Defining the biological bases of individual differences in musicality

Gingras, Bruno; Honing, Henkjan; Peretz, Isabelle; Trainor, Laurel J.; Fisher, Simon E.

doi:10.1098/rstb.2014.0092

Cited by 85 publications

(100 citation statements)

References 111 publications

(178 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…dichromacy | aesthetic preference | color vision | color naming I ndividuals vary in their perceptual experience of the world, and sometimes this variation is caused by genetic differences (1)(2)(3)(4). Dichromacy is a form of color-vision deficiency affecting about 2% of human males in which only two of the three types of retinal cone photoreceptors are functional because of genetic factors (1,2).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Color preference in red–green dichromats

Álvaro

Moreira

Lillo

et al. 2015

Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Around 2% of males have red-green dichromacy, which is a genetic disorder of color vision where one type of cone photoreceptor is missing. Here we investigate the color preferences of dichromats. We aim (i) to establish whether the systematic and reliable color preferences of normal trichromatic observers (e.g., preference maximum at blue, minimum at yellow-green) are affected by dichromacy and (ii) to test theories of color preference with a dichromatic sample. Dichromat and normal trichromat observers named and rated how much they liked saturated, light, dark, and focal colors twice. Trichromats had the expected pattern of preference. Dichromats had a reliable pattern of preference that was different to trichromats, with a preference maximum rather than minimum at yellow and a much weaker preference for blue than trichromats. Color preference was more affected in observers who lacked the cone type sensitive to long wavelengths (protanopes) than in those who lacked the cone type sensitive to medium wavelengths (deuteranopes). Trichromats' preferences were summarized effectively in terms of cone-contrast between color and background, and yellow-blue cone-contrast could account for dichromats' pattern of preference, with some evidence for residual red-green activity in deuteranopes' preference. Dichromats' color naming also could account for their color preferences, with colors named more accurately and quickly being more preferred. This relationship between color naming and preference also was present for trichromat males but not females. Overall, the findings provide novel evidence on how dichromats experience color, advance the understanding of why humans like some colors more than others, and have implications for general theories of aesthetics.dichromacy | aesthetic preference | color vision | color naming I ndividuals vary in their perceptual experience of the world, and sometimes this variation is caused by genetic differences (1-4). Dichromacy is a form of color-vision deficiency affecting about 2% of human males in which only two of the three types of retinal cone photoreceptors are functional because of genetic factors (1, 2). Protanopes, deuteranopes, and tritanopes lack cone photoreceptors sensitive to long (L), medium (M), and short (S) wavelengths, respectively. Accordingly, dichromats' color discrimination is poorer, and their spectral sensitivity is slightly shifted to longer wavelengths (deuteranopes) or is moderately shifted to shorter wavelengths (protanopes) compared with that of normal trichromats (common observers; see table 3.6 in ref. 5).In normal trichromats, cone responses are the input signals for two chromatic cone opponent mechanisms, red-green and yellowblue, based on L−M and S−(L+M) cone responses, respectively, and one achromatic mechanism, mainly based on L+M responses (1). Traditionally it has been considered that protanopes and deuteranopes lack functionality in the red-green mechanism, because this opponent mechanism is based on the comparison of L and M cone responses, and one...

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Color preference in red–green dichromats

Álvaro

Moreira

Lillo

et al. 2015

Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Further research into neural mechanisms and biological substrates is necessary to pinpoint the mechanisms that are essential to musicality. This can reveal the extent to which humans share some of the components of musicality with other species and will inform a phenomics of musicality [46]. Combining these views, we propose to study musicality as a composite of several traits, each with its own underlying neural mechanisms and evolutionary history (figure 3) that can be studied at the present time (avoiding the critique in §4).…”

Section: Multicomponent Perspectivementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Because cognition does not fossilize, we cannot acquire the requisite evidence about variability [44]. On the issue of heritability, many studies provide such evidence (see Gingras et al [46]), but it is difficult to specify the genes because cognitive traits are polygenic. It is also important to gather evidence about the possibility that cognitive traits were the target of natural selection.…”

Section: Evolution Of (Music) Cognitionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The impressive advances in molecular technologies have made it possible to explore these foundations. Gingras et al [46] provide a synthesis of research on the genetic correlates of musicality and the methods by which current insights have emerged. Entry points for exploring the genetic basis of components of musicality range from the examination of clustering in families or co-occurrence in twins of extreme levels of ability, like congenital amusia or absolute pitch perception, to genome-wide genotyping to capture the polymorphic content of a large phenotyped population sample, using advanced genomic and statistical methods.…”

Section: (D) Five Fundamental Constraints On Theories Of the Origins mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Without it no music: cognition, biology and evolution of musicality

Honing

Cate

Peretz

et al. 2015

Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B

Self Cite

205

187

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Musicality can be defined as a natural, spontaneously developing trait based on and constrained by biology and cognition. Music, by contrast, can be defined as a social and cultural construct based on that very musicality. One critical challenge is to delineate the constituent elements of musicality. What biological and cognitive mechanisms are essential for perceiving, appreciating and making music? Progress in understanding the evolution of music cognition depends upon adequate characterization of the constituent mechanisms of musicality and the extent to which they are present in non-human species. We argue for the importance of identifying these mechanisms and delineating their functions and developmental course, as well as suggesting effective means of studying them in human and non-human animals. It is virtually impossible to underpin the evolutionary role of musicality as a whole, but a multicomponent perspective on musicality that emphasizes its constituent capacities, development and neural cognitive specificity is an excellent starting point for a research programme aimed at illuminating the origins and evolution of musical behaviour as an autonomous trait.

show abstract

“…Even though very few genes involved in music have been identified [101], it is important to recognize that evolutionary scenarios, implicitly or explicitly, assume a sequence of changes in gene frequencies in a population, including the appearance of new genetic variants. Making this assumption explicit helps in avoiding the common fallacies of assuming (implicitly) unrealistic amounts of genetic changes (although that is difficult to quantify), assuming instantaneous adoption of new variants, or ignoring the fact that new variants, arising from mutation, are initially always rare.…”

Section: The Evolutionary Contextmentioning

confidence: 99%

Five fundamental constraints on theories of the origins of music

Merker

Morley

Zuidema

2015

Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

One contribution of 12 to a theme issue 'Biology, cognition and origins of musicality'. The diverse forms and functions of human music place obstacles in the way of an evolutionary reconstruction of its origins. In the absence of any obvious homologues of human music among our closest primate relatives, theorizing about its origins, in order to make progress, needs constraints from the nature of music, the capacities it engages, and the contexts in which it occurs. Here we propose and examine five fundamental constraints that bear on theories of how music and some of its features may have originated. First, cultural transmission, bringing the formal powers of cultural as contrasted with Darwinian evolution to bear on its contents. Second, generativity, i.e. the fact that music generates infinite pattern diversity by finite means. Third, vocal production learning, without which there can be no human singing. Fourth, entrainment with perfect synchrony, without which there is neither rhythmic ensemble music nor rhythmic dancing to music. And fifth, the universal propensity of humans to gather occasionally to sing and dance together in a group, which suggests a motivational basis endemic to our biology. We end by considering the evolutionary context within which these constraints had to be met in the genesis of human musicality.

show abstract

Defining the biological bases of individual differences in musicality

Cited by 85 publications

References 111 publications

Color preference in red–green dichromats

Color preference in red–green dichromats

Without it no music: cognition, biology and evolution of musicality

Five fundamental constraints on theories of the origins of music

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About