Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22711832›Full record

ArticleProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America2012

Evolution of music by public choice.

Robert M MacCallum, Matthias Mauch, Austin Burt, Armand M Leroi

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

18 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. The cultural evolution of distortion in music (and other norms of mixed appeal).Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2025
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Selection, adaptation, inheritance and design in human culture: the view from the Price equation.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2020
    Article
  8. The pace of modern culture.Nature human behaviour · 2020
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. The evolution of popular music: USA 1960-2010.Royal Society open science · 2015
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Effect of psychological bias separates cultural from biological evolution.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2012
    Article
  18. Adaptive walks on the fitness landscape of music.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2012
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Robert M MacCallumDepartment of Life Sciences, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom. uncoolbob@gmail.com
Matthias Mauch
Austin Burt
Armand M Leroi

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Music evolves as composers, performers, and consumers favor some musical variants over others. To investigate the role of consumer selection, we constructed a Darwinian music engine consisting of a population of short audio loops that sexually reproduce and mutate. This population evolved for 2,513 generations under the selective influence of 6,931 consumers who rated the loops' aesthetic qualities. We found that the loops quickly evolved into music attributable, in part, to the evolution of aesthetically pleasing chords and rhythms. Later, however, evolution slowed. Applying the Price equation, a general description of evolutionary processes, we found that this stasis was mostly attributable to a decrease in the fidelity of transmission. Our experiment shows how cultural dynamics can be explained in terms of competing evolutionary forces.

Indexed as

Cultural EvolutionModels, TheoreticalMusicAcoustic StimulationAlgorithmsComputer SimulationConsumer BehaviorEstheticsHumans

Identifiers

PMID22711832
PMCPMC3409751

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.