Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37407601›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2023

Humans recognize affective cues in primate vocalizations: acoustic and phylogenetic perspectives.

C Debracque, K E Slocombe, Z Clay, D Grandjean, T Gruber

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing 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

10 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. The role of musical pitch in long-distance defensive signaling.Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences · 2025
    Review
  5. Review
  6. Rough is salient: a conserved vocal niche to hijack the brain's salience system.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2025
    Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
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

5 authors.

C DebracqueDepartment of Psychology and Educational Sciences and Swiss Center for Affective Sciences (CISA), Campus Biotech, University of Geneva, Chemin des Mines 9, 1202, Geneva, Switzerland. coralie.debracque@unige.ch.
K E SlocombeDepartment of Psychology, University of York, York, UK.
Z ClayDepartment of Psychology, Durham University, Durham, UK.
D GrandjeanDepartment of Psychology and Educational Sciences and Swiss Center for Affective Sciences (CISA), Campus Biotech, University of Geneva, Chemin des Mines 9, 1202, Geneva, Switzerland.
T GruberDepartment of Psychology and Educational Sciences and Swiss Center for Affective Sciences (CISA), Campus Biotech, University of Geneva, Chemin des Mines 9, 1202, Geneva, Switzerland.

Funding

Swiss National Science Foundation CR13I1_162720
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Humans are adept at extracting affective information from vocalizations of humans and other animals. However, the extent to which human recognition of vocal affective cues of other species is due to cross-taxa similarities in acoustic parameters or the phylogenetic closeness between species is currently unclear. To address this, we first analyzed acoustic variation in 96 affective vocalizations, taken from agonistic and affiliative contexts, of humans and three other primates-rhesus macaques (Macaca mulatta), chimpanzees and bonobos (Pan troglodytes and Pan paniscus). Acoustic analyses revealed that agonistic chimpanzee and bonobo vocalizations were similarly distant from agonistic human voices, but chimpanzee affiliative vocalizations were significantly closer to human affiliative vocalizations, than those of bonobos, indicating a potential derived vocal evolution in the bonobo lineage. Second, we asked 68 human participants to categorize and also discriminate vocalizations based on their presumed affective content. Results showed that participants reliably categorized human and chimpanzee vocalizations according to affective content, but not bonobo threat vocalizations nor any macaque vocalizations. Participants discriminated all species calls above chance level except for threat calls by bonobos and macaques. Our results highlight the importance of both phylogenetic and acoustic parameter level explanations in cross-species affective perception, drawing a more complex picture to the origin of vocal emotions.

Indexed as

CuesPan troglodytesAcousticsAnimalsHumansMacaca mulattaPan paniscusPhylogeny

Identifiers

PMID37407601
PMCPMC10322975

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.