The Mozart Effect: Evidence for the Arousal Hypothesis

Abstract

This study investigated the effect of music listening for performance on a 25-question portion of the analytical section of the Graduate Record Exam by 72 undergraduate students (M age 21.9 yr.). Five levels of an auditor condition were based on Mozart Piano Sonata No. 3 (K. 281), Movement I (Allegro); a rhythm excerpt; a melody excerpt; traffic sounds; and silence. Participants were randomly assigned to one of the stimuli. After a 5-min., 43-sec. (length of the first Allegro movement) listening period, participants answered the questions. Analysis indicated participants achieved significantly higher mean scores after all auditory conditions than those in the silent condition. No statistically significant pairwise mean difference appeared between scores for the auditory conditions. Findings were interpreted in terms of an arousal framework, suggesting the higher means in all auditory conditions may reflect immediate exposure to auditory stimuli.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Berlyne

D. E.

(1971) Aesthetics and psychobiology. New York: Appleton Century Crofts.

Carstens

C. B.

Huskins

Hounshell

G. W.

(1995) Listening to Mozart may not enhance performance on the revised Minnesota Paper Form Board Test. Psychological Reports, 77, 111–114.

Chabris

C. F.

(1999) Prelude or requiem for the ‘Mozart effect’? Nature, 400, 826–827.

Chen

Hurlburt

, (Eds.) (2000) Kaplan GRE exam. New York: Simon & Schuster.

Fujioka

Trainor

L. J.

Ross

Kakigi

Pantev

(2004) Musical training enhances automatic encoding of melodic contour and interval structure. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 16, 1010–1021.

Gaser

Schlaug

(2003) Brain structures differ between musicians and non-musicians. The Journal of Neuroscience, 23, 9240–9245.

Lintz

Gadbois

(2003) Is listening to Mozart the only way to enhance spatial reasoning? Perceptual and Motor Skills, 97, 1163–1174.

Nantais

K. M.

Schellenberg

E. G.

(1999) The Mozart effect: An artifact of preference. Psychological Science 10, 370–372.

Rauscher

F. H.

(1999) Prelude or requiem for the ‘Mozart effect’? Nature, 400, 827.

10.

Rauscher

F. H.

Shaw

G. L.

K. N.

(1993) Music and spatial task performance. Nature, 365, 611.

11.

Rauscher

F. H.

Shaw

G. L.

K. N.

(1995) Listening to Mozart enhances spatial-temporal reasoning: Towards a neurophysiological basis. Neuroscience Letters, 18, 44–47.

12.

Rideout

B. E.

Taylor

(1997) Enhanced spatial performance following 10 minutes exposure to music: A replication. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 85, 112–114.

13.

Steele

K. M.

(2000) Arousal and mood factors in the “Mozart effect.” Perceptual and Motor Skills, 91, 188–190.

14.

Steele

K. M.

Ball

T. N.

Runk

(1997) Listening to Mozart does not enhance backwards digit span performance. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 84, 1179–1184.

15.

Steele

K. M.

Bass

K. E.

Crook

M. D.

(1999) The mystery of the Mozart effect: Failure to replicate. Psychological Science 10, 366–369.

16.

Steele

K. M.

Dalla Bella

Peretz

Dunlop

Dawe

L. A.

Humphrey

G. K.

Shannon

R. A.

Kirby

J. L.

Jr. Olmsted

C. G.

(1999) Prelude or requiem for the ‘Mozart effect’? Nature, 400, 827.

17.

Stough

Kerkin

Bates

Mangan

(1994) Music and spatial IQ. Personality and Individual Differences, 17, 695.

18.

Thaut

M. H.

Hinshaw

(1999) Crossmodal patterned sensory priming enhances spatial ability: Lack of evidence for a Mozart-Specific effect. Poster session presented at the annual meeting of the American Music Therapy Association, Washington, DC, November.

19.

Thompson

W. F.

Schellenberg

E. G.

Husain

(2001) Arousal, mood, and the Mozart effect. Psychological Science, 12, 248–251.