Mozart effect

Last updated

The Mozart effect is the theory that listening to the music of Mozart may temporarily boost scores on one portion of an IQ test. Popular science versions of the theory make the claim that "listening to Mozart makes you smarter" or that early childhood exposure to classical music has a beneficial effect on mental development. [1]

Contents

The original study from 1993 reported a short-term (lasting about 15 minutes) improvement on the performance of certain kinds of mental tasks known as spatial reasoning, [2] [3] such as folding paper and solving mazes. [4] The results were highly exaggerated by the popular press and became "Mozart makes you smart", [1] which was said to apply to children in particular (the original study included 36 college students). [1] These claims led to a commercial fad with Mozart CDs being sold to parents. [5] The U.S. state of Georgia even proposed a budget to provide every child with a CD of classical music. [1]

A meta-analysis of studies that have replicated the original study shows that there is little evidence that listening to Mozart has any particular effect on spatial reasoning. [5] The author of the original study has stressed that listening to Mozart has no effect on general intelligence. [4]

Rauscher et al. 1993 study

Frances Rauscher, Gordon Shaw, and Catherine Ky (1993) investigated the effect of listening to music by Mozart on spatial reasoning, and the results were published in Nature . They gave research participants one of three standard tests of abstract spatial reasoning after they had experienced each of three listening conditions: the Sonata for Two Pianos in D major, K. 448 by Mozart, verbal relaxation instructions, and silence. They found a temporary enhancement of spatial-reasoning, as measured by spatial-reasoning sub tasks of the Stanford-Binet IQ test. Rauscher et al. show that the enhancing effect of the music condition is only temporary: no student had effects extending beyond the 15-minute period in which they were tested. The study makes no statement of an increase in IQ in general (because IQ was never measured). [2]

Popularization

While Rauscher et al. only showed an increase in "spatial intelligence", the results were popularly interpreted as an increase in general IQ. This misconception, and the fact that the music used in the study was by Mozart, had an obvious appeal to those who valued this music; the Mozart effect was thus widely reported. In 1994, New York Times music columnist Alex Ross wrote in a light-hearted article, "researchers [Rauscher and Shaw] have determined that listening to Mozart actually makes you smarter", and presented this as the final piece of evidence that Mozart has dethroned Beethoven as "the world's greatest composer". [6] A 1997 Boston Globe article mentioned some of the Rauscher and Shaw results. It described one study in which three- and four-year-olds who were given eight months of private piano lessons scored 30% higher on tests of spatio-temporal reasoning than control groups given computer lessons, singing lessons, and no training.

The 1997 book by Don Campbell, The Mozart Effect: Tapping the Power of Music to Heal the Body, Strengthen the Mind, and Unlock the Creative Spirit, [7] discusses the theory that listening to Mozart (especially the piano concertos) may temporarily increase one's IQ and produce many other beneficial effects on mental function. Campbell recommends playing specially selected classical music to infants, in the expectation that it will benefit their mental development.

After The Mozart Effect, Campbell wrote a follow-up book, The Mozart Effect For Children, and created related products. Among these are collections of music that he states harness the Mozart effect to enhance "deep rest and rejuvenation", "intelligence and learning", and "creativity and imagination". Campbell defines the term as "an inclusive term signifying the transformational powers of music in health, education, and well-being. It represents the general use of music to reduce stress, depression, or anxiety; induce relaxation or sleep; activate the body; and improve memory or awareness. Innovative and experimental uses of music and sound can improve listening disorders, dyslexia, attention deficit disorder, autism, and other mental and physical disorders and diseases". [8]

These theories are controversial. The relationship of sound and music (both played and listened to) for cognitive function and various physiological metrics has been explored in studies with no definitive results.

