Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24667562›Full record

ArticlePLoS biology2014

The evolutionary biology of musical rhythm: was Darwin wrong?

Aniruddh D Patel

Erratum issuedAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PLoS biology, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 71 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
71citing 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

71 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Critical Review on the Development and Evolution of Beat Perception.Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences · 2026
    Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Measuring rhythms of vocal interactions: a proof of principle in harbour seal pups.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2023
    Article
  16. Review
  17. Why art? The role of arts in arts and health.Frontiers in psychology · 2023
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

11 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

  • Erratum issued
5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Aniruddh D PatelDepartment of Psychology, Tufts University, Medford, Massachusetts, United States of America.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In The Descent of Man, Darwin speculated that our capacity for musical rhythm reflects basic aspects of brain function broadly shared among animals. Although this remains an appealing idea, it is being challenged by modern cross-species research. This research hints that our capacity to synchronize to a beat, i.e., to move in time with a perceived pulse in a manner that is predictive and flexible across a broad range of tempi, may be shared by only a few other species. Is this really the case? If so, it would have important implications for our understanding of the evolution of human musicality.

Indexed as

Biological EvolutionAcoustic StimulationAnimalsHumansMusicSpecies Specificity

Identifiers

PMID24667562
PMCPMC3965380

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.