ArticleFrontiers in psychology2023
The dual effect of background music on creativity: perspectives of music preference and cognitive interference.
Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- The impact of instrumental music on dual-task interference in a simulated driving environment.Psychological research · 2026Article
- Affective priming through Indian ragas: influence on perception of ambiguous visual stimuli and creativity.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Article
- A narrative review on the psychological mechanisms and efficacy of music interventions for improving symptoms of patients with ADHD.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Review
- Emotion Induction Modulates Neural Dynamics Related to the Originality of Ideational Creativity.Human brain mapping · 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
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Music, an influential environmental factor, significantly shapes cognitive processing and everyday experiences, thus rendering its effects on creativity a dynamic topic within the field of cognitive science. However, debates continue about whether music bolsters, obstructs, or exerts a dual influence on individual creativity. Among the points of contention is the impact of contrasting musical emotions-both positive and negative-on creative tasks. In this study, we focused on traditional Chinese music, drawn from a culture known for its 'preference for sadness,' as our selected emotional stimulus and background music. This choice, underrepresented in previous research, was based on its uniqueness. We examined the effects of differing music genres (including vocal and instrumental), each characterized by a distinct emotional valence (positive or negative), on performance in the Alternative Uses Task (AUT). To conduct this study, we utilized an affective arousal paradigm, with a quiet background serving as a neutral control setting. A total of 114 participants were randomly assigned to three distinct groups after completing a music preference questionnaire: instrumental, vocal, and silent. Our findings showed that when compared to a quiet environment, both instrumental and vocal music as background stimuli significantly affected AUT performance. Notably, music with a negative emotional charge bolstered individual originality in creative performance. These results lend support to the dual role of background music in creativity, with instrumental music appearing to enhance creativity through factors such as emotional arousal, cognitive interference, music preference, and psychological restoration. This study challenges conventional understanding that only positive background music boosts creativity and provides empirical validation for the two-path model (positive and negative) of emotional influence on creativity.
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.