Pleasantness makes a good time: musical consonance shapes interpersonal synchronization in dyadic joint action.

Giorgio Lazzari, Lucia Maria Sacheli, Charles-Etienne Benoit, Carlotta Lega, Floris T van Vugt
Author Information
  1. Giorgio Lazzari: Department of Brain and Behavioral Sciences, University of Pavia, Pavia, Italy.
  2. Lucia Maria Sacheli: Psychology Department, University of Milano-Bicocca, Milan, Italy.
  3. Charles-Etienne Benoit: Inter-University Laboratory of Human Movement Biology, Univ Lyon, University Claude Bernard Lyon 1, Villeurbanne, France.
  4. Carlotta Lega: Department of Brain and Behavioral Sciences, University of Pavia, Pavia, Italy.
  5. Floris T van Vugt: Centre for Research on Brain, Language and Music (CRBLM), Montreal, QC, Canada.

Abstract

Introduction: Music making is a process by which humans across cultures come together to create patterns of sounds that are aesthetically pleasing. What remains unclear is how this aesthetic outcome affects the sensorimotor interaction between participants.
Method: Here we approach this question using an interpersonal sensorimotor synchronization paradigm to test whether the quality of a jointly created chord (consonant vs. dissonant) affects movement coordination. We recruited non-musician participants in dyads to perform a dyadic synchronization-continuation task (dSCT): on each trial, participants first synchronized their movements to a metronome (synchronization phase) and then continued tapping together at the same tempo without the metronome (continuation phase). Each tap yielded a note and participants heard both their own and that of their partner, thus creating a chord that was varied to be either consonant (Perf5 or Maj6) or dissonant (Min2 or Maj2). For each trial, participants also rated the pleasure they felt in creating the sounds together. Additionally, they completed questionnaires about social closeness to the other participant, musical reward sensitivity and musical training.
Results: Results showed that participants' taps were closer in time when they jointly created consonant (high pleasure) vs. dissonant (low pleasure) chords, and that pleasure experienced by the dyad in each trial predicted interpersonal synchronization. However, consonance did not affect individual synchronization with the metronome or individual tapping when the metronome was discontinued. The effect of consonance on synchronization was greater in dyads who reported feeling less close prior to the task.
Discussion: Together, these results highlight the role of consonance in shaping the temporal coordination of our actions with others. More broadly, this work shows that the aesthetic outcome of what we create together affects joint behaviors.

