See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/261634603

Music Education and the Brain: What Does It Take to Make a Change?

Article  in  Update Applications of Research in Music Education · April 2013

DOI: 10.1177/8755123313502346

CITATIONS READS

11 1,933

1 author:

Anita Collins
University of Canberra
19 PUBLICATIONS   61 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Churchill Fellowship View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Anita Collins on 16 April 2014.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Update: Applications of Research in Music
Education
http://upd.sagepub.com/

Music Education and the Brain: What Does It Take to Make a Change?
Anita Collins
Update: Applications of Research in Music Education published online 24 September 2013
DOI: 10.1177/8755123313502346

The online version of this article can be found at:

http://upd.sagepub.com/content/early/2013/09/24/8755123313502346

Published by:

http://www.sagepublications.com

On behalf of:

National Association for Music Education

Additional services and information for Update: Applications of Research in Music Education can be found at:

Email Alerts: http://upd.sagepub.com/cgi/alerts

Subscriptions: http://upd.sagepub.com/subscriptions

Reprints: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.nav

Permissions: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav

>> OnlineFirst Version of Record - Sep 24, 2013

What is This?

Downloaded from upd.sagepub.com at University of Canberra on October 13, 2013

502346
research-article2013
UPDXXX10.1177/8755123313502346UpdateCollins

Article
Update

Music Education and the Brain: What

XX(X) 1­–7
© 2013 National Association for
Music Education
Does It Take to Make a Change? Reprints and permissions:
sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav
DOI: 10.1177/8755123313502346
update.sagepub.com

Anita Collins1

Abstract
Neuroscientists have worked for over two decades to understand how the brain processes music, affects emotions,
and changes brain development. Much of this research has been based on a model that compares the brain function
of participants classified as musicians and nonmusicians. This body of knowledge reveals a large number of benefits
from music education including improvements in memory, language acquisition, executive function, and brain plasticity.
These findings offer the beginnings of an evidence-based argument in favor of music education for every child. Yet
if the potential of this research is to be leveraged for this purpose, music educators need to know the type, period,
and age range for music education that has been shown to affect positive, measurable, and enduring change in brain
development. This article explores the criteria used to define musician and suggests ways these criteria could be used
to advocate for specific developments in music education curricula.

Keywords
advocacy, brain, brain development, music education, musician, neuroscience

The fields of neuroscience and music have been inter- language acquisition and syntax (Dammann, 2009; Patel,
twined over the past two decades in an effort to unlock 2009), executive function (Hanna-Pladdy & MacKay,
some of the secrets of how the human brain develops and 2011; Posner, Rothbart, Sheese, & Kieras, 2008), and
functions. Eminent neuroscience researcher Robert brain plasticity (Hannon & Trainor, 2007; Hyde et al.,
Zatorre (2005) wrote that “music involves a tantalizing 2009). These differences sparked a number of studies
mix of practically every human cognitive function” that attempted to identify how and why participants
(p. 312) and because of this music provides unique insights classed as musicians displayed significant differences in
into how the brain develops and processes information. their brain function and structure to nonmusicians.
Early studies involved participants listening to music This research had the potential to support many of the
while positron emission tomography and functional mag- inherent beliefs about the importance of music education
netic resonance imaging technology was used to observe that I based my practice on as a university teacher educa-
how the brain made sense of the sounds. Comparative tor and high school music teacher. The findings showed
studies that observed responses to different melodies or that music education could positively and permanently
rhythmic samples were undertaken. Brain imaging tech- improve cognitive skills, physical development, and
nology rapidly advanced so that neuroscientists could emotional well-being. Although these benefits have often
observe musicians in the act of making or imaging to been argued from an aesthetic education perspective
make music. Theories of how musical and nonmusical (Austin & Reinhardt, 1999; Leonhard & House, 1959;
information is stored and processed began to emerge. Meyer, 1956; Reimer, 1993; Swanwick, 1979), neurosci-
Neuroscientists began to see identifiable differences ence offered a “hard science” perspective and body of
between participants they classified as musicians and knowledge that implicated music education as a core
nonmusicians. These differences are divided into two learning area for children. Both aesthetic and scientific
areas: brain structures (the areas in the brain, such as cor- research suggested ways that music education could help
pus callosum and auditory cortex) and brain functions students succeed in tomorrow’s world and the broader
(the mechanisms the brain uses to form message path-
ways and process information). These differences cov- 1
University of Canberra, Bruce, ACT, Australia
ered a variety of attributes. Participants classified as
Corresponding Author:
musicians were found to have heightened capacities in Anita Collins, University of Canberra, Faculty of Education, Building 5,
multiple areas of the brain, including memory (Degé, Bruce, ACT 2601, Australia.
Wehrum, Stark, & Schwarzer, 2011; Jonides, 2008), Email: [email protected]
2 Update XX(X)

