Music discriminations by carp (Cyprinus carpio)

Chase, Ava R.

doi:10.3758/bf03192900

Cited by 53 publications

(21 citation statements)

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Another source of useful and important data on animal musical abilities comes from laboratory studies examining animalsÕ perception of human music, e.g., the finding that goldfish and pigeons can distinguish between and generalize about musical styles (Chase, 2001;Porter & Neuringer, 1984), or the difficulties monkeys have in generalizing about melody transpositions other than the octave (DÕAmato, 1988;Wright et al, 2000). However, there are several comprehensive reviews of this topic already in the literature (Carterette & Kendall, 1999;McDermott & Hauser, 2005), so I will focus here on studies of animalÕs spontaneous production of ''song'' or drumming.…”

Section: Literature Review: the Comparative Biology Of Musicmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Human music is based upon a diverse set of perceptual mechanisms, some shared with most other vertebrates, and therefore with a very long evolutionary history, and some potentially unique to our species. For example, goldfish can learn to distinguish baroque music from blues (Chase, 2001), suggesting that some mechanisms involved in music perception date back to the earliest jawed vertebrates (some 500 million years ago). In contrast, even nonhuman primates seem unable to recognize melodies as purely relational structures, as does a newborn child, suggesting that this aspect of music perception evolved in the last few million years (DÕAmato, 1988;Hauser & McDermott, 2003).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The biology and evolution of music: A comparative perspective

2006

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Studies of the biology of music (as of language) are highly interdisciplinary and demand the integration of diverse strands of evidence. In this paper, I present a comparative perspective on the biology and evolution of music, stressing the value of comparisons both with human language, and with those animal communication systems traditionally termed ''song''. A comparison of the ''design features'' of music with those of language reveals substantial overlap, along with some important differences. Most of these differences appear to stem from semantic, rather than structural, factors, suggesting a shared formal core of music and language. I next review various animal communication systems that appear related to human music, either by analogy (bird and whale ''song'') or potential homology (great ape bimanual drumming). A crucial comparative distinction is between learned, complex signals (like language, music and birdsong) and unlearned signals (like laughter, ape calls, or bird calls). While human vocalizations clearly build upon an acoustic and emotional foundation shared with other primates and mammals, vocal learning has evolved independently in our species since our divergence with chimpanzees. The convergent evolution of vocal learning in other species offers a powerful window into psychological and neural constraints influencing the evolution of complex signaling systems (including both song and speech), while ape drumming presents a fascinating potential homology with human instrumental music. I next discuss the archeological data relevant to music evolution, concluding on the basis of prehistoric bone flutes that instrumental music is at least 40,000 years old, and perhaps much older. I end with a brief review of adaptive functions proposed for music, concluding that no one selective force (e.g., sexual selection) is adequate to explaining all aspects of human music. I suggest that questions about ARTICLE IN PRESSthe past function of music are unlikely to be answered definitively and are thus a poor choice as a research focus for biomusicology. In contrast, a comparative approach to music promises rich dividends for our future understanding of the biology and evolution of music.

show abstract

Section: Literature Review: the Comparative Biology Of Musicmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The biology and evolution of music: A comparative perspective

2006

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Fishes have extensive and diverse abilities for pattern discrimination and categorisation (Douglas & Hawryshyn 1990;Chase 2001). Cognitive processing typically allows the subject to select from a wide range of preparatory responses, not just from innate ones.…”

Section: Cognitionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Learning of Foraging Skills by Fish

Warburton

Hughes

2011

Fish Cognition and Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

IntroductionInvestigations of the role of learning and memory in the foraging behaviour of fishes are at an exciting stage. Although less thoroughly studied than traditional laboratory favourites such as rats, pigeons or bees, fish species are no longer to be consigned to the 'poorly understood' category. It is now possible to place the capacities of fish in the context of learning and memory as a whole, as evidenced by previous reviews such as those by Hart (1986Hart ( , 1993, Hughes et al. (1992) and Kieffer & Colgan (1992). The present chapter attempts to integrate perspectives and findings from the fields of behavioural ecology and comparative psychology. This approach has been adopted for the following reasons:1. Comparative psychology has revealed broad regularities in the general principles of learning across invertebrate and vertebrate taxa (Logue 1988; Domjan 1998) and across spatial and temporal domains (Cheng & Spetch 2001). The general principles that apply to learning in bees, pigeons and rats are likely to apply to fishes also. Psychology can clarify the mechanisms that underlie observed behaviour, while behavioural ecology can evaluate the adaptive significance of behavioural capacities demonstrated by psychology. 2. In several cases, static first-generation models based on optimal foraging theory (OFT) that do not represent temporal changes in internal state fail to predict observed behaviour (Hart 1993). More recent studies using more flexible (e.g. dynamic-programming) models have been more successful because of their ability to represent changes in internal state (e.g. physiology and learning), interactions between intrinsic and extrinsic variables and continuous behavioural adjustment in response to these factors (Ehlinger 1989;Kieffer & Colgan 1991;Hart 1993;Dall et al. 1999). Although standard OFT models predict that animals should exhibit all-or-nothing choice, experiments usually reveal partial preferences. It is likely that future models will draw increasingly on psychological effects (e.g. discrimination, memory, cue competition, interference and attention) to explain such divergences from the predictions of simple or idealised models and to test models based on risk and information (Shettleworth 1988).

show abstract

“…Porter and Neuringer (1984), investigating the training and generalization capabilities of pigeons in discriminating between two genres, test whether responses are due to the music itself, or to confounds such as characteristics of the playback mechanisms, and the lengths and loudness of excerpts. Chase (2001) does the same for koi, and looks at the effect of timbre as well.…”

Section: On Evaluationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Classification accuracy is not enough

Sturm

2013

J Intell Inf Syst

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We argue that an evaluation of system behavior at the level of the music is required to usefully address the fundamental problems of music genre recognition (MGR), and indeed other tasks of music information retrieval, such as autotagging. A recent review of works in MGR since 1995 shows that most (82 %) measure the capacity of a system to recognize genre by its classification accuracy. After reviewing evaluation in MGR, we show that neither classification accuracy, nor recall and precision, nor confusion tables, necessarily reflect the capacity of a system to recognize genre in musical signals. Hence, such figures of merit cannot be used to reliably rank, promote or discount the genre recognition performance of MGR systems if genre recognition (rather than identification by irrelevant confounding factors) is the objective. This motivates the development of a richer experimental toolbox for evaluating any system designed to intelligently extract information from music signals.

show abstract

Music discriminations by carp (Cyprinus carpio)

Cited by 53 publications

References 25 publications

The biology and evolution of music: A comparative perspective

The biology and evolution of music: A comparative perspective

Learning of Foraging Skills by Fish

Classification accuracy is not enough

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About