莫扎特效应的实验研究
|
摘要
莫扎特效应最初由Rauscher、Shaw和Ky(1993)提出,它是指聆听10分钟莫扎特的奏鸣曲能够短暂地提高大学生的空间推理测试成绩。莫扎特效应的提出引起了研究者、公众和媒体的广泛兴趣。国外诸多研究者对莫扎特效应及这种效应的神经生理、心理机制等问题进行了实证研究,国内也出现了很多综述性的文章。
综观国外有关莫扎特效应的研究,可以发现诸多研究得出的结果并不一致,有些研究成功重复了莫扎特效应,而有些却未能发现莫扎特效应。由于诸多研究重点关注的因素不同,研究者所采用的研究设计也各不一样,这就使对效应的解释产生了困难。效应的提出者Rauscher等认为一些理论性的和实验性的因素如测量工具的选择、刺激条件的呈现顺序、音乐作品的选择等应该有助于解释不同的实验结果。他们认为研究中应该注意以下几点:(1)要选择合适的测量工具。这个测量工具必须包括空间推理作业的两个重要因素,即空间因素的心像和时间顺序(spatial imagery and the temporal ordering of spatial components),要能够考察被试在物理模式缺失情况下进行心理旋转的能力。(2)测试作业的难度对效应的发现有着重要的影响,使用难度相对较高的测试题将有助于发现莫扎特效应。(3)与莫扎特作品类似的结构比较复杂的音乐作品可能将产生莫扎特效应,而重复性音乐(如简约派音乐)不能产生莫扎特效应。(4)采用被试内前后测设计时要注意控制练习效应。(5)指导语的使用非常重要,应使被试集中注意于所听的音乐。在没有积极对音乐进行加工的被试身上不太可能发现莫扎特效应。
关于莫扎特效应的形成机制,研究者的看法也各不相同。一部分研究者认为莫扎特效应是因为启动的直接影响,音乐加工激活了大脑中负责空间加工的区域并因此而提高了空间推理的能力。还有研究者认为莫扎特效应是因为聆听音乐导致了听者偏好、心境、唤醒的改变从而间接影响了认知能力。
除以上争议外,莫扎特效应的研究中还有许多亟待解决的问题。例如,什么样的音乐作品能够产生莫扎特效应?是否存在性别差异?被试的音乐经验是否会影响莫扎特效应的产生等。
关于莫扎特效应的实践意义,同样存在两种不同的看法。一种看法是,莫扎特效应的研究启发人们从多个角度思考促进脑功能发展的途径和方法,并使人们日益认识到音乐在脑潜力开发中可能具有的一定价值。另一种看法认为人们对莫扎特效应的认识产生了偏差,希望通过音乐来提高儿童的智力,这是弊大于利的。他们认为教育者应该谨慎对待从音乐教育中获得认知益处的不切实际的期望。
本研究采用自编的折纸剪纸作业,考察了莫扎特效应研究中一系列有争议性的问题,并对莫扎特效应的实践意义进行了讨论。
实验1旨在编订空间推理测试题。莫扎特效应的提出者Rauscher等认为,折纸剪纸作业对于测试空间推理能力是比较合适的,因为这个作业包含了对莫扎特效应起关键作用的两个主要因素——空间因素的心像和时间顺序。囿于无法获得Rauscher等研究中采用的折纸剪纸题,因此这个实验根据文献中发表的折纸剪纸题自编了两套难度等值的测试题。
实验2考察了莫扎特效应的可靠性。对于是否存在莫扎特效应,诸多研究的结果是不一致的。通过实验,我们发现被试聆听莫扎特音乐后的空间推理成绩显著高于无声静息后的空间推理成绩。也就是说,本研究成功地重复了莫扎特效应。
音乐作品的选择能够影响到认知表现。Rauscher等认为,不管风格或创作时间,结构比较复杂的音乐相对于重复性的音乐来说可能更容易提高空间推理的成绩。但就已有研究来看,能够产生效应的音乐作品的特征现在还不明晰。实验3采用不同风格和不同作曲家的作品考察了能产生莫扎特效应的音乐作品的特征。选择的作品有三类:[1]被某些研究者采用过并且产生了提高效应的作品。[2]与莫扎特作品风格相近,被某些研究者预测能够产生效应的作品。[3]一首与莫扎特奏鸣曲在某些特点上相近但又存在风格差异的中国音乐作品。在本实验条件下,我们认为能够产生莫扎特效应的音乐作品可能具有以下几个特征:[1]结构比较复杂;[2]旋律具有周期性重复的特点且起伏较大;[3]力度变化的幅度以及强弱对比的转换较为鲜明;[4]节奏形态丰富多变;[5]音响织体比较多样。除以上这些特征,还有许多音乐要素有待进一步的检验,例如,调式的影响。此外,在选择音乐作品时,还需考虑熟悉性的影响等。虽然本实验的被试均表示对中国音乐作品——钢琴协奏曲《山林》不熟悉,但由于《山林》具有浓郁的中国音乐风格,被试所具有的有关中国音乐的隐含性知识,可能使他们认知音乐的过程变得更为便利。
实验4、实验5和实验6分别采用被试内设计考察了莫扎特效应的产生机制。对莫扎特效应的形成机制存在两种不同的看法,我们考察了其中一种假设,即偏好、心境和唤醒的改变间接导致了认知能力的改变。
实验4主要考察了偏好的影响。有研究者(Nantais,1999)认为,莫扎特效应的产生是因为被试对一种刺激的喜爱程度超过了另一种刺激,这种偏好进而会影响随后进行的空间推理测试的成绩。本实验选择了两首风格差异非常大的乐曲——莫扎特奏鸣曲K.448第一乐章与中国民族管弦乐曲《春江花月夜》作为实验刺激条件。研究发现:被试聆听莫扎特奏鸣曲K.448第一乐章后的空间推理成绩显著高于聆听《春江花月夜》后的空间推理成绩,但不同的音乐偏好对空间推理能力的影响不明显。这个实验还发现,音乐专业被试与非音乐专业被试在空间推理成绩上的差异不显著,但音乐专业被试的音乐学习年限与他们的空间推理成绩有显著的相关。
实验5旨在考察心境对莫扎特效应的影响。心境能够影响认知已为很多研究所发现。这个实验采用已有研究中曾用过的两首音乐作品——维瓦尔第的小提琴协奏曲《四季》之“春”第一乐章和巴伯的《弦乐柔板》,来分别唤起被试的两种不同心境——快乐的和悲伤的,比较这两种心境条件下空间推理成绩是否存在差异。实验结果显示,两种音乐条件下被试的空间推理成绩差异不显著。对被试的心境问卷进行分析后发现,由音乐唤起的情绪是非常复杂的,这与被试的知识结构、个性特点等有关。由于我们仅研究被试在相对单一心境下(快乐的和悲伤的)空间推理成绩的差异,因此删除了心境反应复杂的被试。将唤起了快乐心境和悲伤心境的被试的空间推理成绩进行比较,我们发现,心境对空间推理能力的影响不明显。
实验6考察了生理唤醒对莫扎特效应的影响。实验处理条件包括聆听莫扎特奏鸣曲K448第一乐章和聆听放松指导。有研究者认为,莫扎特效应的产生是因为将莫扎特音乐与放松指导相比较,而放松指导降低了唤醒水平从而导致了空间推理成绩的降低。国外的研究中虽然提出唤醒可能是莫扎特效应的产生机制,但大多采用自评量表的形式让被试对自己的唤醒水平做主观评定,采用仪器实际测量被试生理唤醒水平的研究较为少见。国内目前在这方面的研究还是空白。本实验采用生物反馈仪记录了被试在实验过程中的脑电(EEG)、肌电(EMG)、皮电(SC)、皮温(TEMP)、血容量(BVP)、心率(HR)等生理数据。我们发现被试聆听莫扎特奏鸣曲之后的空间推理成绩与聆听放松指导后的空间推理成绩差异不显著。对生理数据进行分析,发现在两个实验处理阶段(聆听莫扎特奏鸣曲和聆听放松指导)被试的生理唤醒水平有着显著的差异,但在随后的两个测试阶段,这种显著的差异消失了。这就是说,生理唤醒水平对莫扎特效应的影响应该是不明显的。
通过研究,我们认为莫扎特效应是存在的。但由于我们只采用折纸剪纸测试考察了被动聆听音乐对空间推理能力的提高效应,所以音乐对其他认知领域的提高效应尤其是音乐对儿童认知发展的影响亟需进一步的研究。综合实验4、实验5和实验6,我们的研究结果间接地对启动说提供了支持。当然,这还需要进一步的神经生理、心理方面的研究,尤其是采用PET、fMRI等脑成像技术进行研究予以印证。
The Mozart effect was reported by Rauscher, Shaw and Ky in 1993. It means that college students' score on spatial reasoning task increased after listening to ten minutes of the first movement (allegro con spirito) of Mozart's Piano Sonata for Two Pianos in D Major, K448. Mozart effect have received widespread attention in researchers, the public, and the news media. Foreign researchers do many empirical studies on the validity of Mozart effect and the mechanism of this effect. Domestic researchers summarized and reviewed foreign studies.
