TABLE 4.

Acoustic attributes of typical animal vocalizations used by different species to display their affective state, grouped according to AEs of human music.

The data for this table is compiled from numerous meta-reviews (Morton, 1977; Peters, 1984; August and Anderson, 1987; Snowdon, 2003; Briefer, 2012; Altenmüller et al., 2013; Zimmermann et al., 2013; Snowdon et al., 2015). According to the classification scheme of Brudzynski (2013), human and animal affective states are equated in the following ways: human “happiness” is equated to animal “pleasure” (satisfaction), human “sadness”—to animal “dissatisfaction” (social isolation from a bonded party), human “anger”—to animal “aggression” (agonistic behavior, conflict with display of threat or combat), human “fear”—to animal “alarm/disturbance” (anxiety at the presence of threat or intimidation by a novel environment), human “tenderness/love”—to animal “appeasing” (affiliation—physical contact without agonistic behavior, e.g., grooming, and play). Those acoustic features that agree between human and animal expressions of the same affective state are marked blue, whereas the disagreeing features—red. Features that are not covered in research literature are marked “n/a.” The aspect of “harmony” is clearly not applicable to animal vocalization. The aspect of “form” bears only distant relation to “musical form”: AC’s compactness loosely corresponds to simplicity of structure, whereas lengthiness—to complexity. Aspect of “meter” also finds only partial correspondence in regularity or irregularity of call units in the AC bouts. The timbral coloration is reflected by the aspect of “harmonicity” rather than “instrumentation” that manages timbre in human music.