The Origins of Music (OoM)
Comparative evaluation of
competing theories
Richard Parncutt
University of Graz, Austria
SysMus Graz
International Conference on Music
Perception and Cognition (ICMPC),
Seattle USA, 23-27 August 2010
Contents of talk
 What
is a “good” theory?
 What is “music”?
 Pitfalls to avoid
 Selected OoM- theories
 Systematic evaluations
 Motherese
A “good” theory is...
simple
 parsimonious, falsifiable
general  accounts for range of phenomena
concrete  clearly defined terms, processes
logical
 clear argument
empirical  observation-based, ecological
seminal  inspires new approaches
Ockham
Kuhn
Popper
Gibson
A good theory
of a complex phenomenon...
focuses on striking, universal aspects (“the wood”)
 neglects specific detail (“the trees”) (δ  0)

 focus on music’s main…
1.
2.
3.
functions
emotions
structures
Bisham (2009): music’s “design features”
(Is music a unitary phenomenon or a Western construct?)
1. Social functions of music
Music is an...
“interpersonal framework for synchronous and
group affective interaction” (Bisham, 2009)
Participants...
“share convergent intersubjective endstates”
Music...
 promotes conformity, integration, altruism
 enables coordinated action and change
2. Music and emotion Juslin & Sloboda...
“What is great about great music? It moves us emotionally! ...awe-filled...
sublime... biologically rooted social-emotional feelings” (Panksepp, 2009)

pleasure underlies musical motivation
(Schubert, 2009; Vusst & Kringelbach, 2009)

spirituality (Gabrielsson & Lindström Wik, 2003)
“dissociation from earthly reality” (Schubert, 2009)
Music can evoke...



all emotions
strong emotions
changed states
3. Music-structural universals

Melody: like speech in...
pitch range, interval sizes, tone and phrase durations

Rhythm: tempo range like footsteps & heartbeats;
movement character (multimodality);
beat induction, entrainment (Honing, Patel, Merker)

Form: repetition, call-response, motivic development
A definition of music







an acoustic signal
evokes recognizable patterns
implies physical movement
meaningful
intentional
accepted by a cultural group
not lexical (not “language”)
A good theory should explain all this!
Constructing OoM theories:
Pitfalls to avoid
Arbitrary focus



Western
evolutionary
Researcher’s background



experience
expertise
Pitfall 1: Western classical focus
Should we explain...
major-minor
tonality?
“Great Composers”?
Or rather...
hunter-gatherer
rituals?
shamanic ceremonies?
garage bands?
iPod experiences?
Pitfall 2: Evolutionary focus
 Not
necessarily evolutionary!
“there has been curious lack of attention to the
possibility that musical origins can be explained
without the need to invoke music-specific genes”
(Livingstone & Thompson, 2009, p. 84)
 Function
≠ adaptation
group function  group survival?
 “Just
so stories” in evol.psychol.
with little behavioral, genetic, neuro support
(Huron, Panksepp)
Pitfall 3: Experience bias
 Climate change
 If I don’t experience it, it’s a lie
 Personal experience of music
 If I perform for sex, everyone does
 If I am gifted, giftedness exists
Pitfall 4: Expertise bias
Emphasize aspects of problem that
correspond to one’s own expertise
e.g. I do psychoacoustics
 auditory scene analysis
is central
 ASA is pleasurable
 ASA is origin of music
Musical origins or prerequisites?
Prerequisites include:
 physiology

vocal tract, fast neural processing...
(e.g. Fitsch, Nishimura, Lieberman)
 psychology

reflective language, theory of mind...
(e.g. Livingstone & Thompson, 2009)
 latent

abilities
ability to synchronize to a beat
(e.g. parrot “Snowball” – Patel)
An origin is a behavior similar to music
 mechanisms, motivations, structures
Six theories of origins
behaviors that are similar to music
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Animal behaviors
Pleasure seeking
Mate attraction
Training
Socializing
Motherese
Grades for OoM theories
Grade
A
B
C
D
E
Evaluation
brill
good
ok
scrape
sorry
Contribution
to OoM
large
medium
small
tiny
zero
Systematic evaluation of
performance on various
tasks  final grade
Weighting of tasks and final
evaluation are subjective
1. Non-human animal behaviors
Examples:



singing (birds, whales, gibbons)
territorial marking (wolves...)
synchronous chorusing (chimpanzees)
For: may explain unconscious “drives”
Against: isolated, impoverished skills
 Can



account for music’s...
functions: yes (but not intentionality)
emotions: yes (but not spirituality)
structures: yes (but not their complexity)
Grade: C
2. Non-adaptive pleasure seeking
(Pinker, 1997; cf. Huron, 2001-2010)
 Uses

multiple existing neural systems:
motor, ASA, language, social, aggression...
 Counterevidence


based on accident – could go in the wrong direction
musicians do not get addicted and suffer withdrawal
 Accounts



for music’s...
functions: no
emotions: yes
structures: no
Grade: D
3. Mate attraction
Darwin (1871), Miller (2000)
 Evidence:


more male than female musicians
more creative when sexually active
 Counterevidence:


no gender difference in music abilities
humans are smarter than peacocks
 Accounts



for music’s...
functions: yes
emotions: yes
structures: no (peacock colors are arbitrary)
Grade: C
4. Training (Roederer, 1984)
Children play with music (in times of bounty and safety)
to train survival skills (in times of shortage and danger)


performance, dance  physical skills, coordination
listening  cognitive skills, language
Doubts:


Does this kind of training really promote survival?
Is there a “Mozart effect”?
Accounts for music’s...


functions: no (individual)
emotions: only pleasure
(not all, strong, spiritual)

structures: maybe
Grade: C
5. Socializing
Roederer (1984), McNeill (1995), Brown (2000)
Freeman (2000), Cross (2009), Huron (2001)....

