↓ Skip to main content

Do Women Prefer More Complex Music around Ovulation?

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, April 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (98th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (96th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
3 news outlets
blogs
5 blogs
twitter
10 X users
facebook
3 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
17 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
78 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Do Women Prefer More Complex Music around Ovulation?
Published in
PLOS ONE, April 2012
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0035626
Pubmed ID
Authors

Benjamin D. Charlton, Piera Filippi, W. Tecumseh Fitch

Abstract

The evolutionary origins of music are much debated. One theory holds that the ability to produce complex musical sounds might reflect qualities that are relevant in mate choice contexts and hence, that music is functionally analogous to the sexually-selected acoustic displays of some animals. If so, women may be expected to show heightened preferences for more complex music when they are most fertile. Here, we used computer-generated musical pieces and ovulation predictor kits to test this hypothesis. Our results indicate that women prefer more complex music in general; however, we found no evidence that their preference for more complex music increased around ovulation. Consequently, our findings are not consistent with the hypothesis that a heightened preference/bias in women for more complex music around ovulation could have played a role in the evolution of music. We go on to suggest future studies that could further investigate whether sexual selection played a role in the evolution of this universal aspect of human culture.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 10 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 78 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Austria 2 3%
Sweden 2 3%
Germany 1 1%
Netherlands 1 1%
Hungary 1 1%
Portugal 1 1%
Australia 1 1%
United Kingdom 1 1%
Canada 1 1%
Other 4 5%
Unknown 63 81%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 22 28%
Student > Ph. D. Student 15 19%
Student > Bachelor 9 12%
Student > Master 8 10%
Professor 5 6%
Other 16 21%
Unknown 3 4%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 28 36%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 22 28%
Arts and Humanities 6 8%
Neuroscience 5 6%
Medicine and Dentistry 4 5%
Other 9 12%
Unknown 4 5%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 66. 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 23 September 2019.
All research outputs
#575,182
of 23,577,761 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#8,022
of 202,084 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#2,815
of 164,909 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#114
of 3,751 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,577,761 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 202,084 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.3. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% 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 164,909 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 98% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 3,751 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its contemporaries.