implications of these findings could “support music as a to these skills and suggests that music education enhances
core within the complete curriculum” as outlined in the the pathways for melodic memory and that the brain
Advocacy statement of the NAfME Strategic Plan translates this into language. Most recently, Koelsch
(NAfME, 2011, p. 1) (2011) has suggested that “the human brain, particularly
Yet in order for these findings effectively underpin at an early age, does not treat language and music as
advocacy for music education, a significant question strictly separate domains, but rather treats language as a
related to the relevance of those findings to everyday special case of music” (p. 16).
people, in this case children of school age, not “musi- Following on from this finding, musicians have been
cians” needed to be answered. What does neuroscience found to acquire language and understand the rules of
classify as a musician? And how significant are factors language and its syntax more effectively than nonmusi-
such as the type and length of music education the partici- cians (Dammann, 2009; Peretz et al., 2009; Wandell,
pants in those studies had received, and the age at which Dougherty, Ben-Shachar, Deutsch, & Tsang, 2009). This
they had received it? In short, an investigation of the area has attracted attention from researchers on the basis
design parameters of those studies was needed before the that the study of music processing might provide insight
findings could be translated in the school context and for into the development of language processing in the brain
effective advocacy of music education. (Patel, 2008). Researchers suggest that music education
assists in the understanding of musical syntax, which in
Benefits of Music Education to Brain turn assists in understanding language syntax. In fact,
music education may develop the mirror neuron system
Development in the brain (Haslinger et al., 2005; Molnar-Szakacs &
Before outlining the review method and findings, it is Overy, 2006; Overy & Molnar-Szakacs, 2009). This sys-
helpful to gain an overview of the benefits of music edu- tem enables the brain to complete two processes at once,
cation to brain development, as suggested by recent neu- making the brain work twice as effectively in the same
roscientific research. This is by no means an exhaustive amount of time. In essence, a musician’s brain can work
overview but aims to better inform music educators of twice as well in half the time. However, it should be noted
relevant findings in the field. that at the time of writing, significant debate remains over
Many are aware of the broad claims made in the name whether music education is solely responsible for this
of the preliminary research by Rauscher, Shaw, and Ky type of brain development, or if it simply capitalizes on
(1993) on the Mozart Effect (Campbell, 2001) and the preexisting differences in an individual’s mirror neuron
capacity for music, but not music education, to raise intel- system (Zatorre, Chen, & Penhune, 2007).
ligence levels. Campbell’s interpretation of the Rauscher The same mirror neuron system allows simultaneous
et al. study along with many other studies has been refuted processing of different types of information, for example,
by numerous researchers in the field and may have done analyzing a sound for both its perceptual and hierarchical
music education a great disservice at the time. However, qualities. This area of brain development connects with a
the field of neuroscience has continued to discover, and group of skills known collectively as Executive Function.
strengthen, the links between music education and posi- Musicians have been found to have higher levels of
tive brain development. The study in this article aims to Executive Function (Geake, 2009; Hanna-Pladdy &
give music educators more recent and credible findings MacKay, 2011), which refer to a group of interlinked
about music education from the decade of research since tasks that include planning, strategizing, setting goals,
the Mozart Effect. As mentioned in the introduction, the and paying attention to detail. To perform these tasks at a
use of these findings to support and advocate for the high level, the brain needs to be able to analyze informa-
importance and value of music education needs to be tion simultaneously and consider both the cognitive and
viewed in tandem with the specific criteria that research- emotional aspects. High levels of Executive Function are
ers have used to define a musician. evident in a person who can successfully resolve internal
Musicians have been found to possess advanced skills and external conflict, or solve problems effectively.
in both long and short-term memory (Jonides, 2008) and Again, research has suggested that musical rehearsal
memory storage and retrieval (Dunbar, 2008). It has been assists with the development of attention skills, which is
suggested that music rehearsal helps improve the mem- a significant factor in Executive Function (Jonides, 2008).
ory pathways in the brain and that musicians use pictures Musicians also appear to have higher levels of brain
and narrative to link memories. Furthermore, it has been plasticity and this was one of the original areas that
suggested that musicians attach multiple “tags” to a sin- sparked investigation of the benefits of music education
gle memory, such as a conceptual tag, emotional tag, and to brain development (Munte, Altenmuller, & Jancke,
contextual tag, and this considerably enhances memory 2002; Schlaug, 2001). Brain plasticity refers to the capac-
storage and retrieval. Enhanced verbal memory is linked ity of the brain to change, remain flexible, and continue to
Collins 3