The results of foreign studies intended to replicate the enhancement of spatial reasoning following exposure to 10 min. of Mozart's Sonata for Two Pianos in D Major have been varied. While some studies have replicated the effect, others have not. Because many researchers examined various factors, so that the design they used varied. These make the difficulties in explain the Mozart effect. Rauscher et al. consider that some theoretical and experimental factors may contribute to the various findings, such as the selection of dependent measures, the presentation order of the conditions, and the choice of musical compositions. They proposed some suggestions in the future study. (1)Choose the suitable task. They suggest two components of spatial reasoning task......spatial imagery and the temporal ordering of spatial components. Such kind of task should be used to investigate the ability to transform mental images in the absence of a physical model. (2) The difficulty of the task is important to Mozart effect, and using more difficult items will facilitated to find Mozart effect. (3)The music pieces similar to Mozart's music and with complex construction probably produce Mozart effect, while the repeated music (for example, minimal music) could not produce effect. (4) Studies using pretest and post-test design should control for practice effects. (5) Instructions to participants are important because it can make participants concentrate on the music. It seems unlikely that a Mozart effect would be found for participants who did not actively process the music.
Researchers also have different views on the mechanism of the Mozart effect. Some researchers think that listening to the music will directly prime spatial abilities because of similar neural activation between spatial reasoning and passive listening to Mozart. In other words, the Mozart effect represents an instance of priming. Some other researchers think that listening to music may affect subject's mood, arousal or preference, which will then influence performance on various cognitive skills.
Besides these controversies, there are many problems should be explored, such as, what kind of music can produce Mozart effect? Are Female more subject to the Mozart effect than males? Do subject's music experiences have any influence on Mozart effect?
People's opinions on the implication of Mozart effect on education are not the same. One of the views is that the research on Mozart effect enlightened people to consider the way and the method of promoting the development of brain functions, and such research make people realized the possible importance of music on exploiting the potential ability of brain. However, the adverse view is that people have the false impression of Mozart effect and wont to promote children's intelligence through music. This will do more harm than good and will draw attention and resources away from programs, policies, and ideas that have already been proven to be effective. They suggest that educators should be cautious about setting unrealistic expectations regarding the cognitive benefits of music instruction.
The present study used paper folding and cutting task that derived from the similar items publishing in the literatures to examined many controversial issues in the researches on the Mozart effect, and discussed its' practical meaning.
Experiment 1 aimed to produce spatial reasoning task. Rauscher et al. believed that paper folding and cutting task (PFC) is suitable for measure the ability of spatialreasoning because such task contained two components of spatial reasoning task------spatial imagery and the temporal ordering of spatial components. Because lacking of the original PFC, we derived two sets of PFC from the published literature.
Experiment 2 investigated the existence of Mozart effect. The results of studies intended to replicate the enhancement of spatial reasoning following exposure to ten min. of Mozart's Sonata for Two Pianos in D Major (K.448) or other composer's works are inconsistent. Some studies have replicated the effect and some studies have been unable to confirm the existence of the effect. The result of experiment 2 indicate that the participants' spatial score after listening Mozart's music is significantly higher than the spatial score after sit in silence for ten minutes. We replicated the Mozart effect.
The choice of musical composition may influence cognitive performance. Rauscher et al. suggest that complexly structured music, regardless of style or period, may enhance spatial task performance. But according to the previous studies, the characteristics of the musical compositions which can produce the enhanced effect are not clear. In experiment 3, we using different composer's music and the music works with different styles to examine which kind of music can produce Mozart effect. The music work we choose include three sorts: (1) the music was clearly affective as the Mozart selection used by others; (2) the music composition is similar to Mozart's K448 and some researchers predicted that it will be effective; (3) a piece of Chinese music composition which have many characteristics similar to the Mozart's K448 and also have many differences in style. Through the present study, we suggest that the music pieces which will be affective to spatial reasoning include such following characteristics: (1) have complex structure; (2) the melodic line repeatedly and with more biggish undulation; (3) have more variations of dynamics and the lively change between piano and forte; (4) have various rhythm form; (5) the sound texture was rich and varied. Except for these characteristics, there are many musical factors should be examined, for example, the influence of mode. The influence of the familiarity with music composition also should be considered. Though most respondents in this study are notfamiliar with the Chinese music composition------Piano Concerto "Shan Lin", butbecause of its' rich Chinese musical style, respondents' implicit knowledge of Chinese music will facilitate the processing of this music composition.
Experiment 4, experiment 5 and experiment 6 using within-subject design to examined the mechanism of Mozart effect. There are two hypotheses about the mechanism of Mozart effect. We examined one of the two hypotheses that listening music change respondents' arousal level, mood or preference and thus promote cognitive ability.
Experiment 4 investigated the influence of preference. Nantais et al. suggest that Mozart effect is actually a consequence of participants' preference for one testing condition over another. This preference will influence the performance of subsequent spatial task. The assumption being that better performance would follow the preferred condition. This study selected two music compositions as the stimuli, the first movement of Mozart's Sonata (K.448) and Chinese orchestral piece "A Moonlit Spring Night by the River of Flowers". The findings of this experiment are as following: (1) Participants' spatial reasoning score after listening to Mozart's Sonata K.488 were significantly higher than their spatial reasoning score after listening to "A Moonlit Spring Night by the River of Flowers". (2) The influence of preference on Mozart effect is not significant. (3) The difference of spatial reasoning score between musicians and nonmusicians is not significant, but the years of studying music and the spatial score have a reliable correlation.
The purpose of experiment 5 was to examine the influence of mood on Mozart effect. Many researches proved that variations in mood can affect cognitive performance. We used two music compositions (the first movement of violin concerto "Four Seasons" composed by Vivaldi, Barber's Adagio for strings) to induced twodifferent moods------happy and sadness, and then investigated whether there have anydifferences in spatial reasoning score between happy mood and sad mood. These two music pieces once used by other researchers and be proved can induce happy mood and sad mood respectively. The findings indicate that the difference of subject's spatial reasoning score in two kind of musical stimuli is not significant. By analyzing subjects' mood measure, we found that the mood induced by music is too complicated, and this related to participants' knowledge structure, and characteristic of personality, etc. Because we aimed to compare the spatial scores in simple mood, so we delete the participants who induced complex mood by music. Compared the score of spatial task in happy mood and sad mood, the result suggest that the influence of mood on Mozart effect is not significant.