Political impact

The political impact of the theory was demonstrated on January 13, 1998, when Zell Miller, governor of Georgia, announced that his proposed state budget would include $105,000 a year to provide every child born in Georgia with a tape or CD of classical music. Miller stated "No one questions that listening to music at a very early age affects the spatial-temporal reasoning that underlies math and engineering and even chess." Miller played legislators some of Beethoven's "Ode to Joy" on a tape recorder and asked "Now, don't you feel smarter already?" Miller asked Yoel Levi, music director of the Atlanta Symphony, to compile a collection of classical pieces that should be included. State representative Homer DeLoach said "I asked about the possibility of including some Charlie Daniels or something like that, but they said they thought the classical music has a greater positive impact. Having never studied those impacts too much, I guess I'll just have to take their word for that." [9]

Subsequent research and meta-analyses

While some supportive reports have been published, [10] studies with positive results have tended to be associated with any form of music that has energetic and positive emotional qualities. [11] [12] Moreover, the intellectual benefits of enhanced mood and arousal are not restricted to spatial-temporal reasoning, but extend to speed of processing and creative problem solving. [13] Among children, some studies suggest no effect on IQ or spatial ability, [14] whereas others suggest that the effect can be elicited with energetic popular music that the children enjoy. [15] The weight of subsequent evidence supports either a null effect, or short-term effects related to increases in mood and arousal, with mixed results published after the initial report in Nature. [16]

In 1999 a major challenge was raised to the existence of the Mozart effect by two teams of researchers. [17] [18] [19] In a pair of papers published together under the title "Prelude or Requiem for the 'Mozart Effect'?" Chabris reported a meta-analysis demonstrating that "any cognitive enhancement is small and does not reflect any change in IQ or reasoning ability in general, but instead derives entirely from performance on one specific type of cognitive task and has a simple neuropsychological explanation", called "enjoyment arousal". For example, he cites a study that found that "listening either to Mozart or to a passage from a Stephen King story enhanced subjects' performance in paper folding and cutting (one of the tests frequently employed by Rauscher and Shaw) but only for those who enjoyed what they heard". Steele et al. found that "listening to Mozart produced a 3-point increase relative to silence in one experiment and a 4-point decrease in the other experiment". [20] In another study, the effect was replicated with the original Mozart music, but eliminated when the tempo was slowed down and major chords were replaced by minor chords. [12]

Another meta-analysis by Pietschnig, Voracek, and Formann (2010) combined results of 39 studies to answer the question as to whether or not the Mozart Effect exists. They concluded that there is little evidence to support the Mozart effect, as shown by small effect sizes. However, the most striking finding in this meta-analysis is the significantly larger effects published in studies affiliated with Rauscher or Rideout, with effect sizes more than three times higher for published studies affiliated with these founding members of the Mozart Effect. These systematic moderating effects due to lab affiliation call into question the existence of a Mozart Effect. In addition, this study also found strong evidence supporting a confounding publication bias when effect sizes of samples who listened to Mozart are compared to samples not exposed to a stimulus. [21]

Despite implementing Rauscher, Shaw, and Ky's (1995) [22] suggestions of three key components that must be present to replicate the Mozart Effect, McCutcheon (2000) still failed to reproduce the Mozart Effect in a study with 36 adults. These conditions were: to ensure a task that taps into spatial components of mental imagery; a research design that does not include a pretest to avoid ceiling effects; a musical composition that is complex rather than repetitive and simple. Regardless of listening to classical music, jazz or silence, the study did not yield a significant effect on spatial reasoning performance. [23]

The Mozart Effect is likely just an artifact of arousal and heightened mood. [11] [24] [25] Arousal is the confounding variable that mediates the relationship between spatial ability and music that defines the Mozart Effect. [24] The "neural resonance" theory of Rauscher and colleagues which contends that Mozart's music primes the neural pathways of spatial reasoning has been widely criticized. [24] [25]

Government bodies also became involved in analysing the wealth (some 300+ articles as of 2005) of reports. A German report concluded, for instance, that "... passively listening to Mozart — or indeed any other music you enjoy — does not make you smarter. But more studies should be done to find out whether music lessons could raise your child's IQ in the long term". [26] [27]

Popular presentations of the "Mozart effect", including Alex Ross's comment that "listening to Mozart actually makes you smarter" and Zell Miller's "don't you feel smarter" query to the Georgia legislature, almost always tie it to "intelligence." Rauscher, one of the original researchers, has disclaimed this idea. In a 1999 reply to an article challenging the effect, [20] published along with the article, she wrote (emphasis added):

Our results on the effects of listening to Mozart's Sonata for Two Pianos in D Major K. 448 on spatial–temporal task performance have generated much interest but several misconceptions, many of which are reflected in attempts to replicate the research. The comments by Chabris and Steele et al. echo the most common of these: that listening to Mozart enhances intelligence. We made no such claim. The effect is limited to spatial–temporal tasks involving mental imagery and temporal ordering.

