This research note describes ByrdBot, a science communication tool that leverages bird songs to communicate data regarding human impacts on the environment. With ByrdBot, listeners can compare simulated soundscapes of 1970, 2017, and 2065 to immediately, and viscerally, experience decades of past or projected future environmental change. The communication tactic of ByrdBot—what we call emergent sonification—is discussed as one that capitalizes on computational media to facilitate attunement to nonhuman voices and, subsequently, to offer an affective grasping of the impacts of such phenomena as habitat destruction and climate change on wildlife displacement and loss.
AngelerD.Alvarez-CobelasM.Sánchez-CarrilloS. (2018). Sonifying social-ecological change: A wetland laments agricultural transformation. Ecology and Society, 23(2), 20.
2.
Armarego-MarriottT. (2021). Listen to the world change. Nature Climate Change, 11(9), 730–730.
3.
BarrassS. (2012). The aesthetic turn in sonification towards a social and cultural medium. AI & Society, 27(2), 177–181.
4.
BarrettN.MairK. (2014). Aftershock: A science–art collaboration through sonification. Organised Sound, 19(1), 4–16.
5.
ComstockM.HocksM. E. (2016). The sounds of climate change: Sonic rhetoric in the anthropocene, the age of human impact. Rhetoric Review, 35(2), 165–175.
6.
DayéC.De CampoA. (2006). Sounds sequential: Sonification in the social sciences. Interdisciplinary Science Reviews, 31(4), 349–364.
7.
DazaS.GershonW. S. (2015). Beyond ocular inquiry: Sound, silence, and sonification. Qualitative Inquiry, 21(7), 639–644.
8.
DeLaureM. (2020). Performing loss: Sonic rhetoric in Maya Lin’s what is missing?Liminalities, 16(1), 1–32.
EdgarA. N. (2017). The rhetoric of auscultation: Corporeal sounds, mediated bodies, and abortion rights. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 103(4), 550–371.
12.
GoodaleG. (2011). Sonic persuasion: Reading sound in the recorded age. University of Illinois Press.
13.
GrondF.HermannT. (2012). Aesthetic strategies in sonification. AI & Society, 27(2), 213–222.
14.
HawkB. (2018). Sound: Resonance as rhetorical. Rhetoric Society Quarterly, 48(3), 315–323.
15.
HelyerN.WooD.VeronesiF. (2009). Artful media: The sonic nomadic: Exploring mobile surround-sound interactions. IEEE MultiMedia, 16(2), 12–15.
16.
KunnasJ. (2017). Storytelling: From the early anthropocene to the good or the bad anthropocene. The Anthropocene Review, 4(2), 136–150.
17.
LatourB. (2011). Love your monsters. Breakthrough Journal, 2(11), 21–28.
18.
LeddingtonJ. (2014). What we hear. In BrownR. (Ed.), Consciousness inside and out: Phenomenology, neuroscience, and the nature of experience (pp. 321–334). Springer.
McCormackJ.DorinA. (2001). Art, emergence and the computational sublime [Conference session]. Second Iteration: Conference on Generative Systems in the Electronic Arts, CEMA, VIC, Australia.
21.
MilsteinT.KroløkkeC. (2012). Transcorporeal tourism: Whales, fetuses, and the rupturing and reinscribing of cultural constraints. Environmental Communication: A Journal of Nature and Culture, 6(1), 82–100.
OuariachiT.Olvera-LoboM. D.Gutiérrez-PérezJ.MaibachE. (2019). A framework for climate change engagement through video games. Environmental Education Research, 25(5), 701–716.
24.
PortusR.McGinnC. (2019). Bees, extinction and ambient soundscapes: An exploratory environmental communication workshop. Humanities, 8(3), 153.
25.
RickertT. (2013). Ambient rhetoric: The attunements of rhetorical being. University of Pittsburgh.
26.
RosenbergK. V.DokterA. M.BlancherP. J.SauerJ. R.SmithA. C.SmithP. A.StantonJ. C.PanjabiA.HelftL.ParrM.MarraP. P. (2019). Decline of the North American avifauna. Science, 366(6461), 120–124.
27.
SakellariM. (2015). Cinematic climate change, a promising perspective on climate change communication. Public Understanding of Science, 24(7), 827–841.
28.
SaweN.ChafeC.TreviñoJ. (2020). Using data sonification to overcome science literacy, numeracy, and visualization barriers in science communication. Frontiers in Communication, 5, 46.
29.
SupperA. (2014). Sublime frequencies: The construction of sublime listening experiences in the sonification of scientific data. Social Studies of Science, 44(1), 34–58.
30.
van RenssenS. (2017). The visceral climate experience. Nature Climate Change, 7(3), 168–171.
31.
Von BurgR. (2012). Decades away or the day after tomorrow?: Rhetoric, film, and the global warming debate. Critical Studies in Media Communication, 29(1), 7–26.
32.
WaltonT.ShawW. S. (2015). Living with the anthropocene blues. Geoforum, 60, 1–3.
33.
WhitehouseA. (2015). Listening to birds in the anthropocene: The anxious semiotics of sound in a human-dominated world. Environmental Humanities, 6(1), 53–71.
