Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37907580›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2023

How being perceived to be an artist boosts feelings of attraction in others.

Eugen Wassiliwizky, Paul Wontorra, Fredrik Ullén

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 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
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.

Eugen WassiliwizkyDepartment of Cognitive Neuropsychology, Max Planck Institute for Empirical Aesthetics, Grueneburgweg 14, 60322, Frankfurt am Main, Germany. eugen.wassiliwizky@ae.mpg.de.ORCID 0000-0002-1087-1657
Paul WontorraDepartment of Cognitive Neuropsychology, Max Planck Institute for Empirical Aesthetics, Grueneburgweg 14, 60322, Frankfurt am Main, Germany.
Fredrik UllénDepartment of Cognitive Neuropsychology, Max Planck Institute for Empirical Aesthetics, Grueneburgweg 14, 60322, Frankfurt am Main, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Music production is a universal phenomenon reaching far back into our past. Given its ubiquity, evolution theorists have postulated adaptive functions for music, such as strengthening in-group cohesion, intimidating enemies, or promoting child bonding. Here, we focus on a longstanding Darwinian hypothesis, suggesting that music production evolved as a vehicle to display an individual's biological fitness in courtship competition, thus rendering musicality a sexually selected trait. We also extend this idea to visual artists. In our design, we employed different versions of naturalistic portraits that manipulated the presence or absence of visual cues suggesting that the person was an artist or a non-artist (e.g., farmer, teacher, physician). Participants rated each portrayed person's appeal on multiple scales, including attractiveness, interestingness, sympathy, and trustworthiness. Difference scores between portrait versions revealed the impact of the artistic/non-artistic visual cues. We thus tested Darwin's hypothesis on both a within-subject and within-stimulus level. In addition to this implicit approach, we collected explicit ratings on the appeal of artists versus non-artists. The results demonstrate divergent findings for both types of data, with only the explicit statements corroborating Darwin's hypothesis. We discuss this divergence in detail, along with the particular role of interestingness revealed by the implicit data.

Indexed as

ArtMusicChildCourtshipDietary SupplementsEmotionsHumans

Identifiers

PMID37907580
PMCPMC10618184

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.