SynthesisScientific reports2023
Unfounded authority, underpowered studies, and non-transparent reporting perpetuate the Mozart effect myth: a multiverse meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Scientific reports, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Systematic review and meta-analysis of lifestyle modification interventions and their impact on seizure reduction and quality of life.Epilepsia · 2026Pooled it
- Toward a Tailored Acoustic-Based Approach in Music Neuromodulation in Epilepsy.European journal of neurology · 2025Article
- Music in healthcare: Investigating music preferences for pain management across twenty countries.SSM - population health · 2025Article
- Taylor Swift versus Mozart: music preferences of C57BL/6J mice.Frontiers in behavioral neuroscience · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In recent years, an ostensible Mozart effect, suggesting beneficial influences of listening to the sonata KV448 on epilepsy, has been extensively covered in popular media outlets. However, the evidential value of such a potential effect seems unclear. Here, we present the first formal meta-analysis on this topic, based on k = 8 studies (N = 207). Further published studies that met our inclusion criteria had to be omitted due to insufficient reporting and author non-responsiveness on data requests. In three independent analyses, we observed non-significant trivial-to-small summary effects for listening to Mozart KV448 or other musical stimuli on epilepsy or other medical conditions (g range: 0.09-0.43). Bias and sensitivity analyses suggested that these effects were likely inflated and non-trivial effects were driven by isolated leverage points. Multiverse analyses conformed to these results, showing inconsistent evidential patterns. Low primary study power and consequently lacking evidential value indicates that there is only little reason to suspect a specific Mozart effect. In all, listening to music, let alone a specific kind of sonata, does not appear to have any beneficial effect on epilepsy. Unfounded authority, underpowered studies, and non-transparent reporting appear to be the main drivers of the Mozart effect myth.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.