Keywords

References

  1. Neurosci Biobehav Rev. 2024 Jul 19;167:105816 [PMID: 39032841]
  2. Neuroreport. 2003 Dec 19;14(18):2303-6 [PMID: 14663180]
  3. Front Psychol. 2022 Jul 11;13:886639 [PMID: 36092070]
  4. Front Psychol. 2021 May 31;12:611867 [PMID: 34135799]
  5. J Nerv Ment Dis. 2014 Jan;202(1):47-54 [PMID: 24375212]
  6. Neuroreport. 2009 Jan 7;20(1):87-92 [PMID: 19033878]
  7. Neuropsychologia. 2014 May;58:23-32 [PMID: 24690415]
  8. Psychol Res. 2002 Feb;66(1):3-17 [PMID: 11963276]
  9. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 2009 Jul;1169:336-41 [PMID: 19673803]
  10. J Neurosci. 2009 Oct 21;29(42):13165-71 [PMID: 19846704]
  11. PLoS One. 2016 Sep 29;11(9):e0163380 [PMID: 27684369]
  12. Hear Res. 2011 Jan;271(1-2):16-25 [PMID: 20850511]
  13. Psychol Sci. 2019 Sep;30(9):1352-1361 [PMID: 31340130]
  14. Curr Biol. 2009 Apr 14;19(7):573-6 [PMID: 19303300]
  15. PLoS One. 2014 Feb 26;9(2):e89642 [PMID: 24586929]
  16. Neuropsychologia. 2023 Mar 12;181:108492 [PMID: 36736856]
  17. Psychol Res. 2005 Mar;69(4):292-309 [PMID: 15616863]
  18. Neuron. 2002 Jan 17;33(2):185-91 [PMID: 11804567]
  19. Front Hum Neurosci. 2022 Aug 30;16:944241 [PMID: 36111209]
  20. Eur J Neurosci. 2011 Aug;34(3):517-23 [PMID: 21714818]
  21. Psychophysiology. 2007 Mar;44(2):293-304 [PMID: 17343712]
  22. Percept Psychophys. 1995 Apr;57(3):305-17 [PMID: 7770322]
  23. Neuroimage. 2014 Nov 1;101:204-14 [PMID: 25019679]
  24. Front Hum Neurosci. 2022 Sep 29;16:899676 [PMID: 36248684]
  25. J Comp Psychol. 2016 May;130(2):97-108 [PMID: 27078078]
  26. Trends Cogn Sci. 2015 Mar;19(3):111-4 [PMID: 25641075]
  27. Adv Cogn Psychol. 2020 Sep 17;16(4):302-308 [PMID: 33500741]
  28. Neuropsychologia. 2018 Aug;117:188-198 [PMID: 29885961]
  29. Front Robot AI. 2019 Aug 20;6:73 [PMID: 33501088]
  30. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 2016 May;42(5):611-6 [PMID: 26820249]
  31. Q J Exp Psychol (Hove). 2008 Feb;61(2):275-91 [PMID: 17853237]
  32. Music Percept. 2009 Jun;26(5):401-413 [PMID: 25190901]
  33. Exp Brain Res. 2015 May;233(5):1585-95 [PMID: 25725774]
  34. PLoS One. 2012;7(1):e29772 [PMID: 22272247]
  35. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 2001 Jun;930:92-116 [PMID: 11458869]
  36. Acta Psychol (Amst). 2022 Apr;224:103513 [PMID: 35093851]
  37. Mol Autism. 2017 Jun 9;8:23 [PMID: 28616126]
  38. J Acoust Soc Am. 2010 Dec;128(6):3781-7 [PMID: 21218909]
  39. Cereb Cortex. 2008 Dec;18(12):2844-54 [PMID: 18388350]
  40. Emotion. 2024 Apr;24(3):687-702 [PMID: 37747497]
  41. Pers Soc Psychol Rev. 2017 May;21(2):99-141 [PMID: 26921410]
  42. PLoS One. 2012;7(11):e50223 [PMID: 23209680]
  43. Sci Rep. 2022 Jul 28;12(1):12973 [PMID: 35902677]
  44. Sci Rep. 2018 Mar 22;8(1):5027 [PMID: 29567946]
  45. Front Psychol. 2021 Jun 22;12:677201 [PMID: 34248776]
  46. Schizophr Bull. 2021 Oct 21;47(6):1544-1556 [PMID: 34132344]
  47. Neuroscience. 2014 Sep 26;277:842-58 [PMID: 25088911]
  48. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 2014 Dec 19;369(1658):20130394 [PMID: 25385772]
  49. Commun Biol. 2022 Oct 18;5(1):1104 [PMID: 36257973]
  50. Q J Exp Psychol (Hove). 2010 Nov;63(11):2220-30 [PMID: 20694920]
  51. PLoS One. 2014 Oct 20;9(10):e110490 [PMID: 25330315]
  52. IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabil Eng. 2014 May;22(3):543-8 [PMID: 24235275]
  53. Autism Res. 2023 Jun;16(6):1161-1173 [PMID: 37102441]
  54. Front Psychol. 2014 Oct 14;5:1115 [PMID: 25352813]
  55. Prog Brain Res. 2018;237:399-413 [PMID: 29779745]
