Birds Like Music, Too

Abstract

In the Random Samples item “Monkeys have tin ears” on a recent study by Joshua McDermott and Marc Hauser ([1][1]), Isabelle Peretz is quoted as saying, “The observations suggest that only humans have a natural, or innate, inclination to engage with music” (3 August, p. [577][2]). This statement is not quite true. McDermott and Hauser have shown a difference between how humans and nonhuman primates respond to music, but they have not shown a difference between humans and all other animals. It is a well-known phenomenon that birds use song to communicate. Whether birdsong is considered music is still debatable; however, the many parallels between birdsong, language, and music have been, and are still, extensively studied. Certainly, there are similarities between humans and songbirds in their ability to discriminate and respond to music. For example, Watanabe and Sato ([2][3]) have shown that Java sparrows can discriminate between Bach's French Suite no. 5 in G minor and Arnold Schoenberg's Suite for Piano opus 25. The birds were also able to generalize new music by Bach (Orchestral Suite No. 3 in D major) and Schoenberg (Five Orchestra Pieces, Opus 16) and artists in similar categories, i.e., Vivaldi and Elliott Carter. In these experiments, music by Bach and Vivaldi was considered classical music, while the music of Schoenberg and Carter was considered modern music. Watanabe and Nemoto ([3][4]) have also shown that, given the option of three perches producing either silence, classical, or modern music, the Java sparrows preferred Bach to Schoenberg and Vivaldi to Carter. These results indicate that Java sparrows or songbirds prefer classical to modern music, or perhaps just more harmonious to dissonant sounds. Additionally, the sparrows chose music they “liked” (e.g., Bach) over silence or music they “disliked” (e.g., Schoenberg). These findings resemble those of McDermott and Hauser and suggest that birds, like humans, clearly engage, and are inclined to engage, with music. ![Figure][5] CREDIT: JOE SUTLIFF 1. 1.[↵][6] 1. J. M.D. McDermott Hauser , Cognition 104, 3 (2007). [OpenUrl][7] 2. 2.[↵][8] 1. S. Watanabe, 2. K. Sato , Behav. Processes 47, 1 (1999). [OpenUrl][9][CrossRef][10][Web of Science][11] 3. 3.[↵][12] 1. S. Watanabe, 2. M. Nemoto , Behav. Processes 43, 2 (1998). [OpenUrl][13] [1]: #ref-1 [2]: /lookup/doi/10.1126/science.317.5838.577c [3]: #ref-2 [4]: #ref-3 [5]: pending:yes [6]: #xref-ref-1-1 View reference 1. in text [7]: {openurl}?query=rft.jtitle%253DCognition%26rft.volume%253D104%26rft.spage%253D3%26rft.atitle%253DCOGNITION%26rft.genre%253Darticle%26rft_val_fmt%253Dinfo%253Aofi%252Ffmt%253Akev%253Amtx%253Ajournal%26ctx_ver%253DZ39.88-2004%26url_ver%253DZ39.88-2004%26url_ctx_fmt%253Dinfo%253Aofi%252Ffmt%253Akev%253Amtx%253Actx [8]: #xref-ref-2-1 View reference 2. in text [9]: {openurl}?query=rft.jtitle%253DBehav.%2BProcesses%26rft.volume%253D47%26rft.spage%253D1%26rft.atitle%253DBEHAV%2BPROCESSES%26rft_id%253Dinfo%253Adoi%252F10.1016%252FS0376-6357%252899%252900048-0%26rft.genre%253Darticle%26rft_val_fmt%253Dinfo%253Aofi%252Ffmt%253Akev%253Amtx%253Ajournal%26ctx_ver%253DZ39.88-2004%26url_ver%253DZ39.88-2004%26url_ctx_fmt%253Dinfo%253Aofi%252Ffmt%253Akev%253Amtx%253Actx [10]: /lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1016/S0376-6357(99)00048-0&link_type=DOI [11]: /lookup/external-ref?access_num=000082841000001&link_type=ISI [12]: #xref-ref-3-1 View reference 3. in text [13]: {openurl}?query=rft.jtitle%253DBehav.%2BProcesses%26rft.volume%253D43%26rft.spage%253D2%26rft.atitle%253DBEHAV%2BPROCESSES%26rft.genre%253Darticle%26rft_val_fmt%253Dinfo%253Aofi%252Ffmt%253Akev%253Amtx%253Ajournal%26ctx_ver%253DZ39.88-2004%26url_ver%253DZ39.88-2004%26url_ctx_fmt%253Dinfo%253Aofi%252Ffmt%253Akev%253Amtx%253Actx