Experiment 6 examined the influence of physiological arousal on Mozart effect. The treatment conditions include listening Mozart' Sonata (K.448) and listening a relaxation instructions. Some researchers think that the mechanism of Mozart effect must be arousal. The conditions may have affected subjects' arousal differently, with the sonata increasing arousal and the relaxation instructions decreasing arousal, which could have affected spatial reasoning performance. Though the foreign researchers proposed that arousal may be a factor that could influence Mozart effect, but they often let the participants using self-report inventory to evaluate their arousal level subjectively. There are few researches using apparatus to measure participants' arousal level directly. While domestic research in this way have not been found. This study used biofeedback apparatus to record participants' physiological data in the course of experiment, such as EEG, EMG, SC, TEMP, BVP, HR, etc. The result shows that the difference of spatial reasoning scores in two treatment conditions is not significant. Through the analysis of physiological data, we find the significant difference in listening Mozart and listening relaxation instruction. While this difference in two test phases (test after listening Mozart and test after listening relaxation instruction) disappeared. This means the influence of arousal level on Mozart effect is not obvious.
Through these series researches, we suggest the existence of Mozart effect. Because our studies have focused on investigating the effect of passive listening to music with the paper folding and cutting task, we cannot clarify the breadth of the music effect. Thus the effect of music on other cognitive areas especially the music's influence on children's cognitive development should make clear. The results of experiment 4, experiment 5 and experiment 6 support Rauscher et al.'s priming explanation indirectly. Certainly, this view should be proved in further studies in neurophysiology and neuropsychology, especially using barin-function-graphy techniques such as PET and fMRI to authenticate it.
综观国外有关莫扎特效应的研究,可以发现诸多研究得出的结果并不一致,有些研究成功重复了莫扎特效应,而有些却未能发现莫扎特效应。由于诸多研究重点关注的因素不同,研究者所采用的研究设计也各不一样,这就使对效应的解释产生了困难。效应的提出者Rauscher等认为一些理论性的和实验性的因素如测量工具的选择、刺激条件的呈现顺序、音乐作品的选择等应该有助于解释不同的实验结果。他们认为研究中应该注意以下几点:(1)要选择合适的测量工具。这个测量工具必须包括空间推理作业的两个重要因素,即空间因素的心像和时间顺序(spatial imagery and the temporal ordering of spatial components),要能够考察被试在物理模式缺失情况下进行心理旋转的能力。(2)测试作业的难度对效应的发现有着重要的影响,使用难度相对较高的测试题将有助于发现莫扎特效应。(3)与莫扎特作品类似的结构比较复杂的音乐作品可能将产生莫扎特效应,而重复性音乐(如简约派音乐)不能产生莫扎特效应。(4)采用被试内前后测设计时要注意控制练习效应。(5)指导语的使用非常重要,应使被试集中注意于所听的音乐。在没有积极对音乐进行加工的被试身上不太可能发现莫扎特效应。
关于莫扎特效应的形成机制,研究者的看法也各不相同。一部分研究者认为莫扎特效应是因为启动的直接影响,音乐加工激活了大脑中负责空间加工的区域并因此而提高了空间推理的能力。还有研究者认为莫扎特效应是因为聆听音乐导致了听者偏好、心境、唤醒的改变从而间接影响了认知能力。
除以上争议外,莫扎特效应的研究中还有许多亟待解决的问题。例如,什么样的音乐作品能够产生莫扎特效应?是否存在性别差异?被试的音乐经验是否会影响莫扎特效应的产生等。
关于莫扎特效应的实践意义,同样存在两种不同的看法。一种看法是,莫扎特效应的研究启发人们从多个角度思考促进脑功能发展的途径和方法,并使人们日益认识到音乐在脑潜力开发中可能具有的一定价值。另一种看法认为人们对莫扎特效应的认识产生了偏差,希望通过音乐来提高儿童的智力,这是弊大于利的。他们认为教育者应该谨慎对待从音乐教育中获得认知益处的不切实际的期望。
本研究采用自编的折纸剪纸作业,考察了莫扎特效应研究中一系列有争议性的问题,并对莫扎特效应的实践意义进行了讨论。
实验1旨在编订空间推理测试题。莫扎特效应的提出者Rauscher等认为,折纸剪纸作业对于测试空间推理能力是比较合适的,因为这个作业包含了对莫扎特效应起关键作用的两个主要因素——空间因素的心像和时间顺序。囿于无法获得Rauscher等研究中采用的折纸剪纸题,因此这个实验根据文献中发表的折纸剪纸题自编了两套难度等值的测试题。
实验2考察了莫扎特效应的可靠性。对于是否存在莫扎特效应,诸多研究的结果是不一致的。通过实验,我们发现被试聆听莫扎特音乐后的空间推理成绩显著高于无声静息后的空间推理成绩。也就是说,本研究成功地重复了莫扎特效应。
音乐作品的选择能够影响到认知表现。Rauscher等认为,不管风格或创作时间,结构比较复杂的音乐相对于重复性的音乐来说可能更容易提高空间推理的成绩。但就已有研究来看,能够产生效应的音乐作品的特征现在还不明晰。实验3采用不同风格和不同作曲家的作品考察了能产生莫扎特效应的音乐作品的特征。选择的作品有三类:[1]被某些研究者采用过并且产生了提高效应的作品。[2]与莫扎特作品风格相近,被某些研究者预测能够产生效应的作品。[3]一首与莫扎特奏鸣曲在某些特点上相近但又存在风格差异的中国音乐作品。在本实验条件下,我们认为能够产生莫扎特效应的音乐作品可能具有以下几个特征:[1]结构比较复杂;[2]旋律具有周期性重复的特点且起伏较大;[3]力度变化的幅度以及强弱对比的转换较为鲜明;[4]节奏形态丰富多变;[5]音响织体比较多样。除以上这些特征,还有许多音乐要素有待进一步的检验,例如,调式的影响。此外,在选择音乐作品时,还需考虑熟悉性的影响等。虽然本实验的被试均表示对中国音乐作品——钢琴协奏曲《山林》不熟悉,但由于《山林》具有浓郁的中国音乐风格,被试所具有的有关中国音乐的隐含性知识,可能使他们认知音乐的过程变得更为便利。
实验4、实验5和实验6分别采用被试内设计考察了莫扎特效应的产生机制。对莫扎特效应的形成机制存在两种不同的看法,我们考察了其中一种假设,即偏好、心境和唤醒的改变间接导致了认知能力的改变。
实验4主要考察了偏好的影响。有研究者(Nantais,1999)认为,莫扎特效应的产生是因为被试对一种刺激的喜爱程度超过了另一种刺激,这种偏好进而会影响随后进行的空间推理测试的成绩。本实验选择了两首风格差异非常大的乐曲——莫扎特奏鸣曲K.448第一乐章与中国民族管弦乐曲《春江花月夜》作为实验刺激条件。研究发现:被试聆听莫扎特奏鸣曲K.448第一乐章后的空间推理成绩显著高于聆听《春江花月夜》后的空间推理成绩,但不同的音乐偏好对空间推理能力的影响不明显。这个实验还发现,音乐专业被试与非音乐专业被试在空间推理成绩上的差异不显著,但音乐专业被试的音乐学习年限与他们的空间推理成绩有显著的相关。
实验5旨在考察心境对莫扎特效应的影响。心境能够影响认知已为很多研究所发现。这个实验采用已有研究中曾用过的两首音乐作品——维瓦尔第的小提琴协奏曲《四季》之“春”第一乐章和巴伯的《弦乐柔板》,来分别唤起被试的两种不同心境——快乐的和悲伤的,比较这两种心境条件下空间推理成绩是否存在差异。实验结果显示,两种音乐条件下被试的空间推理成绩差异不显著。对被试的心境问卷进行分析后发现,由音乐唤起的情绪是非常复杂的,这与被试的知识结构、个性特点等有关。由于我们仅研究被试在相对单一心境下(快乐的和悲伤的)空间推理成绩的差异,因此删除了心境反应复杂的被试。将唤起了快乐心境和悲伤心境的被试的空间推理成绩进行比较,我们发现,心境对空间推理能力的影响不明显。
实验6考察了生理唤醒对莫扎特效应的影响。实验处理条件包括聆听莫扎特奏鸣曲K448第一乐章和聆听放松指导。有研究者认为,莫扎特效应的产生是因为将莫扎特音乐与放松指导相比较,而放松指导降低了唤醒水平从而导致了空间推理成绩的降低。国外的研究中虽然提出唤醒可能是莫扎特效应的产生机制,但大多采用自评量表的形式让被试对自己的唤醒水平做主观评定,采用仪器实际测量被试生理唤醒水平的研究较为少见。国内目前在这方面的研究还是空白。本实验采用生物反馈仪记录了被试在实验过程中的脑电(EEG)、肌电(EMG)、皮电(SC)、皮温(TEMP)、血容量(BVP)、心率(HR)等生理数据。我们发现被试聆听莫扎特奏鸣曲之后的空间推理成绩与聆听放松指导后的空间推理成绩差异不显著。对生理数据进行分析,发现在两个实验处理阶段(聆听莫扎特奏鸣曲和聆听放松指导)被试的生理唤醒水平有着显著的差异,但在随后的两个测试阶段,这种显著的差异消失了。这就是说,生理唤醒水平对莫扎特效应的影响应该是不明显的。
通过研究,我们认为莫扎特效应是存在的。但由于我们只采用折纸剪纸测试考察了被动聆听音乐对空间推理能力的提高效应,所以音乐对其他认知领域的提高效应尤其是音乐对儿童认知发展的影响亟需进一步的研究。综合实验4、实验5和实验6,我们的研究结果间接地对启动说提供了支持。当然,这还需要进一步的神经生理、心理方面的研究,尤其是采用PET、fMRI等脑成像技术进行研究予以印证。
The Mozart effect was reported by Rauscher, Shaw and Ky in 1993. It means that college students' score on spatial reasoning task increased after listening to ten minutes of the first movement (allegro con spirito) of Mozart's Piano Sonata for Two Pianos in D Major, K448. Mozart effect have received widespread attention in researchers, the public, and the news media. Foreign researchers do many empirical studies on the validity of Mozart effect and the mechanism of this effect. Domestic researchers summarized and reviewed foreign studies.
