Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2016 Nov;44(6):1255-1273.
doi: 10.1177/0305735616636208. Epub 2016 Mar 29.

Singing together or apart: The effect of competitive and cooperative singing on social bonding within and between sub-groups of a university Fraternity

Eiluned Pearce  1 , Jacques Launay  1 , Max van Duijn  2 , Anna Rotkirch  3 , Tamas David-Barrett  1 , Robin I M Dunbar  1
Affiliations

Singing together or apart: The effect of competitive and cooperative singing on social bonding within and between sub-groups of a university Fraternity

Eiluned Pearce et al. Psychol Music. 2016 Nov.

Abstract

Singing together seems to facilitate social bonding, but it is unclear whether this is true in all contexts. Here we examine the social bonding outcomes of naturalistic singing behaviour in a European university Fraternity composed of exclusive 'Cliques': recognised sub-groups of 5-20 friends who adopt a special name and identity. Singing occurs frequently in this Fraternity, both 'competitively' (contests between Cliques) and 'cooperatively' (multiple Cliques singing together). Both situations were re-created experimentally in order to explore how competitive and cooperative singing affects feelings of closeness towards others. Participants were assigned to teams of four and were asked to sing together with another team either from the same Clique or from a different Clique. Participants (N = 88) felt significantly closer to teams from different Cliques after singing with them compared to before, regardless of whether they cooperated with (singing loudly together) or competed against (trying to singing louder than) the other team. In contrast, participants reported reduced closeness with other teams from their own Clique after competing with them. These results indicate that group singing can increase closeness to less familiar individuals regardless of whether they share a common motivation, but that singing competitively may reduce closeness within a very tight-knit group.

Keywords: Fraternity; Group dynamics; affect; emotional closeness; singing; social cohesion.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1.
Figure 1.
The study set up, showing the four conditions and how they relate to ethnographic singing behaviour in the Fraternity.
Figure 2.
Figure 2.
The mean holding time for the wall-sit exercise in the competitive and cooperative singing conditions, split by Clique condition (teams from the same or different Cliques), N = 87. Error bars show ±2 standard errors. Fraternity board members and outliers who held the position for more than 350 seconds are excluded. Any significant differences between conditions are indicated as * p < 0.05, ** p < 0.001, *** p < 0.0001.
Figure 3.
Figure 3.
The change in reported closeness with the other team in the competitive and cooperative singing conditions, split by Clique condition (teams from the same or different Cliques), N = 88. Error bars show ±2 standard errors. Fraternity board members are excluded. Any significant differences from zero are indicated as * p < 0.05, ** p < 0.001, *** p < 0.0001.
Figure 4.
Figure 4.
The change in reported positive (A) and negative (B) affect in the competitive and cooperative singing conditions, split by Clique condition (teams from the same or different Cliques), N = 91. Error bars show ±2 standard errors. Fraternity board members are excluded. Any significant differences from zero are indicated as * p < 0.05, ** p < 0.001, *** p < 0.0001.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

See all "Cited by" articles

References

    1. Almau A. Music is why we come to school. Improving Schools. 2005;8(2):193–197. doi: 10.1177/1365480205057707. - DOI
    1. Aron A, Aron EN, Smollan D. Inclusion of other in the self scale and the structure of interpersonal closeness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 1992;63(4):596–612. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.63.4.596. - DOI
    1. Baer M, Leenders RTAJ, Oldham GR, Vadera AK. Win or lose the battle for creativity: The power and perils of intergroup competition. Academy of Management Journal. 2010;53(4):827–845.
    1. Boer D, Abubakar A. Music listening in families and peer groups: benefits for young people’s social cohesion and emotional well-being across four cultures. Frontiers in Psychology. 2014;5:392. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00392. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Boer D, Fischer R, Strack M, Bond MH, Lo E, Lam J. How shared preferences in music create bonds between people: Values as the missing link. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. 2011;37(9):1159–1171. - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources