MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Why collective music-making is sometimes rare: A study of four indigenous societies

2025· article· en· W4410619912 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueEvolution and Human Behavior · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeuroscience and Music Perception
Canadian institutionsCanadian Institute for Advanced Research
FundersRadcliffe Institute for Advanced Study, Harvard University
KeywordsIndigenousSociologyPsychologyGender studiesBiologyEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Current prominent music evolution theories suggest music evolved as a participatory group activity, whose adaptive functions were strengthening and/or signaling social cohesion. However, the prevalence of collective music-making varies substantially across societies, and in some cases is exceptionally rare. Here, we consider hypotheses for three factors which could attenuate collective music-making: diminished collective action more generally, an emphasis on musical expertise, and solo-oriented musical styles. We examine data related to these hypotheses in four societies in which collective music-making is rare: the Tsimane of lowland Bolivia, the Ache of eastern Paraguay, the Ayoreo of Bolivia and Paraguay, and the Tuvans of the Russian Republic of Tyva. Our results suggest that the scale and religiosity of collective action are the most important factors related to the overall degree of collective music-making in these cultures. The effect of musical expertise was mostly limited to the dominance of shamans in religious contexts, while well-developed solo musical styles did not necessarily prevent group performance in other social settings. We also note the importance of cultural loss due to influence of invading colonial and imperial forces in diminishing indigenous forms of collective music-making. Notably, in all the cases we consider, episodes of some form of collective music-making do (or historically did) occur during important social events, a fact which supports the group-functionalist view. Our findings also point to the centrality and ubiquity of the religious function of music, and suggest this aspect of musical behavior needs to be better addressed by evolutionary theories of music.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.958
Threshold uncertainty score0.672

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.065
GPT teacher head0.328
Teacher spread0.263 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it