The results of foreign studies intended to replicate the enhancement of spatial reasoning following exposure to 10 min. of Mozart's Sonata for Two Pianos in D Major have been varied. While some studies have replicated the effect, others have not. Because many researchers examined various factors, so that the design they used varied. These make the difficulties in explain the Mozart effect. Rauscher et al. consider that some theoretical and experimental factors may contribute to the various findings, such as the selection of dependent measures, the presentation order of the conditions, and the choice of musical compositions. They proposed some suggestions in the future study. (1)Choose the suitable task. They suggest two components of spatial reasoning task......spatial imagery and the temporal ordering of spatial components. Such kind of task should be used to investigate the ability to transform mental images in the absence of a physical model. (2) The difficulty of the task is important to Mozart effect, and using more difficult items will facilitated to find Mozart effect. (3)The music pieces similar to Mozart's music and with complex construction probably produce Mozart effect, while the repeated music (for example, minimal music) could not produce effect. (4) Studies using pretest and post-test design should control for practice effects. (5) Instructions to participants are important because it can make participants concentrate on the music. It seems unlikely that a Mozart effect would be found for participants who did not actively process the music.
Researchers also have different views on the mechanism of the Mozart effect. Some researchers think that listening to the music will directly prime spatial abilities because of similar neural activation between spatial reasoning and passive listening to Mozart. In other words, the Mozart effect represents an instance of priming. Some other researchers think that listening to music may affect subject's mood, arousal or preference, which will then influence performance on various cognitive skills.
Besides these controversies, there are many problems should be explored, such as, what kind of music can produce Mozart effect? Are Female more subject to the Mozart effect than males? Do subject's music experiences have any influence on Mozart effect?
People's opinions on the implication of Mozart effect on education are not the same. One of the views is that the research on Mozart effect enlightened people to consider the way and the method of promoting the development of brain functions, and such research make people realized the possible importance of music on exploiting the potential ability of brain. However, the adverse view is that people have the false impression of Mozart effect and wont to promote children's intelligence through music. This will do more harm than good and will draw attention and resources away from programs, policies, and ideas that have already been proven to be effective. They suggest that educators should be cautious about setting unrealistic expectations regarding the cognitive benefits of music instruction.
The present study used paper folding and cutting task that derived from the similar items publishing in the literatures to examined many controversial issues in the researches on the Mozart effect, and discussed its' practical meaning.
Experiment 1 aimed to produce spatial reasoning task. Rauscher et al. believed that paper folding and cutting task (PFC) is suitable for measure the ability of spatialreasoning because such task contained two components of spatial reasoning task------spatial imagery and the temporal ordering of spatial components. Because lacking of the original PFC, we derived two sets of PFC from the published literature.
Experiment 2 investigated the existence of Mozart effect. The results of studies intended to replicate the enhancement of spatial reasoning following exposure to ten min. of Mozart's Sonata for Two Pianos in D Major (K.448) or other composer's works are inconsistent. Some studies have replicated the effect and some studies have been unable to confirm the existence of the effect. The result of experiment 2 indicate that the participants' spatial score after listening Mozart's music is significantly higher than the spatial score after sit in silence for ten minutes. We replicated the Mozart effect.
The choice of musical composition may influence cognitive performance. Rauscher et al. suggest that complexly structured music, regardless of style or period, may enhance spatial task performance. But according to the previous studies, the characteristics of the musical compositions which can produce the enhanced effect are not clear. In experiment 3, we using different composer's music and the music works with different styles to examine which kind of music can produce Mozart effect. The music work we choose include three sorts: (1) the music was clearly affective as the Mozart selection used by others; (2) the music composition is similar to Mozart's K448 and some researchers predicted that it will be effective; (3) a piece of Chinese music composition which have many characteristics similar to the Mozart's K448 and also have many differences in style. Through the present study, we suggest that the music pieces which will be affective to spatial reasoning include such following characteristics: (1) have complex structure; (2) the melodic line repeatedly and with more biggish undulation; (3) have more variations of dynamics and the lively change between piano and forte; (4) have various rhythm form; (5) the sound texture was rich and varied. Except for these characteristics, there are many musical factors should be examined, for example, the influence of mode. The influence of the familiarity with music composition also should be considered. Though most respondents in this study are notfamiliar with the Chinese music composition------Piano Concerto "Shan Lin", butbecause of its' rich Chinese musical style, respondents' implicit knowledge of Chinese music will facilitate the processing of this music composition.
Experiment 4, experiment 5 and experiment 6 using within-subject design to examined the mechanism of Mozart effect. There are two hypotheses about the mechanism of Mozart effect. We examined one of the two hypotheses that listening music change respondents' arousal level, mood or preference and thus promote cognitive ability.
Experiment 4 investigated the influence of preference. Nantais et al. suggest that Mozart effect is actually a consequence of participants' preference for one testing condition over another. This preference will influence the performance of subsequent spatial task. The assumption being that better performance would follow the preferred condition. This study selected two music compositions as the stimuli, the first movement of Mozart's Sonata (K.448) and Chinese orchestral piece "A Moonlit Spring Night by the River of Flowers". The findings of this experiment are as following: (1) Participants' spatial reasoning score after listening to Mozart's Sonata K.488 were significantly higher than their spatial reasoning score after listening to "A Moonlit Spring Night by the River of Flowers". (2) The influence of preference on Mozart effect is not significant. (3) The difference of spatial reasoning score between musicians and nonmusicians is not significant, but the years of studying music and the spatial score have a reliable correlation.
