Music may have helped us in our journey somehow, maybe even as a precursor to language. But music is something we do to bring us together, not to compete for dominance.
...and their study, unsurprisingly, came to the same conclusion.
>But music is something we do to bring us together, not to compete for dominance.
Sure, but the specific genre they looked into is more athletics than music.
Competition for dominance may be a part of music and poetry, too.
Diss tracks have existed since ancient times ("Pedicabo ego vos et irrumabo"[1]), and today's Nicki Minaj vs. Megan Thee Stallion feud is very much a performative competition for dominance.
Music brings us together, music also divides us (many subcultures formed around musical genres).
It's a medium of human expression. And as such, it can reflect all of our sides.
Groupies are a well known thing.
Says who?
Eric Clapton said that he learned guitar to meet girls and that was well before the thing with George Harrison.
There's probably a point of diminishing returns but ....
Psychology can often be pretty bad about this (overreliance on very weak experimental methods, such as surveys), but evolutionary psychology is a particularly weak subfield of psychology.
For this reason, scientists in more rigorous fields tend to look upon evolutionary psychology as pseudoscience.
If there is good science happening there, I am unaware of it. I strongly suspect that serious scientists interested in this subject matter go into more rigorous fields, like evolutionary biology or neuroscience. If you are interested in this subject matter (I know I am!), I recommend following these fields instead because they are far less likely to dress up an under-tested hypothesis as true.