On efforts like Miller's budget proposal, and the press attention surrounding the effect, Rauscher has said, "I don't think it can hurt. I'm all for exposing children to wonderful cultural experiences. But I do think the money could be better spent on music education programs." [28]

Many scholars in the psychological community now view the claim that playing classical music to children can boost their intelligence to be a "myth." [29] Emory University psychologist Scott Lilienfeld ranks Mozart Effect as number six in his book 50 Great Myths of Popular Psychology . [30]

Health benefits

Music has been evaluated to see if it has other properties. The April 2001 edition of Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine assessed the possible health benefits of the music of Mozart. [31] John Jenkins played Sonata K.448 to patients with epilepsy and found a decrease in epileptiform activity. According to the British Epilepsy Organization, research has suggested that apart from Mozart's K.448 and Piano Concerto No. 23 (K. 488), only one other piece of music has been found to have a similar effect; a song by the Greek composer Yanni, entitled "Acroyali/Standing in Motion" (version from Yanni Live at the Acropolis performed at the Acropolis ). [31] It was determined to have the "Mozart effect", by the Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine because it was similar to Mozart's K.448 in tempo, structure, melodic and harmonic consonance and predictability. [31] [32]

In 2023, Sandra Oberleiter and Jakob Pietschnig showed in Scientific Reports that the existing evidence on the Mozart Effect in epilepsy is not scientifically robust. In an extensive meta-analysis, it was argued that positive findings regarding symptom relief are based on inadequate research designs, selective reporting, and too small sample sizes. Additionally, results cannot be replicated because study data is not available and therefore does not comply with modern research standards. [33]

Other uses of Mozart's music

While it is clear that exposure to Mozart does not raise IQ, studies of the effects of music have explored as diverse areas as its links to seizure onset [31] [34] or research in animals suggesting that even exposure in-utero in rats improves their maze learning [35] The original claim continues to influence public life. For instance a German sewage treatment plant plays Mozart music to break down the waste faster, reports the UK Guardian . Anton Stucki, chief operator of the Treuenbrietzen plant was quoted as saying, "We think the secret is in the vibrations of the music, which penetrate everything—including the water, the sewage and the cells." [36]

Alfred A. Tomatis

The term "Mozart effect" was used by the French researcher Alfred A. Tomatis in his 1991 book Pourquoi Mozart? (Why Mozart?) [37] where he used the music of Mozart in his efforts to "retrain" the ear, and believed that listening to the music presented at differing frequencies helped the ear, and promoted healing and the development of the brain, [38] but his method is not directly related to claims that listening to Mozart increases intelligence.

See also

Related Research Articles

The Flynn effect is the substantial and long-sustained increase in both fluid and crystallized intelligence test scores that were measured in many parts of the world over the 20th century, named after researcher James Flynn (1934–2020). When intelligence quotient (IQ) tests are initially standardized using a sample of test-takers, by convention the average of the test results is set to 100 and their standard deviation is set to 15 or 16 IQ points. When IQ tests are revised, they are again standardized using a new sample of test-takers, usually born more recently than the first; the average result is set to 100. When the new test subjects take the older tests, in almost every case their average scores are significantly above 100.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Intelligence quotient</span> Score from a test designed to assess intelligence

An intelligence quotient (IQ) is a total score derived from a set of standardised tests or subtests designed to assess human intelligence. The abbreviation "IQ" was coined by the psychologist William Stern for the German term Intelligenzquotient, his term for a scoring method for intelligence tests at University of Breslau he advocated in a 1912 book.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Music lesson</span> Type of formal instruction in music

Music lessons are a type of formal instruction in playing a musical instrument or singing. Typically, a student taking music lessons meets a music teacher for one-to-one training sessions ranging from 30 minutes to one hour in length over a period of weeks or years. Depending on lessons to be taught, students learn different skills relevant to the instruments used. Music teachers also assign technical exercises, musical pieces, and other activities to help the students improve their musical skills. While most music lessons are one-on-one (private), some teachers also teach groups of two to four students, and, for very basic instruction, some instruments are taught in large group lessons, such as piano and acoustic guitar. Since the widespread availability of high speed. low latency Internet, private lessons can also take place through live video chat using webcams, microphones and videotelephony online.