The purpose of experiment 5 was to examine the influence of mood on Mozart effect. Many researches proved that variations in mood can affect cognitive performance. We used two music compositions (the first movement of violin concerto "Four Seasons" composed by Vivaldi, Barber's Adagio for strings) to induced twodifferent moods------happy and sadness, and then investigated whether there have anydifferences in spatial reasoning score between happy mood and sad mood. These two music pieces once used by other researchers and be proved can induce happy mood and sad mood respectively. The findings indicate that the difference of subject's spatial reasoning score in two kind of musical stimuli is not significant. By analyzing subjects' mood measure, we found that the mood induced by music is too complicated, and this related to participants' knowledge structure, and characteristic of personality, etc. Because we aimed to compare the spatial scores in simple mood, so we delete the participants who induced complex mood by music. Compared the score of spatial task in happy mood and sad mood, the result suggest that the influence of mood on Mozart effect is not significant.
Experiment 6 examined the influence of physiological arousal on Mozart effect. The treatment conditions include listening Mozart' Sonata (K.448) and listening a relaxation instructions. Some researchers think that the mechanism of Mozart effect must be arousal. The conditions may have affected subjects' arousal differently, with the sonata increasing arousal and the relaxation instructions decreasing arousal, which could have affected spatial reasoning performance. Though the foreign researchers proposed that arousal may be a factor that could influence Mozart effect, but they often let the participants using self-report inventory to evaluate their arousal level subjectively. There are few researches using apparatus to measure participants' arousal level directly. While domestic research in this way have not been found. This study used biofeedback apparatus to record participants' physiological data in the course of experiment, such as EEG, EMG, SC, TEMP, BVP, HR, etc. The result shows that the difference of spatial reasoning scores in two treatment conditions is not significant. Through the analysis of physiological data, we find the significant difference in listening Mozart and listening relaxation instruction. While this difference in two test phases (test after listening Mozart and test after listening relaxation instruction) disappeared. This means the influence of arousal level on Mozart effect is not obvious.
Through these series researches, we suggest the existence of Mozart effect. Because our studies have focused on investigating the effect of passive listening to music with the paper folding and cutting task, we cannot clarify the breadth of the music effect. Thus the effect of music on other cognitive areas especially the music's influence on children's cognitive development should make clear. The results of experiment 4, experiment 5 and experiment 6 support Rauscher et al.'s priming explanation indirectly. Certainly, this view should be proved in further studies in neurophysiology and neuropsychology, especially using barin-function-graphy techniques such as PET and fMRI to authenticate it.
引文
1. Rauscher F H, Shaw G L, Ky K N. Music and spatial task performance. Nature,1993,365:611
2. Rauscher F H, Shaw G L, Ky K N. Listening to Mozart enhances spatial-temporal reasoning: Towards a neurophysiological basis. Neuroscience Letter, 1995, 185:44-47
3. Rideout B E, Laubach C M. EEG correlates of enhanced spatial performance following exposure to music. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 1996, 82: 427-432
4. Wilson T L, Brown T. Reexamination of the effect of Mozart's music on spatial-task performance. The Journal of Psychology, 1997, 131: 365-370
5. Rideout B E, Taylor J. Enhanced spatial performance following 10 minutes exposure to music: a replication. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 1997, 85: 112-114
6. Rideout B E, Dougherty S, Wernert L. Effect of music on spatial performance: a test of generality. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 1998, 86: 512-514
7. Nantais K M, Schellenberg E G. The Mozart effect: an artifact of preference.Psychological Science, 1999, 10: 370-373
8. Twomey A, Esgate A. The Mozart effect may only be demonstrable in nonmusicians. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 2002, 95: 1013-1026
9. Ivanov V K, Geake J G. The Mozart effect and primary school children. Psychology of Music, 2003, 31:405-413
10. Norbert Jausovec, Ksenija Jausovec, Ivan Gerlic. The influence of Mozart's music on brain activity in the process of learning. Clinical Neurophysiology, 2006, 117:2703-2714
11. Steele K M, Ball T N, Runk R. Listening to Mozart does not enhance backwards digit span performance. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 1997, 84: 1179-1184
12. Steele K M, Brown J D, Stoecker J A. Failure to confirm the Rauscher and Shaw description of recovery of the Mozart effect. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 1999, 88:843-848
13. Steele K M, Bass K E, Crook M D. The Mystery of the Mozart effect: Failure to Replicate. Psychological Science, 1999, 10: 366-369
14. McCutcheon L E. Another failure to generalize the Mozart effect. Psychological Reports, 2000, 87: 325-330
15.Mckelvie P,Low J.Listening to Mozart does not improve children's spatial ability:Final curtains for the Mozart effect.British Journal of Development Psychology,2002,20:241-258
16.Kackson C S,Tlauka M.Route-Learning and the Mozart Effect.Psychology of Music,2004,32:213-220
17.Crncec R,Wilson S J,Prior M.No evidence for the Mozart effect in children.Music Perception,2006,23(4):305-317
18.Leng X,Shaw G L.Toward a neural theory of higher brain function using music as a window.Concepts in Neuroscience,1991,2:229-258
19.Rauscher F H,Shaw G L,Levine L J,et al.Music training causes long-term enhancement of preschool children's spatial-temporal reasoning abilities.Neurological Research,1997,19:1-8
20.Rauscher F H,Zupan M A.Classroom keyboard instruction improves kindergarten children's spatial-temporal performance:A field experiment.Early Childhood Research Quarterly,2000,15:215-228
21.Rauscher F H.Music exposure and the development of spatial intelligence in children.Bulletin of the Council for Research in Music Education,1999,142:35-47
22.Costa-Giomi E.The effects of three years of piano instruction on children's cognitive development.Journal of Research in Music Education,1999,47:198-213
23.Costa-Giomi E.Effects of three years of piano instruction on children's academic achievement,school performance and self-esteem.Psychology of Music,2004,32:139-152
24.Hetland L.Learning to make music enhances spatial reasoning.Journal of Aesthetic Education,2000,34:179-238
25.周海宏.器乐学习与儿童智力发展研究报告.中国音乐学,2002,2:5-22
26.Hughes J R,Daaboul Y,Fino J J,Shaw G L.The“Mozart effect”in epileptiform activity.Clinical Electroencephalography,1998:29:109-119
27.Hughes J R.The Mozart effect.Epilepsy and behavior,2001,2:396-417
28.Lahiri N,Duncan J S.The Mozart effect:Encore.Epilepsy and Behavior,2007,11:152-153
29.Turner R P.The acute effect of music on interictal epileptiform discharges.Epilepsy and Behavior,2004(5):662-668
30.Rauscher F H,Robinson K D,Jens J J.Improved maze learning through early music exposure in rats.Neurological Research,1998,20:427-432
31.Steele K M.Do Rats Show a Mozart Effect? Music Perception,2003,21:251-265
32.Sutoo D,Akiyama K.Music improves dopaminergic neurotransmission:demonstration based on the effect of music on blood pressure regulation.Brain Research,2004,1006:255-262
33.管林初主编.生理心理学辞典.上海:上海教育出版社,2005,第31页
34.Papoutsoglou S E,Karakatsouli N,Louizos E,Chadio S,Kalogiannis D,Dalla C,Polissidis A,Papadopoulou-Daifoti Z.Effect of Mozart's music (Romanze-Andante of“Eine Kleine Nacht Musik”,sol major,K525)stimulus on common carp(Cyprinus carpio L.)physiology under different light conditions.Aquacultural Engineering,2007(36):61-72
35.Weina Zhu,Lun Zhao,Junjun Zhang,Xiaojun Ding,Haiwei Liu,Enzhi Ni,Yuanye Ma,Changle Zhou.The influence of Mozart's sonata K.448 on visual attention:An ERPs study.Neuroscience Letters,2008,434:35-40
36.Bridgett D,Cuevas J.Effects of listening to Mozart and Bach on the performance of a mathematical test.Perceptual and Motor Skills,2000,90:1171-1175
37.Sarnthein J,vonStein A,Rappelsberger,et al.Persistent patterns of brain activity:an EEG coherence study of the positive effect of music on spatial-temporal reasoning.Neurological Research,1997,19:107-116.