Evidence:
• Human rituals (church, soccer...) achieve “convergent
emotional states”, “socio-affective confluence” (Bisham)
• Primate grooming time increases with group size (Dunbar)
 Accounts


for music’s...
functions: yes
emotions
yes: pleasure
no: spirituality, strong emotion

structures: maybe
Grade: B
6. Motherese
Dissanayake (2000), Falk (2004)
Larger brain + bipedalism  earlier birth



infant fragility = “atriciality” (strong evolutionary argument)
more parental care  survival
new, complex infant-mother interaction
(difficult since partners are very different)
Accounts for music’s...



functions: yes
emotions: yes
structures: yes
Grade: A
May also account for...
• reflective language
• theory of mind
• all arts
From motherese to music
motherese
infant
memory*
play**
ritual**
music
* Long-term multimodal recognition memory
for repeated, emotional patterns of sound and movement
** In play and ritual, behaviors similar to motherese
• evoke “motherese feelings”
• are reinforced by operant conditioning
From motherese to music
“It is not surprising that societies all over the world have
developed these nodes of culture that we call ceremonies
and rituals, which do for their members what mothers
naturally do for their babies: engage their interest, involve
them in a shared rhythmic pulse, and thereby instill feelings
of closeness and communion. The inborn propensities for
imitation, reciprocity, and emotional communion in infancy
have become further elaborated and used in ritualized and
ceremonial forms that themselves build and reinforce
feelings of unity among adults, all of which ultimately serve
to hold the group together.”
(Dissanayake, 2000, p. 64, cited by Davies)
Infant musicality
e.g. many studies by Trehub and collaborators
Sensitivity to...
melodic contour; relative pitch/duration
 specific musical intervals (e.g. fifths)
 changes in unequal scales/rhythms
+ pulse (Winkler et al., 2009; Phillips-Silver & Trainor, 2005)

These are “predispositions”
“evident in infancy, before they have obvious utility”
(Trehub, 2001)
Utility of infant musicality
(Parncutt, 2009, 2010)
prenatal
audition
prenatal
bonding
Adaptations:
motherese
prenatal audition, motherese
1 million years = 50,000 generations
Byproduct:
postnatal
survival
music
100,000 years = 5,000 generations
Origins of infant musicality
two possibilities
 Genetic
(Trehub)
selection for music (mate attraction, training,
social glue, motherese…)

Learned (Parncutt)
prenatal exposure to changing maternal
sound, movement and hormone levels
Why is motherese not
accepted as an OoM?
 Motherese


no practice-based expertise
no audience (private, active)
 Link


is not music
to music is not...
evolutionary (out of fashion!)
documented (no data!)
(but competing theories have similar problems!)
 Portrays

women as musically active
Contradicts a pervasive cultural stereotype
Is OoM research sexist?
an academic question – not moral, ethnical or political
Evidence:
1. Popularity of mate attraction hypothesis (Darwin)
...although male & female music abilities do not differ!
2. Neglect of motherese hypothesis (Dissanayake)
...although no other theory satisfies all major criteria!
Sexism and evolutionary theory
In efficient hunter-gatherer societies,
men and women have different roles
in reproduction and survival
 sexism
is “natural”
 we are all sexist
Sexism and social psychology
Bearman et al. (2009)
Study of conversations: 45 pairs of female friends
Analysis by categories of internalized sexism:




assertions of incompetence (powerlessness)
competition between women
construction of women as objects
invalidation or derogation of women
Result: On average, one such statement per minute
both
men and women
are sexist
Sexism and music history
“Great music” was composed by white males
Philosophical explanation (Kant):
The female mind comprehends...


beauty: small, curved, soft, gentle, delicate
but not sublimity: rough, jagged, fearsome
Culturally transmitted stereotypes:

(some) men are musically active and deep
 women are musically passive and superficial
Covert or subtle sexism
“hidden or clandestine...unnoticed because it is
built into cultural and societal norms”
(Swim & Cohen, 2006)
Microaggression
“unconscious and unintentional expression of bias
and prejudice toward socially devalued groups”
(Sue, 2010)
Conclusion: take this theory seriously!
Motherese as the origin of music
Dissanayake (2000), Falk (2004)
Larger brain + bipedalism  earlier birth



infant fragility “atriciality”
more parental care  survival
new, complex infant-mother interaction
Accounts for music’s...
Maybe also for...



reflective language
theory of mind
all arts
functions: yes
emotions: yes
structures: yes