Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25346705›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in psychology2014

Chorusing, synchrony, and the evolutionary functions of rhythm.

Andrea Ravignani, Daniel L Bowling, W Tecumseh Fitch

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 74 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
74citing papers in PubMed
6.1field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
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

74 citing papers in PubMed, 166 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. The role of musical pitch in long-distance defensive signaling.Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences · 2025
    Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Cetaceans are the next frontier for vocal rhythm research.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2024
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

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

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Andrea RavignaniDepartment of Cognitive Biology, Faculty of Life Sciences, University of Vienna, Vienna Austria.
Daniel L BowlingDepartment of Cognitive Biology, Faculty of Life Sciences, University of Vienna, Vienna Austria.
W Tecumseh FitchDepartment of Cognitive Biology, Faculty of Life Sciences, University of Vienna, Vienna Austria.
University of Vienna · AT

Funding

European Research Council 230604
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

A central goal of biomusicology is to understand the biological basis of human musicality. One approach to this problem has been to compare core components of human musicality (relative pitch perception, entrainment, etc.) with similar capacities in other animal species. Here we extend and clarify this comparative approach with respect to rhythm. First, whereas most comparisons between human music and animal acoustic behavior have focused on spectral properties (melody and harmony), we argue for the central importance of temporal properties, and propose that this domain is ripe for further comparative research. Second, whereas most rhythm research in non-human animals has examined animal timing in isolation, we consider how chorusing dynamics can shape individual timing, as in human music and dance, arguing that group behavior is key to understanding the adaptive functions of rhythm. To illustrate the interdependence between individual and chorusing dynamics, we present a computational model of chorusing agents relating individual call timing with synchronous group behavior. Third, we distinguish and clarify mechanistic and functional explanations of rhythmic phenomena, often conflated in the literature, arguing that this distinction is key for understanding the evolution of musicality. Fourth, we expand biomusicological discussions beyond the species typically considered, providing an overview of chorusing and rhythmic behavior across a broad range of taxa (orthopterans, fireflies, frogs, birds, and primates). Finally, we propose an "Evolving Signal Timing" hypothesis, suggesting that similarities between timing abilities in biological species will be based on comparable chorusing behaviors. We conclude that the comparative study of chorusing species can provide important insights into the adaptive function(s) of rhythmic behavior in our "proto-musical" primate ancestors, and thus inform our understanding of the biology and evolution of rhythm in human music and language.

Indexed as

chorusingcoupled oscillatorsevolution of communicationisochronymusic perceptionrhythmsynchronizationtiming

Identifiers

PMID25346705
PMCPMC4193405
OpenAlexW2069138632

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.