learn throughout one’s life. This challenges earlier think- The key issue on review of the studies was the age of
ing that the human brain became “set” or unable to change the participants when the study occurred. Many of the
or learn once we reached adulthood, summed up by the earlier studies were conducted using professionals and
adage “you can’t teach an old dog new tricks.” Music amateurs adult musician whereas a number of the more
education has been found to encourage high levels of recent studies involved children of various ages. Some of
plasticity in the auditory cortex (where we process sound the studies investigated one small part or activity within
information) and frontal cortex (where we process many the brain whereas other studies focused on the broader
executive functions such as the ability to predict conse- range of brain activity that was influenced by music edu-
quences, moderate emotional reactions, and determine cation. To further complicate the process, details of the
similarities and differences). This plasticity allows for selection criteria could be extremely brief. In a published
higher levels of creativity and divergent thinking (Gibson, research article, this information was typically buried in a
Folley, & Park, 2009) as well as improved brain health single sentence in the methodology section or scattered
into later life (Moser, 2005). throughout the findings and discussion sections.
Although the above review of neuroscience research The studies selected for review needed to be broad
is not exhaustive, it does highlight the benefits of the enough to provide an overview of the research findings
type of music education that involves making, rehears- and narrow enough to define a musician for the purposes
ing, performing, and understanding music on brain of informing and advocating for the importance of music
development. Although these findings are useful when education in a child’s learning. Therefore, the studies
advocating for the importance and value of music edu- were divided equally between adult and child partici-
cation within the curriculum, such advocacy can be pants. The term commonly used in the studies to identify
strengthened by a greater understanding of the type and music education was formal music training. For the pur-
length of music education that has led to these research poses of this review, the term formal music training will
findings. be used in the place of music education.
Too often music education is devalued by other educa-
tors, leaders, and policy makers who see it as a vehicle for
entertainment for the school community. The fact that the
Selection of Studies
final product, the performance, is the public face of The 14 studies fall into two groups based on their partici-
the music education program in a school can neglect the pants. The list of the studies can be found in Table 1 and
meaningful learning that occurs in the learning process will be referred to in this article as Studies 1, 2, and so
leading up to a performance. The argument may now be on. Studies 1 to 7 involve adult participants. These stud-
made, using findings based in the scientific rather than ies compared professional musicians (those drawing
artistic fields, that the learning process is far more impor- their primary income from musical performance or
tant than the performance for the overall neurological music education) with nonmusicians (who had no sig-
development of a child. A paradigm shift of this kind nificant formal instrumental music education experi-
could have significant implications for all aspects of ences). The criterion for a musician in this group was
music education. To assist in this recognition the music defined in a number of different ways: by the average
profession needs specific details from the research that hours of practice per day (Studies 1, 6, and 7), if they had
advocates for this type of shift. participated in continuous music learning from child-
The review that follows will outline the type, length, hood through adolescence (equal or more than 10 years;
and age period of music education that has been shown to Study 4), and/or trained at a specified music school
affect positive and permanent changes in brain develop- (Studies 1, 2, 3, and 5).
ment as outlined in the current body of research in the The second group of studies, Studies 8 to 14, involved
neuroscientific field. child participants between the ages of 3 and 11 years. Six
out of the seven studies compared those who undertook
formal music training in the form of instrumental music
Review
lessons. The only study that used an alternative form of
This review consisted of 14 studies and took the form of music education was Study 11, which undertook formal
a meta-analysis that compared the criteria used in each Kodaly lessons in a classroom environment.
study to identify musicians and nonmusicians. The stud-
ies were selected from a larger literature review to the
Exclusionary Criteria Within the Studies
field of music education and neuroscience. The compari-
son focused on the specific activities that were identified Several exclusionary criteria existed in each study. The
as music education and over what period of time and at most prominent was that all participants selected for the
what age these activities occurred. experiment were right handed, which was determined by
4 Update XX(X)

