Group singing is globally dominant and associated with social context.

cross-cultural cultural evolution music social organization

Journal

Royal Society open science
ISSN: 2054-5703
Titre abrégé: R Soc Open Sci
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101647528

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
Sep 2023
Historique:
received: 28 04 2023
accepted: 15 08 2023
medline: 8 9 2023
pubmed: 8 9 2023
entrez: 8 9 2023
Statut: epublish

Résumé

Music is an interactive technology associated with religious and communal activities and was suggested to have evolved as a participatory activity supporting social bonding. In post-industrial societies, however, music's communal role was eclipsed by its relatively passive consumption by audiences disconnected from performers. It was suggested that as societies became larger and more differentiated, music became less participatory and more focused on solo singing. Here, we consider the prevalence of group singing and its relationship to social organization through the analysis of two global song corpora: 5776 coded audio recordings from 1024 societies, and 4709 coded ethnographic texts from 60 societies. In both corpora, we find that group singing is more common than solo singing, and that it is more likely in some social contexts (e.g. religious rituals, dance) than in others (e.g. healing, infant care). In contrast, relationships between group singing and social structure (community size or social differentiation) were not consistent within or between corpora. While we cannot exclude the possibility of sampling bias leading to systematic under-sampling of solo singing, our results from two large global corpora of different data types provide support for the interactive nature of music and its complex relationship with sociality.

Identifiants

pubmed: 37680502
doi: 10.1098/rsos.230562
pii: rsos230562
pmc: PMC10480695
doi:

Banques de données

figshare
['10.6084/m9.figshare.c.6820978']

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Pagination

230562

Informations de copyright

© 2023 The Authors.

Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts

We declare we have no competing interests.

Références

Science. 2019 Nov 22;366(6468):
pubmed: 31753969
Front Psychol. 2020 Feb 18;10:3051
pubmed: 32132941
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2015 Jul 21;112(29):8987-92
pubmed: 26124105
Behav Brain Sci. 2020 Aug 20;44:e59
pubmed: 32814608
Curr Biol. 2023 Apr 24;33(8):1472-1486.e12
pubmed: 36958332
PLoS One. 2021 Apr 15;16(4):e0250166
pubmed: 33857238
PLoS One. 2022 Nov 2;17(11):e0275469
pubmed: 36322519
PLoS One. 2016 Jul 08;11(7):e0158391
pubmed: 27391016
Behav Brain Sci. 2020 Aug 26;44:e60
pubmed: 32843107
Front Psychol. 2020 Feb 14;11:134
pubmed: 32116937
Behav Brain Sci. 2021 Sep 30;44:e121
pubmed: 34588076
Behav Brain Sci. 2021 Sep 30;44:e85
pubmed: 34588015

Auteurs

Dor Shilton (D)

Cohn Institute for the History and Philosophy of Science and Ideas, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel.

Sam Passmore (S)

Evolution of Cultural Diversity Initiative, Australian National University, Canberra, Australia.
Graduate School of Media and Governance, Keio University, Fujisawa, Japan.

Patrick E Savage (PE)

School of Psychology, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand.
Faculty of Environment and Information Studies, Keio University, Fujisawa, Japan.

Classifications MeSH