Working memory is a cognitive system with a limited capacity that can hold information temporarily. It is important for reasoning and the guidance of decision-making and behavior. Working memory is often used synonymously with short-term memory, but some theorists consider the two forms of memory distinct, assuming that working memory allows for the manipulation of stored information, whereas short-term memory only refers to the short-term storage of information. Working memory is a theoretical concept central to cognitive psychology, neuropsychology, and neuroscience.

Human intelligence is the intellectual capability of humans, which is marked by complex cognitive feats and high levels of motivation and self-awareness. Using their intelligence, humans are able to learn, form concepts, understand, and apply logic and reason. Human intelligence is also thought to encompass our capacities to recognize patterns, plan, innovate, solve problems, make decisions, retain information, and use language to communicate.

The g factor is a construct developed in psychometric investigations of cognitive abilities and human intelligence. It is a variable that summarizes positive correlations among different cognitive tasks, reflecting the fact that an individual's performance on one type of cognitive task tends to be comparable to that person's performance on other kinds of cognitive tasks. The g factor typically accounts for 40 to 50 percent of the between-individual performance differences on a given cognitive test, and composite scores based on many tests are frequently regarded as estimates of individuals' standing on the g factor. The terms IQ, general intelligence, general cognitive ability, general mental ability, and simply intelligence are often used interchangeably to refer to this common core shared by cognitive tests. However, the g factor itself is a mathematical construct indicating the level of observed correlation between cognitive tasks. The measured value of this construct depends on the cognitive tasks that are used, and little is known about the underlying causes of the observed correlations.

Neuroscience and intelligence refers to the various neurological factors that are partly responsible for the variation of intelligence within species or between different species. A large amount of research in this area has been focused on the neural basis of human intelligence. Historic approaches to studying the neuroscience of intelligence consisted of correlating external head parameters, for example head circumference, to intelligence. Post-mortem measures of brain weight and brain volume have also been used. More recent methodologies focus on examining correlates of intelligence within the living brain using techniques such as magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), functional MRI (fMRI), electroencephalography (EEG), positron emission tomography and other non-invasive measures of brain structure and activity.

Stereotype threat is a situational predicament in which people are or feel themselves to be at risk of conforming to stereotypes about their social group. It is theorized to be a contributing factor to long-standing racial and gender gaps in academic performance. Since its introduction into the academic literature, stereotype threat has become one of the most widely studied topics in the field of social psychology.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Music education</span> Field of study associated with the teaching and learning of music

Music education is a field of practice in which educators are trained for careers as elementary or secondary music teachers, school or music conservatory ensemble directors. Music education is also a research area in which scholars do original research on ways of teaching and learning music. Music education scholars publish their findings in peer-reviewed journals, and teach undergraduate and graduate education students at university education or music schools, who are training to become music teachers.

Research on the heritability of IQ inquires into the degree of variation in IQ within a population that is due to genetic variation between individuals in that population. There has been significant controversy in the academic community about the heritability of IQ since research on the issue began in the late nineteenth century. Intelligence in the normal range is a polygenic trait, meaning that it is influenced by more than one gene, and in the case of intelligence at least 500 genes. Further, explaining the similarity in IQ of closely related persons requires careful study because environmental factors may be correlated with genetic factors.

Health can affect intelligence in various ways. Conversely, intelligence can affect health. Health effects on intelligence have been described as being among the most important factors in the origins of human group differences in IQ test scores and other measures of cognitive ability. Several factors can lead to significant cognitive impairment, particularly if they occur during pregnancy and childhood when the brain is growing and the blood–brain barrier of the child is less effective. Such impairment may sometimes be permanent, sometimes be partially or wholly compensated for by later growth.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Sonata for Two Pianos (Mozart)</span>

The Sonata for Two Pianos in D major, K. 448 (375a), is a work composed by Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart in 1781, when he was 25. It is written in sonata-allegro form, with three movements. The sonata was composed for a performance he would give with fellow pianist Josepha Auernhammer. Mozart composed this in the galant style, with interlocking melodies and simultaneous cadences. This is one of his few compositions written for two pianos.