38.Petsche H,Richter P,von Stein A,Etlinger S,Filz O.EEG coherence and music thinking.Music Perception,1993:117-152
39.Janata P,Grafton S T.Swinging in the brain:shared neural substrates for behaviors related to sequencing and music.Nat Neuroscience,2003,6:682-687
40.Patel A D.Language,music,syntax and the brain.Nat neuroscience,2003,6:674-681
41.Bodner M,Muftuler,L T,Nalcioglu O,Shaw G L.fMRI study relevant to the Mozart effect:brain areas involved in spatial-temporal reasoning.Neurological Research,2001,23:683-690
42.Hughes J R.The Mozart effect:additional data.Epilepsy and behavior,2002,3:182-184
43.侯建成.“莫扎特效应”的认知神经科学研究.中国特殊教育,2007,3:85-91
44.Price H.A proposed glossary for use in affective response literature in music.Journal of Research in Music Education,1986,34(3):262-268
45.黄希庭.心理学导论.北京:人民教育出版社,1991,第528-537页
46.朱智贤.心理学大词典.北京:北京师范大学出版社,1989,第274页
47.Krumhansl C L.An exploratory study of musical emotions and p sychophysiology.Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology,1997,51(4):336-352
48.Schmidt L A,Trainor L J.Frontal brain electrical activity(EEG)distinguishes valence and intensity of musical emotions.Cognition and Emotion,2001,15:487-500
49.Isen A M,Daubman K A.The influence of affect on categorization.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,1984,47:1206-1217
50.Isen A M,Niedenthal P,Cantor N.An influence of positive affect on social categorization.Motivation and Emotion,1992,16:65-78
51.Khan B E,Isen A M.The influence of positive affection on variety-seeking among safe,enjoyable products.Journal of Consumer Research,1993,20:257-270
52.Schellenberg E G.Music and Cognitive Abilities.Current Directions in Psychological Science,2005,14(6):317-320
53.Caldwell G N,Riby L M.The effects of music exposure and own genre preference on conscious and unconscious cognitive processes:A pilot ERP study.Consciousness and Cognition,2007,16:992-996
54.Cassity H D,Henley T B,Markley R P.The Mozart effect:musical phenomenonormusical preference:a more ecologically valid reconsideration.Journal of Instructional Psychology,2007,34:13-17
55.Steele K M.Arousal and mood factors in the“Mozart effect”.Perceptual and Motor Skills,2000,91:188-190
56.Chabris C F.Prelude or requiem for the‘Mozart effect'? Nature,1999,400:826
57.Thompson W F,Schellenberg E G,Husain G.Arousal,mood,and the Mozart effect.Psychological Science,2001,12:248-251
58.Husaln G,Thompson W F,Schellenberg E G.Effects of musical tempo and mode on arousal,mood,and spatial abilities.Music Perception,2002,20(2):151-171
59.Cristy Ho,Oliver Mason,Charles Spence.An investigation into the temporal dimension of the Mozart effect:Evidence from the attentional blink task.Acta Psychologica,2007(125):117-128
60.Rauscher F H.The Mozart effect in rats:response to Steele.Music Perception,2006,123(5):447-453
61.Steele K M.Unconvincing evidence that rats show a Mozart effect.Music Perception,2006,123(5):455-458
62.Rideout B E.Performance suppression from control procedure is not the basis of the Mozart effect.Perceptual and Motor Skills,1999,89:890
63.Rideout B E,Fairchild R A,Urban G E.The Mozart effect and skin conductance.Presented at Eastern Psychological Association,Boston,Massachusetts,1998
64.Hetland L.Listening to music enhances spatial-temporal reasoning:evidence for the“Mozart effect”.Journal of Aesthetic Education,2000,34:105-148
65.Parsons L M,Fox P T F.Neural basis of mental rotation.Society for Neuroscience Abstracts,1995,21:272
66.Parsons L M,Hodges D A,Fox P T.Neural basis of the comprehension of musical harmony,melody,and rhythm.Proceeding of the cognitive neuroscience society meeting,San Francisco,California,April 1998
67.王新,钟明宝.“莫扎特效应”的变化特点与分析.聊城大学学报(自然科学版),2004(2):104-107
68.Johnson J K,Cotman C W,Tasaki C S,Shaw G L.Enhancement of spatial-temporal reasoning after a Mozart listening condition in Alzheimer's disease:a case study.Neural Research,1998,20:666-672
69.Campbell D.The Mozart effect:Awakening your child's mind,health,and creativity with music.New York:Avon books,2000
70.Rauscher F H.Can music instruction affect children's cognitive development? Eric Digest,2003:EDO-PS-03-12
71.Fudin R,Lembessis E.The Mozart effect:questions about the seminal findings of Rauscher,Shaw,and colleagues.Perceptual and Motor Skills,2004,98:389-405
72.Steele K M,Bella S D,Peretz I,et al.Prelude or requiem for the‘Mozart effect'?.Nature,1999,400:827
73.Rauscher F H.Reply:Prelude or requiem for the‘Mozart effect'? Nature,1999,400:827-828.
74.Steele K M.The“Mozart Effect”:An example of the scientific method in operation.Psychology Teacher Network,2001:2-5
75.Carstens C B,Huskins E,Hounshell G W.Listening to Mozart may not enhance performance on the Revised Minnesota Paper Form Board Test.Psychological Reports,1996,77:111-114
76.Newman J,Rosenbach J H,Bums K L,et al.An experimental test of the“Mozart effect”:does listening to his music improve spatial ability? Perceptual and Motor Skills,1995,81:1379-1387
77.Grandin T,Peterson M,Shaw G L.Spatial-temporal versus language-analytic reasoning:the role of music training.Arts Education Policy Review,1998,99:11-14
78.Rauscher F H,Shaw G L.Key components of the“Mozart Effect.”Perceptual and Motor Skills,1998,86:835-841.
79.Rauscher F H.Is the“Mozart effect”debunked? Poster presented at the bi-annual meeting of the International Conference on Music Perception and Cognition,2000,Keele University,Keele,UK
80.郭声健.音乐教育是否可以开发智力.人民音乐.2001,4:30-32
81.李昕.莫扎特效应.国外科技动态.2000,3:28-29
82.侯建成,刘昌.国外有关音乐活动的脑机制的研究概述-兼及“莫扎特效应”.中央音乐学院学报,2008,1:110-118
83.Cash A H,EL-Mallakh R S,Chamberlain K,et al.Structure of music may not influence cognition.Perceptual and Motor Skills,1997,84:66
84.Ashby F G,Isen A M,Turken A U.A neuropsychological theory of positive affect and its influence on cognition.Psychological Review,1999,106:529-550
85.Damasio A R.Descartes Error:Emotion,reason,and the human brain.New York:Avon Books,1994
86.Oaksford M R,Morris F,Grainger B,Williams J M G.Mood,reasoning,and central executive processes.Journal of Experimental psychology:Learning,Memory and cognition,1996,22:476-492
87.Ferraro F R,King B,Ronning B,Pekarski K,Risan J.Effects of induced emotional state on lexical processing in younger andolder adults.The Journal of Psychology,2003,137(3):262-272
88.Moore S C,Oaksford M.Some long-term effects of emotion on cognition.British Journal of Psychology,2002,93:383-395
89.Guhn M,Hamm A,Zentner M.Physiological and musico-acoustic correlates of the response.Music Perception,2007,24:473-483
90.Hevner K.Experimental studies of the elements of expression in music.American Journal of Psychology,1936,47:103-118
91.魏景汉 罗跃嘉.事件相关脑电位教程.北京:经济日报出版社,2002,第11页
92.郑延平 姚树桥 朱熊兆 丁宝坤.生物反馈的临床实践.北京:高等教育出版社,2003
93.谭郁玲.临床脑电图学与脑电地形图学.北京:人民卫生出版社,1999.