Table 1.  Studies Included in the Literature Review.

Studies involving adult participants Studies involving child participants

1. Gaser, C., & Schlaug, G. (2003). Brain structures differ between   8. Marin, M. (2009). Effects of early musical training on
musicians and non-musicians. Journal of Neuroscience, 23, musical and linguistic syntactic abilities. Neurosciences
9240–9245. and Music III—Disorders and Plasticity, 1169, 187–190.
2. Schlaug, G. (2001). The brain of musicians: A model for   9. Schlaug, G., Forgeard, M., Zhu, L., Norton, A., &
functional and structural adaptation. Annals of the New York Winner, E. (2009). Training–induced neuroplasticity
Academy of Sciences, 930, 281–299. in young children. Annals of the New York Academy of
3. Fujioka, T., Trainor, L. J., Ross, B., Kakigi, R., & Pantev, C. Sciences, 1169, 205–208.
(2004). Musical training enhances automatic encoding of 10. Hyde, K., Lerch, J., Norton, A., Forgeard, M., Winner,
melodic contour and interval structure. Journal of Cognitive E., Evans, A. C., & Schlaug, G. (2009). Musical training
Neuroscience, 16, 1010–1021. shapes structural brain development. Journal of
4. Schmithorst, V. J., & Wilke, M. (2002). Differences in white Neuroscience, 26, 3019–3025.
matter architecture between musicians and non-musicians: A 11. Schellenberg, E. G. (2004). Music lesson and IQ.
diffusion tensor imaging study. Neuroscience Letters, 321, 57–60. Psychological Sciences, 15, 511–514.
5. Bangert, M., & Schlaug, G. (2006). Specialization of the 12. Jentschke, S., & Koelsch, S. (2009). Musical training
specialized in features of external human brain morphology. modulates the development of syntax processing in
European Journal of Neuroscience, 24, 1832–1834. children. NeuroImage, 47, 725–744.
6. Bengtsson, S. L., Nagy, Z., Skare, K., Forsman, L., Forssberg, 13. Hetland, L. (2000). Learning to make music enhances
H., & Ullen, F. (2005). Extensive piano practicing has regionally spatial reasoning. Journal of Aesthetic Education, 34,
specific effects on white matter development. Nature 179–238.
Neuroscience, 8, 1148–1150. 14. Hannon, E. E., & Trainor, L. J. (2007). Music acquisition:
7. Ridding, M. C., Brouwer, B., & Nordstrom, M. A. (2000). Effects of enculturation and formal training on
Reduced interhemispheric inhibition in musicians. Experimental development. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 11, 465–472.
Brain Research, 133, 249–253.