  56. PLoS One. 2010 Aug 13;5(8):e12160 [PMID: 20730095]
  57. Psychon Bull Rev. 2013 Jun;20(3):403-52 [PMID: 23397235]
  58. Hum Brain Mapp. 2006 Mar;27(3):239-50 [PMID: 16078183]
  59. Cortex. 2009 Jan;45(1):80-92 [PMID: 19054506]
  60. Sci Rep. 2024 Apr 30;14(1):9930 [PMID: 38688922]
  61. Front Psychol. 2013 Aug 07;4:492 [PMID: 23966962]
  62. Exp Brain Res. 2011 Jun;211(3-4):505-15 [PMID: 21424257]
  63. Behav Res Methods. 2005 Aug;37(3):379-84 [PMID: 16405133]
  64. PLoS Comput Biol. 2019 Feb 28;15(2):e1006820 [PMID: 30818358]
  65. Behav Res Methods. 2016 Dec;48(4):1591-1607 [PMID: 26542971]
  66. J Neurophysiol. 2001 Dec;86(6):2761-88 [PMID: 11731536]
  67. Cereb Cortex. 2014 Apr;24(4):1009-16 [PMID: 23236203]
  68. J Neurophysiol. 2003 Mar;89(3):1603-22 [PMID: 12626629]
  69. Psychol Res. 2019 Apr;83(3):419-431 [PMID: 30805705]
  70. Sci Rep. 2022 Jan 10;12(1):421 [PMID: 35013620]
  71. Front Psychol. 2013 Jun 25;4:368 [PMID: 23805116]
  72. Front Psychiatry. 2024 Feb 19;15:1355068 [PMID: 38439792]
  73. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2001 Sep 25;98(20):11818-23 [PMID: 11573015]
  74. Psychol Methods. 2003 Dec;8(4):434-47 [PMID: 14664681]
  75. Phys Life Rev. 2022 Dec;43:273-304 [PMID: 36372030]
  76. Psychol Med. 2016 Sep;46(12):2595-604 [PMID: 27353452]
  77. Dev Sci. 2006 Jan;9(1):46-50 [PMID: 16445395]
  78. Nature. 2005 Aug 25;436(7054):1161-5 [PMID: 16121182]
  79. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 2022 Aug;1514(1):142-154 [PMID: 35589672]
  80. Brain Cogn. 2002 Feb;48(1):66-79 [PMID: 11812033]
  81. Curr Biol. 2010 Jun 8;20(11):1035-41 [PMID: 20493704]
  82. Behav Res Methods. 2012 Jun;44(2):314-24 [PMID: 22083660]
  83. Front Hum Neurosci. 2013 Jun 10;7:253 [PMID: 23772211]
  84. Nat Neurosci. 2011 Feb;14(2):257-62 [PMID: 21217764]
  85. J Cogn Neurosci. 2006 Jun;18(6):871-9 [PMID: 16839295]
  86. Percept Psychophys. 1992 Dec;52(6):691-704 [PMID: 1287574]
  87. Psychon Bull Rev. 2005 Dec;12(6):969-92 [PMID: 16615317]
  88. Science. 2004 Mar 12;303(5664):1634-40 [PMID: 15016991]
  89. Q J Exp Psychol (Hove). 2019 Sep;72(9):2272-2287 [PMID: 30744490]
  90. Neuropsychologia. 2017 May;99:213-224 [PMID: 28315696]
  91. Cereb Cortex. 2015 Nov;25(11):4038-47 [PMID: 24904066]
  92. Acta Psychol (Amst). 2018 Nov;191:190-200 [PMID: 30308442]
  93. PLoS One. 2023 Feb 2;18(2):e0281057 [PMID: 36730271]
  94. Sci Rep. 2015 Feb 02;5:8156 [PMID: 25640605]

Word Cloud

Created with Highcharts 10.0.0synchronizationparticipantsconsonancetogetherinterpersonalmetronomepleasuremusicaljointoutcomeaffectsconsonantdissonanttrialcreatesoundsaestheticsensorimotorjointlycreatedchordvscoordinationdyadsdyadictaskphasetappingcreatingindividualactionIntroduction:MusicmakingprocesshumansacrossculturescomepatternsaestheticallypleasingremainsunclearinteractionMethod:approachquestionusingparadigmtestwhetherqualitymovementrecruitednon-musicianperformsynchronization-continuationdSCT:firstsynchronizedmovementscontinuedtempowithoutcontinuationtapyieldednoteheardpartnerthusvariedeitherPerf5Maj6Min2Maj2alsoratedfeltAdditionallycompletedquestionnairessocialclosenessparticipantrewardsensitivitytrainingResults:Resultsshowedparticipants'tapsclosertimehighlowchordsexperienceddyadpredictedHoweveraffectdiscontinuedeffectgreaterreportedfeelinglessclosepriorDiscussion:TogetherresultshighlightroleshapingtemporalactionsothersbroadlyworkshowsbehaviorsPleasantnessmakesgoodtime:shapespleasantness

Similar Articles

Cited By