Environment and intelligence research investigates the impact of environment on intelligence. This is one of the most important factors in understanding human group differences in IQ test scores and other measures of cognitive ability. It is estimated that genes contribute about 20–40% of the variance in intelligence in childhood and about 80% in adulthood. Thus the environment and its interaction with genes account for a high proportion of the variation in intelligence seen in groups of young children, and for a small proportion of the variation observed in groups of mature adults. Historically, there has been great interest in the field of intelligence research to determine environmental influences on the development of cognitive functioning, in particular, fluid intelligence, as defined by its stabilization at 16 years of age. Despite the fact that intelligence stabilizes in early adulthood it is thought that genetic factors come to play more of a role in our intelligence during middle and old age and that the importance of the environment dissipates.

The n-back task is a continuous performance task that is commonly used as an assessment in psychology and cognitive neuroscience to measure a part of working memory and working memory capacity. The n-back was introduced by Wayne Kirchner in 1958. N-Back games are purported to be a training method to improve working memory and working memory capacity and also increase fluid intelligence, although evidence for such effects are lacking.

Emotion can have a powerful effect on humans and animals. Numerous studies have shown that the most vivid autobiographical memories tend to be of emotional events, which are likely to be recalled more often and with more clarity and detail than neutral events.

The missing heritability problem is the fact that single genetic variations cannot account for much of the heritability of diseases, behaviors, and other phenotypes. This is a problem that has significant implications for medicine, since a person's susceptibility to disease may depend more on the combined effect of all the genes in the background than on the disease genes in the foreground, or the role of genes may have been severely overestimated.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Neuroscience of sex differences</span> Characteristics of the brain that differentiate the male brain and the female brain

The neuroscience of sex differences is the study of characteristics that separate brains of different sexes. Psychological sex differences are thought by some to reflect the interaction of genes, hormones, and social learning on brain development throughout the lifespan.

Sex differences in human intelligence have long been a topic of debate among researchers and scholars. It is now recognized that there are no significant sex differences in general intelligence, though particular subtypes of intelligence vary somewhat between sexes.

Sex differences in cognition are widely studied in the current scientific literature. Biological and genetic differences in combination with environment and culture have resulted in the cognitive differences among males and females. Among biological factors, hormones such as testosterone and estrogen may play some role mediating these differences. Among differences of diverse mental and cognitive abilities, the largest or most well known are those relating to spatial abilities, social cognition and verbal skills and abilities.

In behavioral genetics, the Scarr–Rowe effect, also known as the Scarr–Rowe hypothesis, refers to the proposed moderating effect of low socioeconomic status on the heritability of children's IQ. According to this hypothesis, lower socioeconomic status and greater exposure to social disadvantage during childhood leads to a decrease in the heritability of IQ, as compared to children raised in more advantaged environments. It is considered an example of gene–environment interaction. This hypothesized effect was first proposed by Sandra Scarr, who found support for it in a 1971 study of twins in Philadelphia, and these results were replicated by David C. Rowe in 1999. Since then, similar results have been replicated numerous times, though not all replication studies have yielded positive results. A 2015 meta-analysis found that the effect was predominant in the United States while less evident in societies with robust child welfare systems.