94.林崇德,杨治良,黄希庭.心理学大辞典.上海:上海教育出版社,1999,第506页
95.刘沛.脑科学:21世纪音乐教育理论与实践的新基石——围绕“莫扎特效应”的科学研究和展望.中国音乐学.2000,3:88-100
96.刘沛.神经音乐学及其研究切入点的动议.星海音乐学院学报.2002,1:29-31
97.Reimer B.Facing the risks of the“Mozart effect”.Phi Detta Kappan,1999,81:278-283
98.Jones S M,Zigler E.The Mozart effect not learning from history.Applied Developmental Psychology,2002,23:355-372
99.孟昭兰.普通心理学.北京:北京大学出版社,1994,第392-393页
100.罗小平 黄虹.最新音乐心理学荟萃.北京:中国文联出版公司,1995,第5页
101.Franco Fabbro,Anna Brusaferro,Antonia Bava.Opposite musical-manual interference in young vs expert musicians.Neuropsychologia,1990,28(8):871-877
102.Schon D,Charlotte Magne,Mireille Besson M.The music of speech:Musician training facilitates pitch processing in both music and language.Psychophysiology,2004,41:341-349
103.Paula Caplan,Gael Macpherson,Patricia Tobin.Do sex-related differences in spatial ability exist? a multilevel critique with new data.American Psychologist,1985:786-799
2. Rauscher F H, Shaw G L, Ky K N. Listening to Mozart enhances spatial-temporal reasoning: Towards a neurophysiological basis. Neuroscience Letter, 1995, 185:44-47
3. Rideout B E, Laubach C M. EEG correlates of enhanced spatial performance following exposure to music. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 1996, 82: 427-432
4. Wilson T L, Brown T. Reexamination of the effect of Mozart's music on spatial-task performance. The Journal of Psychology, 1997, 131: 365-370
5. Rideout B E, Taylor J. Enhanced spatial performance following 10 minutes exposure to music: a replication. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 1997, 85: 112-114
6. Rideout B E, Dougherty S, Wernert L. Effect of music on spatial performance: a test of generality. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 1998, 86: 512-514
7. Nantais K M, Schellenberg E G. The Mozart effect: an artifact of preference.Psychological Science, 1999, 10: 370-373
8. Twomey A, Esgate A. The Mozart effect may only be demonstrable in nonmusicians. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 2002, 95: 1013-1026
9. Ivanov V K, Geake J G. The Mozart effect and primary school children. Psychology of Music, 2003, 31:405-413
10. Norbert Jausovec, Ksenija Jausovec, Ivan Gerlic. The influence of Mozart's music on brain activity in the process of learning. Clinical Neurophysiology, 2006, 117:2703-2714
11. Steele K M, Ball T N, Runk R. Listening to Mozart does not enhance backwards digit span performance. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 1997, 84: 1179-1184
12. Steele K M, Brown J D, Stoecker J A. Failure to confirm the Rauscher and Shaw description of recovery of the Mozart effect. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 1999, 88:843-848
13. Steele K M, Bass K E, Crook M D. The Mystery of the Mozart effect: Failure to Replicate. Psychological Science, 1999, 10: 366-369
14. McCutcheon L E. Another failure to generalize the Mozart effect. Psychological Reports, 2000, 87: 325-330
15.Mckelvie P,Low J.Listening to Mozart does not improve children's spatial ability:Final curtains for the Mozart effect.British Journal of Development Psychology,2002,20:241-258
16.Kackson C S,Tlauka M.Route-Learning and the Mozart Effect.Psychology of Music,2004,32:213-220
17.Crncec R,Wilson S J,Prior M.No evidence for the Mozart effect in children.Music Perception,2006,23(4):305-317
18.Leng X,Shaw G L.Toward a neural theory of higher brain function using music as a window.Concepts in Neuroscience,1991,2:229-258
19.Rauscher F H,Shaw G L,Levine L J,et al.Music training causes long-term enhancement of preschool children's spatial-temporal reasoning abilities.Neurological Research,1997,19:1-8
20.Rauscher F H,Zupan M A.Classroom keyboard instruction improves kindergarten children's spatial-temporal performance:A field experiment.Early Childhood Research Quarterly,2000,15:215-228
21.Rauscher F H.Music exposure and the development of spatial intelligence in children.Bulletin of the Council for Research in Music Education,1999,142:35-47
22.Costa-Giomi E.The effects of three years of piano instruction on children's cognitive development.Journal of Research in Music Education,1999,47:198-213
23.Costa-Giomi E.Effects of three years of piano instruction on children's academic achievement,school performance and self-esteem.Psychology of Music,2004,32:139-152
24.Hetland L.Learning to make music enhances spatial reasoning.Journal of Aesthetic Education,2000,34:179-238
25.周海宏.器乐学习与儿童智力发展研究报告.中国音乐学,2002,2:5-22
26.Hughes J R,Daaboul Y,Fino J J,Shaw G L.The“Mozart effect”in epileptiform activity.Clinical Electroencephalography,1998:29:109-119
27.Hughes J R.The Mozart effect.Epilepsy and behavior,2001,2:396-417
28.Lahiri N,Duncan J S.The Mozart effect:Encore.Epilepsy and Behavior,2007,11:152-153
29.Turner R P.The acute effect of music on interictal epileptiform discharges.Epilepsy and Behavior,2004(5):662-668
30.Rauscher F H,Robinson K D,Jens J J.Improved maze learning through early music exposure in rats.Neurological Research,1998,20:427-432
31.Steele K M.Do Rats Show a Mozart Effect? Music Perception,2003,21:251-265
32.Sutoo D,Akiyama K.Music improves dopaminergic neurotransmission:demonstration based on the effect of music on blood pressure regulation.Brain Research,2004,1006:255-262
33.管林初主编.生理心理学辞典.上海:上海教育出版社,2005,第31页
34.Papoutsoglou S E,Karakatsouli N,Louizos E,Chadio S,Kalogiannis D,Dalla C,Polissidis A,Papadopoulou-Daifoti Z.Effect of Mozart's music (Romanze-Andante of“Eine Kleine Nacht Musik”,sol major,K525)stimulus on common carp(Cyprinus carpio L.)physiology under different light conditions.Aquacultural Engineering,2007(36):61-72
35.Weina Zhu,Lun Zhao,Junjun Zhang,Xiaojun Ding,Haiwei Liu,Enzhi Ni,Yuanye Ma,Changle Zhou.The influence of Mozart's sonata K.448 on visual attention:An ERPs study.Neuroscience Letters,2008,434:35-40
36.Bridgett D,Cuevas J.Effects of listening to Mozart and Bach on the performance of a mathematical test.Perceptual and Motor Skills,2000,90:1171-1175
37.Sarnthein J,vonStein A,Rappelsberger,et al.Persistent patterns of brain activity:an EEG coherence study of the positive effect of music on spatial-temporal reasoning.Neurological Research,1997,19:107-116.
