The Mozart Effect: A Common Misconception In Popular Culture

Introduction

In 1993, Rauscher, Shaw, and Ky published a report stating that 36 of their undergraduate participants increased their mean spatial reasoning scores 8 to 9 IQ points on the Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scale after merely listening to 10 minutes of a Mozart sonata. This ‘phenomenon, ' henceforward referred to as the "Mozart effect" received substantial attention in the media after the publication of the article by Rauscher et al. According to Hughes, the Mozart effect refers to an "enhancement of performance or a change in neurophysiological activity associated with listening to Mozart music" (2001). Although the Mozart effect was initially demonstrated in college students (and employed tests measuring only spatial ability), popular media referring to the finding reported that exposure to Mozart music would somehow enhance the intelligence of younger children. Public captivation with this method to improve spatial reasoning scores has resulted in a vast commercial industry dedicated to the Mozart effect; with dozens of records, tapes, and CDs of Mozart music aimed to create a positive impact on children's intelligence.

Thompson, Schellenberg, and Husain (2001) tested whether arousal and mood contributed to the Mozart effect. The authors used two musical pieces: a sonata by Mozart and an adagio by Albinoni. They predicted that the Mozart piece would produce a happy mood and intensified arousal while the Albinoni piece would create a sad mood and low arousal. In their study, they had 24 post-secondary students, ranging from 20 to 60 years of age. All the participants had, on average, 2. 75 years of formal music lessons. The two musical pieces were either 10 minutes from Mozart's (1985) Sonata for Two Pianos in D Major (K. 448) or 10 minutes from Albinoni's (1981) Adagio in G Minor for Organ and Strings. For the control stimulus, some students were asked to sit in silence for 10 minutes. The authors conducted various measures to test their prediction.

In the Paper Folding and Cutting (PF&C) subtest from the Stanford-Binet intelligence test, a different rectangular piece of paper on each trial was manipulated by folding and cutting. The participants were asked to choose, from five unfolded pieces of paper, which was the right pattern. Another measure was the Profile of Mood States (POMS), which assessed arousal level and mood (as determined by scores on the Vigor-Activity and Depression-Dejection subscales). The POMS has 30 adjectives that describe feelings and mood; the Vigor-Activity subscale describes positive arousal while the Depression-Dejection subscale describes negative affect. The participants indicated the amount to which each adjective described their mood by using a 5-point scale (ranging from not at all to extremely). In another measure, participants provided a subjective global rating of mood and arousal, on a scale from 1 (sad) to 7 (happy). This subjective mood-arousal rating, combined both mood and arousal into a single measure, creating a counterpart to the POMS measures. Lastly, a 7-point scale was employed for the participants to rate how much they enjoyed listening to the music. The authors found that the participants performed better after listening to a Mozart sonata compared to sitting in silence, but no effect of exposure to music when the excerpt by Albinoni was presented instead. Furthermore, the study found that the two musical excerpts generated different levels of arousal and mood; those who listened to Mozart scored considerably higher on positive mood and arousal and considerably lower on negative mood compared to the Albinoni group. The authors claim that their findings provide evidence that the Mozart effect can be explained by the participants' mood and arousal levels. According to Thompson et al. , previous indications that the short-term effects of listening to Mozart on spatial ability are caused by arousal and mood were directly supported by their study.

The authors discuss that the findings of Nantais & Schellenberg (1999) revealed that the Mozart effect disappears with appropriate experimental controls, and that their results also showed that the effect is removed "when enjoyment ratings, POMS arousal scores, or subjective mood-arousal ratings are statistically controlled" in their study as well. However, the Mozart effect remained when POMS mood scores were only fractioned out. The authors mention that one explanation for this discrepancy is that the POMS mood subscale (Depression-Dejection) measures negative affect, whereas the enjoyment and mood ratings both measure positive affect. Therefore, positive and negative affect may be somewhat independent, and may be mediated by different neural pathways.

In conclusion, the authors point out that claims that music leads to short-term enhancement of non-musical skills are false. Instead, the authors state that enjoyable stimuli (such as music) create a positive affect and heightened levels of arousal, which leads to moderate improvements in performance on multiple tasks.

Črnčec, Wilson, & Prior (2006) conducted a study to analyze previous predictions about improved spatiotemporal performance after exposure to Mozart's music. The authors conducted this particular study on children because of speculations that the Mozart effect may have educational benefits. The study contrasted the impact of Mozart's K. 448, popular music ("Zorba's Dance"), and silence on spatiotemporal performance. The authors mention that "Zorba's Dance" was selected because the composition was predicted to be exciting and enjoyable for children, and therefore according to the arousal-mood model, would improve spatiotemporal abilities. To control for a general listening effect, a silence condition was added. After exposure to each listening condition, spatiotemporal ability, self-reported preference, arousal, and mood were evaluated. Their study included 136 grade 5 children with a mean age of 10. 7 years. Although there were 36 cases of missing data from the 136 total children who participated in the study, the authors believe the sample to have had sufficient experimental power to detect a small to medium-sized Mozart effect.

The K. 448 sonata was used, which lasts 8 minutes 23 seconds (Mozart, 1985) along with a modified version of "Zorba's Dance". Using Cool Edit 2000 software (Johnston, 2000), "Zorba's Dance" was edited to make the stimulus the same length as K. 448 and to remove phrases that contained short verbalizations. The Fitzgerald paper-folding test was used to measure spatiotemporal reasoning as it has been shown to demonstrate good internal consistency and test-retest reliability (Fitzgerald, 1978). Although similar to the Paper Folding and Cutting subtest from the Stanford-Binet intelligence scale, it was not appropriate for the study as normative data is only available for children aged 12 and over. In the Fitzgerald paper-folding test, children were asked to visualize paper being folded, punctured, and then unfolded. The children had to select the correct answer from multiple choices. The test takes 10-15 minutes to complete, consisting of a practice item and 20 test items which are administered in a paper-and-pencil form. Additional measures of spatiotemporal reasoning were not employed as the Mozart effect is thought to wane after a period of 10 to 15 minutes in adults. Additionally, a 10-item affective reaction chart developed specifically for children by Ainley was used to measure arousal and mood. Moreover, during the pretest portion of the experiment the Rey-Osterrieth complex figure test, the Porteous Mazes, and the Vandenberg three-dimensional mental rotation task were administered to provide a greater assessment of the participants’ visuospatial abilities.

Lastly, musical ability was measured at pretest using the Bentley Measures of Musical Abilities. The authors found that there was no difference of performance on tests of spatiotemporal reasoning after exposure to Mozart, popular music, or silence. The Mozart sonata did not improve performance compared to repetitive music or silence. The authors note that their predictions were only partially supported, as “exposure to popular music was associated with enhanced positive mood, arousal, and increased preference; however, these changes did not result in improved spatiotemporal performance. "

The authors mention that there may be some methodological issues in the study given their null results, as their use of a single measure of spatiotemporal reasoning presents a methodological concern. Although the use of supplementary measures could enhance the validity of the results, multiple experiments would need to be employed as the Mozart effect is short-term in nature. In addition to this, re-administration of the Fitzgerald paper-folding test led to a small practice effect which could have removed any Mozart effect unnoticed. In conclusion, the authors claim that there is no Mozart effect in children and that there are no apparent immediate spatiotemporal benefits of exposing children to Mozart music.