References

  1. 1 2 3 4 "'Mozart Effect' Was Just What We Wanted To Hear". NPR.org. Retrieved 2020-11-29.
  2. 1 2 Rauscher, Frances H.; Shaw, Gordon L.; Ky, Catherine N. (1993). "Music and spatial task performance". Nature . 365 (6447): 611. Bibcode:1993Natur.365..611R. doi:10.1038/365611a0. PMID   8413624. S2CID   1385692.
  3. ↑ William Pryse-Phillips (2003). Companion to Clinical Neurology. Oxford University Press. ISBN   0-19-515938-1., p. 611 defines the term as "Slight and transient improvement in spational[sic] reasoning skills detected in normal subjects as a result of exposure to the music of Mozart, specifically his sonata for two pianos (K448)."
  4. 1 2 Jenkins, J S (April 2001). "The Mozart Effect". Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine. 94 (4): 170–172. doi:10.1177/014107680109400404. ISSN   0141-0768. PMC   1281386 . PMID   11317617.
  5. 1 2 Pietschnig, Jakob; Voracek, Martin; Formann, Anton K. (2010-05-01). "Mozart effect–Shmozart effect: A meta-analysis". Intelligence. 38 (3): 314–323. doi:10.1016/j.intell.2010.03.001. ISSN   0160-2896.
  6. ↑ Ross, Alex (August 28, 1994). "CLASSICAL VIEW; Listening To Prozac . . . Er, Mozart". New York Times. Retrieved 2012-11-15.
  7. ↑ Campbell, Don (1997). The Mozart Effect : tapping the power of music to heal the body, strengthen the mind, and unlock the creative spirit (1st ed.). New York: Avon Books. ISBN   978-0380974184 – via Internet Archive.
  8. ↑ Campbell, Don (1997). The Mozart Effect: Tapping the Power of Music to Heal the Body, Strengthen the Mind, and Unlock the Creative Spirit. ISBN   0-380-97418-5.
  9. ↑ Sack, Kevin (1998-01-15). "Georgia's Governor Seeks Musical Start for Babies". The New York Times . p. A12.
  10. ↑ Wilson, T., Brown, T. (2010). "Reexamination of the effect of Mozart's music on spatial task performance". The Journal of Psychology. 131 (4): 365–370. doi:10.1080/00223989709603522.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  11. 1 2 Thompson, W.F.; Schellenberg, E.G.; Husain, G. (2001). "Arousal, mood, and the Mozart effect". Psychological Science. 12 (3): 248–51. doi:10.1111/1467-9280.00345. PMID   11437309. S2CID   17641225.
  12. 1 2 Husain, G., Thompson, W.F. & Schellenberg, E.G. (2002). "Effects of musical tempo and mode on arousal, mood, and spatial abilities: Re-examination of the "Mozart effect"". Music Perception. 20 (2): 151. doi:10.1525/mp.2002.20.2.151.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  13. ↑ Ilie, G., & Thompson, W.F. (2011). "Experiential and cognitive changes following seven minutes exposure to music and speech". Music Perception. 28 (3): 247–264. doi:10.1525/mp.2011.28.3.247.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  14. ↑ McKelvie, Pippa; Low, Jason (2002). "Listening to Mozart does not improve children's spatial ability: Final curtains for the Mozart effect". British Journal of Developmental Psychology. 20 (2): 241. doi:10.1348/026151002166433.
  15. ↑ Schellenberg, E.G., & Hallam, S. (2005). "Music listening and cognitive abilities in 10 and 11 year olds: The Blur effect" (PDF). Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences. 1060 (1): 202–9. Bibcode:2005NYASA1060..202S. doi:10.1196/annals.1360.013. PMID   16597767. S2CID   9278012.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  16. ↑ Bridgett, D.J.; Cuevas, J. (2000). "Effects of listening to Mozart and Bach on the performance of a mathematical test". Perceptual and Motor Skills. 90 (3 Pt 2): 1171–1175. doi:10.2466/pms.2000.90.3c.1171. PMID   10939064. S2CID   35762220.
  17. ↑ Chabris, Christopher F. (1999). "Prelude or requiem for the 'Mozart effect'?". Nature . 400 (6747): 826–827. Bibcode:1999Natur.400..826C. doi:10.1038/23608. PMID   10476958. S2CID   898161.
  18. ↑ Steele, K. M.; Bella, S. D.; Peretz, I.; Dunlop, T.; Dawe, L. A.; Humphrey, G. K.; Shannon, R. A.; Kirby, J. L.; Olmstead, C. G. (1999). "Prelude or requiem for the 'Mozart effect'?" (PDF). Nature . 400 (6747): 827–828. Bibcode:1999Natur.400..827S. doi:10.1038/23611. PMID   10476959. S2CID   4352029.