38.Petsche H,Richter P,von Stein A,Etlinger S,Filz O.EEG coherence and music thinking.Music Perception,1993:117-152
39.Janata P,Grafton S T.Swinging in the brain:shared neural substrates for behaviors related to sequencing and music.Nat Neuroscience,2003,6:682-687
40.Patel A D.Language,music,syntax and the brain.Nat neuroscience,2003,6:674-681
41.Bodner M,Muftuler,L T,Nalcioglu O,Shaw G L.fMRI study relevant to the Mozart effect:brain areas involved in spatial-temporal reasoning.Neurological Research,2001,23:683-690
42.Hughes J R.The Mozart effect:additional data.Epilepsy and behavior,2002,3:182-184
43.侯建成.“莫扎特效应”的认知神经科学研究.中国特殊教育,2007,3:85-91
44.Price H.A proposed glossary for use in affective response literature in music.Journal of Research in Music Education,1986,34(3):262-268
45.黄希庭.心理学导论.北京:人民教育出版社,1991,第528-537页
46.朱智贤.心理学大词典.北京:北京师范大学出版社,1989,第274页
47.Krumhansl C L.An exploratory study of musical emotions and p sychophysiology.Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology,1997,51(4):336-352
48.Schmidt L A,Trainor L J.Frontal brain electrical activity(EEG)distinguishes valence and intensity of musical emotions.Cognition and Emotion,2001,15:487-500
49.Isen A M,Daubman K A.The influence of affect on categorization.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,1984,47:1206-1217
50.Isen A M,Niedenthal P,Cantor N.An influence of positive affect on social categorization.Motivation and Emotion,1992,16:65-78
51.Khan B E,Isen A M.The influence of positive affection on variety-seeking among safe,enjoyable products.Journal of Consumer Research,1993,20:257-270
52.Schellenberg E G.Music and Cognitive Abilities.Current Directions in Psychological Science,2005,14(6):317-320
53.Caldwell G N,Riby L M.The effects of music exposure and own genre preference on conscious and unconscious cognitive processes:A pilot ERP study.Consciousness and Cognition,2007,16:992-996
54.Cassity H D,Henley T B,Markley R P.The Mozart effect:musical phenomenonormusical preference:a more ecologically valid reconsideration.Journal of Instructional Psychology,2007,34:13-17
55.Steele K M.Arousal and mood factors in the“Mozart effect”.Perceptual and Motor Skills,2000,91:188-190
56.Chabris C F.Prelude or requiem for the‘Mozart effect'? Nature,1999,400:826
57.Thompson W F,Schellenberg E G,Husain G.Arousal,mood,and the Mozart effect.Psychological Science,2001,12:248-251
58.Husaln G,Thompson W F,Schellenberg E G.Effects of musical tempo and mode on arousal,mood,and spatial abilities.Music Perception,2002,20(2):151-171
59.Cristy Ho,Oliver Mason,Charles Spence.An investigation into the temporal dimension of the Mozart effect:Evidence from the attentional blink task.Acta Psychologica,2007(125):117-128
60.Rauscher F H.The Mozart effect in rats:response to Steele.Music Perception,2006,123(5):447-453
61.Steele K M.Unconvincing evidence that rats show a Mozart effect.Music Perception,2006,123(5):455-458
62.Rideout B E.Performance suppression from control procedure is not the basis of the Mozart effect.Perceptual and Motor Skills,1999,89:890
63.Rideout B E,Fairchild R A,Urban G E.The Mozart effect and skin conductance.Presented at Eastern Psychological Association,Boston,Massachusetts,1998
64.Hetland L.Listening to music enhances spatial-temporal reasoning:evidence for the“Mozart effect”.Journal of Aesthetic Education,2000,34:105-148
65.Parsons L M,Fox P T F.Neural basis of mental rotation.Society for Neuroscience Abstracts,1995,21:272
66.Parsons L M,Hodges D A,Fox P T.Neural basis of the comprehension of musical harmony,melody,and rhythm.Proceeding of the cognitive neuroscience society meeting,San Francisco,California,April 1998
67.王新,钟明宝.“莫扎特效应”的变化特点与分析.聊城大学学报(自然科学版),2004(2):104-107
68.Johnson J K,Cotman C W,Tasaki C S,Shaw G L.Enhancement of spatial-temporal reasoning after a Mozart listening condition in Alzheimer's disease:a case study.Neural Research,1998,20:666-672
69.Campbell D.The Mozart effect:Awakening your child's mind,health,and creativity with music.New York:Avon books,2000
70.Rauscher F H.Can music instruction affect children's cognitive development? Eric Digest,2003:EDO-PS-03-12
71.Fudin R,Lembessis E.The Mozart effect:questions about the seminal findings of Rauscher,Shaw,and colleagues.Perceptual and Motor Skills,2004,98:389-405
72.Steele K M,Bella S D,Peretz I,et al.Prelude or requiem for the‘Mozart effect'?.Nature,1999,400:827
73.Rauscher F H.Reply:Prelude or requiem for the‘Mozart effect'? Nature,1999,400:827-828.
74.Steele K M.The“Mozart Effect”:An example of the scientific method in operation.Psychology Teacher Network,2001:2-5
75.Carstens C B,Huskins E,Hounshell G W.Listening to Mozart may not enhance performance on the Revised Minnesota Paper Form Board Test.Psychological Reports,1996,77:111-114
76.Newman J,Rosenbach J H,Bums K L,et al.An experimental test of the“Mozart effect”:does listening to his music improve spatial ability? Perceptual and Motor Skills,1995,81:1379-1387
77.Grandin T,Peterson M,Shaw G L.Spatial-temporal versus language-analytic reasoning:the role of music training.Arts Education Policy Review,1998,99:11-14
78.Rauscher F H,Shaw G L.Key components of the“Mozart Effect.”Perceptual and Motor Skills,1998,86:835-841.
79.Rauscher F H.Is the“Mozart effect”debunked? Poster presented at the bi-annual meeting of the International Conference on Music Perception and Cognition,2000,Keele University,Keele,UK
80.郭声健.音乐教育是否可以开发智力.人民音乐.2001,4:30-32
81.李昕.莫扎特效应.国外科技动态.2000,3:28-29
82.侯建成,刘昌.国外有关音乐活动的脑机制的研究概述-兼及“莫扎特效应”.中央音乐学院学报,2008,1:110-118
83.Cash A H,EL-Mallakh R S,Chamberlain K,et al.Structure of music may not influence cognition.Perceptual and Motor Skills,1997,84:66
84.Ashby F G,Isen A M,Turken A U.A neuropsychological theory of positive affect and its influence on cognition.Psychological Review,1999,106:529-550
85.Damasio A R.Descartes Error:Emotion,reason,and the human brain.New York:Avon Books,1994
86.Oaksford M R,Morris F,Grainger B,Williams J M G.Mood,reasoning,and central executive processes.Journal of Experimental psychology:Learning,Memory and cognition,1996,22:476-492
87.Ferraro F R,King B,Ronning B,Pekarski K,Risan J.Effects of induced emotional state on lexical processing in younger andolder adults.The Journal of Psychology,2003,137(3):262-272
88.Moore S C,Oaksford M.Some long-term effects of emotion on cognition.British Journal of Psychology,2002,93:383-395
89.Guhn M,Hamm A,Zentner M.Physiological and musico-acoustic correlates of the response.Music Perception,2007,24:473-483
90.Hevner K.Experimental studies of the elements of expression in music.American Journal of Psychology,1936,47:103-118
91.魏景汉 罗跃嘉.事件相关脑电位教程.北京:经济日报出版社,2002,第11页
92.郑延平 姚树桥 朱熊兆 丁宝坤.生物反馈的临床实践.北京:高等教育出版社,2003
93.谭郁玲.临床脑电图学与脑电地形图学.北京:人民卫生出版社,1999.
94.林崇德,杨治良,黄希庭.心理学大辞典.上海:上海教育出版社,1999,第506页
95.刘沛.脑科学:21世纪音乐教育理论与实践的新基石——围绕“莫扎特效应”的科学研究和展望.中国音乐学.2000,3:88-100
96.刘沛.神经音乐学及其研究切入点的动议.星海音乐学院学报.2002,1:29-31
97.Reimer B.Facing the risks of the“Mozart effect”.Phi Detta Kappan,1999,81:278-283
98.Jones S M,Zigler E.The Mozart effect not learning from history.Applied Developmental Psychology,2002,23:355-372
99.孟昭兰.普通心理学.北京:北京大学出版社,1994,第392-393页
100.罗小平 黄虹.最新音乐心理学荟萃.北京:中国文联出版公司,1995,第5页
101.Franco Fabbro,Anna Brusaferro,Antonia Bava.Opposite musical-manual interference in young vs expert musicians.Neuropsychologia,1990,28(8):871-877
102.Schon D,Charlotte Magne,Mireille Besson M.The music of speech:Musician training facilitates pitch processing in both music and language.Psychophysiology,2004,41:341-349
103.Paula Caplan,Gael Macpherson,Patricia Tobin.Do sex-related differences in spatial ability exist? a multilevel critique with new data.American Psychologist,1985:786-799