open Science
Published
2025-08-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1098/rsos.250453
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Neuroscience and Music Perception
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
1.43

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Humans can find rhythm in randomly timed sounds

Jelle van der Werff, Andrea Ravignani, Laura Verga, Tommaso Tufarelli
1 citations
Royal Society Open Science
Neuroscience and Music Perception
1.43
article

Humans can find rhythm in randomly timed sounds

Jelle van der Werff, Andrea Ravignani, Laura Verga, Tommaso Tufarelli
article en
1 citations

Abstract

Humans are keen pattern-seekers and take advantage of regularities present in their environment. In the temporal domain, we may call these patterns rhythms, but what is rhythm? Definitions vary, but all presuppose a categorical distinction between rhythm and randomness. Here, we challenge this view and show that two types of random sound sequences-classically considered arrhythmic by experimenters-differ in the amount of regularity humans reconstruct from them. When asked to synchronize to randomly timed sounds, participants leverage statistics to estimate the underlying tempo of the sequence, similar to linear statistical estimators. Theoretically, our results challenge current definitions of rhythm by showing that rhythmicity and randomness are instances of a continuum. Methodologically, our data and mathematical model show that a common method for creating random timing, namely the jittering of event onsets, introduces an undesirable regularity that humans readily exploit. New experiments should aim to maximize temporal randomness, and past experiments' outcomes require reconsideration.

Royal Society Open ScienceVol. 12(8)
Maastricht University (NL), Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics (NL), Locate Bio (United Kingdom) (GB), Royal Academy of Music (DK), Sapienza University of Rome (IT)
Danmarks Grundforskningsfond, European Research Council
Openalex Percentile: Top 16%
Neuroscience and Music Perception
1.43
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.