  19. ↑ Steele, Kenneth M.; Bass, Karen E.; Crook, Melissa D. (1999). "The Mystery of the Mozart Effect: Failure to Replicate". Psychological Science . 10 (4): 366–369. doi:10.1111/1467-9280.00169. S2CID   13793518.
  20. 1 2 Steele, M. "Papers by Steele casting doubt on the Mozart effect". appstate.edu. Archived from the original on 2007-02-27. Retrieved 2007-03-24.
  21. ↑ Pietschnig, Jakob; Voracek, Martin; Formann, Anton K. (2010). "Mozart effect–Shmozart effect: A meta-analysis". Intelligence. 38 (3): 314–323. doi:10.1016/j.intell.2010.03.001.
  22. ↑ Rauscher, Frances H.; Shaw, Gordon L.; Ky, Katherine N. (1995). "Listening to Mozart enhances spatial-temporal reasoning: towards a neurophysiological basis". Neuroscience Letters. 185 (1): 44–47. doi:10.1016/0304-3940(94)11221-4. PMID   7731551. S2CID   20299379.
  23. ↑ McCutcheon, Lynn E. (2000). "Another failure to generalize the Mozart effect". Psychological Reports. 87 (5): 325–30. doi:10.2466/pr0.2000.87.1.325. PMID   11026433. S2CID   26613447.
  24. 1 2 3 Jones, Martin H.; West, Stephen D.; Estell, David B. (2006). "The Mozart effect: Arousal, preference, and spatial performance". Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts. S (1): 26–32. doi:10.1037/1931-3896.S.1.26.
  25. 1 2 Steele, Kenneth M. (2000). "Arousal and mood factors in the "Mozart effect"" (PDF). Perceptual and Motor Skills. 91 (1): 188–190. doi:10.2466/pms.2000.91.1.188. PMID   11011888. S2CID   21977655. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2017-01-06. Retrieved 2015-11-04.
  26. ↑ Abbott, Alison. "Mozart doesn't make you clever". Nature.com. Retrieved 2009-05-22.
  27. ↑ Schumacher, Ralph. "Macht Mozart schlau?" (PDF) (in German). Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung. p. 183. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2011-07-26. Retrieved 2009-05-22.
  28. ↑ Goode, Erica (1999), "Mozart For Baby? Some Say, Maybe Not". The New York Times, 1999-08-03 p. f1: Rauscher, "the money could be better spent on music education programs."
  29. ↑ Lilienfeld, Scott O.; Lynn, Steven Jay; Ruscio, John; Beyerstein, Barry L. (2009). 50 Great Myths of Popular Psychology. Wiley. ISBN   978-1405131124.
  30. ↑ University of Vienna (May 10, 2010). "Mozart's music does not make you smarter, study finds". www.sciencedaily.com. Retrieved 2 January 2017.
  31. 1 2 3 4 "The Mozart Effect". epilepsy.org. Archived from the original on 9 January 2013. Retrieved 2007-08-07.
  32. ↑ Yanni; Rensin, David (2002). Yanni in Words. Miramax Books. p.  67. ISBN   1-4013-5194-8.
  33. ↑ Oberleiter, Sandra; Pietschnig, Jakob. </ Unfounded authority, underpowered studies, and non-transparent reporting perpetuate the Mozart effect myth: a multiverse meta-analysis.
  34. ↑ Hughes, J. R.; Daaboul, Y.; Fino, J. J.; Shaw, G. L. (1998). "The "Mozart Effect" on Epileptiform Activity". Clinical EEG and Neuroscience. 29 (3): 109–119. doi:10.1177/155005949802900301. PMID   9660010. S2CID   36676593.
  35. ↑ Rauscher, F. H.; Robinson, K. D.; Jens, J. J. (July 1998). "Improved maze learning through early music exposure in rats". Neurol. Res. 20 (5): 427–32. doi:10.1080/01616412.1998.11740543. PMID   9664590.
  36. ↑ Connolly, Kate (2 June 2010). "Sewage plant plays Mozart to stimulate microbes". The Guardian. Retrieved 8 April 2011.
  37. ↑ Sorensen, Lars (19 November 2008). "Mozart on the Brain". Archived from the original on 2011-05-10. Retrieved 28 September 2014.
  38. ↑ Thompson, Billie M.; Andrews, Susan R. (2000). "An historical commentary on the physiological effects of music: Tomatis, Mozart and neuropsychology". Integrative Physiological and Behavioral Science. 35 (3): 174–188. doi:10.1007/BF02688778. PMID   11286370. S2CID   1228590.
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.