↓ Skip to main content

Effects of Choir Singing or Listening on Secretory Immunoglobulin A, Cortisol, and Emotional State

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Behavioral Medicine, December 2004
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • One of the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#9 of 1,164)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (99th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
49 news outlets
blogs
2 blogs
twitter
16 X users
facebook
3 Facebook pages
wikipedia
4 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
295 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
344 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
Title
Effects of Choir Singing or Listening on Secretory Immunoglobulin A, Cortisol, and Emotional State
Published in
Journal of Behavioral Medicine, December 2004
DOI 10.1007/s10865-004-0006-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

Gunter Kreutz, Stephan Bongard, Sonja Rohrmann, Volker Hodapp, Dorothee Grebe

Abstract

The present study investigates the effects of choir music on secretory immunoglobulin A (S-IgA), cortisol, and emotional states in members of a mixed amateur choir. Subjects participated in two conditions during two rehearsals 1 week apart, namely singing versus listening to choral music. Saliva samples and subjective measures of affect were taken both before each session and 60 min later. Repeated measure analyses of variance were conducted for positive and negative affect scores, S-IgA, and cortisol. Results indicate several significant effects. In particular, singing leads to increases in positive affect and S-IgA, while negative affect is reduced. Listening to choral music leads to an increase in negative affect, and decreases in levels of cortisol. These results suggest that choir singing positively influences both emotional affect and immune competence. The observation that subjective and physiological responses differed between listening and singing conditions invites further investigation of task factors.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 16 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 344 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 4 1%
Norway 2 <1%
Germany 2 <1%
Canada 2 <1%
Brazil 2 <1%
Chile 1 <1%
Sweden 1 <1%
South Africa 1 <1%
Portugal 1 <1%
Other 4 1%
Unknown 324 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 58 17%
Student > Bachelor 56 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 50 15%
Researcher 42 12%
Student > Postgraduate 22 6%
Other 66 19%
Unknown 50 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 105 31%
Arts and Humanities 50 15%
Social Sciences 33 10%
Medicine and Dentistry 29 8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 13 4%
Other 53 15%
Unknown 61 18%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 411. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 22 March 2024.
All research outputs
#72,726
of 25,837,817 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Behavioral Medicine
#9
of 1,164 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#78
of 155,150 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Behavioral Medicine
#1
of 4 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,837,817 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,164 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 16.9. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 155,150 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them