the use of the Edinburgh Handedness Test (Oldfield, to multiple classroom teachers and methodologies during
1971). As these studies involved scientific testing, this is the same period. Studies 8 and 11 used weekly Orff or
a commonly used criterion to limit variability in the Kodaly lessons, respectively, in their definition of musi-
results. Participants were also excluded on the grounds of cian, and although Study 8 did use Orff instruments in con-
a history of hearing and vision problems, a history of sei- junction with other Orff activities (such as singing and
zures, metal implants, pregnancy, or head trauma with games), learning a single musical instrument was not the
loss of consciousness (Study 4), problems or delays with primary objective of this type of formal music training.
language acquisition, learning problems, and if they had In addition to this definition, the review revealed fur-
given up learning an instrument (Study 12). Two interest- ther details about the type of formal music training that
ing exclusions used in the studies were those participants contributed to the definition of a musician. Disregarding
who learnt more than one instrument (Studies 3 and 5) Studies 8 and 11, all studies required weekly lessons on
and those who learnt a foreign language before 6 years of a musical instrument during the school year in a one
age (Study 12). teacher/one student format. Studies 8 and 11 listed for-
mal music training as weekly lessons during the school
year in a one teacher/no more than six student format.
Findings
Type of Music Education
Period of Music Education
The majority of the studies, with the exception of Studies 8
and 11, defined formal music training as the learning of a Studies 1 to 7 involved professional musicians and there-
musical instrument. This included string, keyboard, or fore the duration of their training varied significantly but
conventionally recognized musical instruments. This was always more than 10 years and involved weekly one-
choice could have been made for a number of reasons: For to-one lessons. Studies 8 to 14 provided more informa-
the purposes of a scientific study this option presents far tion that could be useful to a music educator. Among
fewer variables, the participant group would be easier to other objectives, these studies sought to determine the
access, students are likely to undertake this type of musical length of formal music education required to produce
learning for several years with the same teacher as opposed structural and functional brain changes. Essentially, they
Collins 5

were searching for a minimum period of music training musical development in 2-year time frames may not be as
required to change the brain. Studies 9, 10, and 14 found common and this finding may encourage a reexamination
that participants who underwent weekly instrumental les- of how we view musical development when related to
sons from between 8 weeks and 15 months showed either brain development.
structural or functional changes in brain activity but not The definition of a musician in these studies begs a
both. Studies 12 and 13 showed that both structural and number of questions that future research might usefully
functional changes in the brain occurred after a minimum address including: Is instrumental music training the only
of 2 years of formal instrumental music training. form of music education that has positive effects on brain
development? If students learn in a group or social situa-
tion does this lessen the positive effects of formal music
Age of Music Education training? If a child plays a violin and begins learning at 3
The age at which formal music training occurred varied years of age, is their brain development greater than a
widely. The studies involving children only examined child who takes up trombone at 10 years of age?
children in their primary school years (<11 years of age) Our current body of research does not appear to pro-
whereas the studies involving adults examined a far wider vide answers to these questions. The field itself is rela-
age range. Study 6 examined the average practice hours tively young (entering its third decade) and research not
of professional musicians in three important periods dur- only needs to be initiated but also verified and replicated
ing their childhood and adolescence, the age they began in different contexts and at different times in history.
practicing till 11 years, 12 to 16 years, and 17 years until Some suggest that using these findings even now is too
time of test. Study 6 found that the earlier the students soon (Gruhn, 2004). I would venture that learning a musi-
began practicing a musical instrument the more signifi- cal instrumental is not the only form of music education
cant the changes in the brain. Study 13 echoes this find- that positively effects brain development, but it provides
ing and Study 4 used the continuation of instrumental clear and easy parameters on which to base a scientific
lessons through childhood and adolescence as a criteria study. It is also an easy and large participant group to
for their musicians. access. These two reasons may make this group attractive
to neuroscientists, more so than a classroom program
based on an Orff or Kodaly methodology or informal
Conclusions music learning environments.
The review revealed a number of useful research findings Music educators know that every music ensemble or
and also some significant questions that deserve further music learning environment is unique and different. It
investigation. In essence, positive changes in brain struc- depends on the aims of the ensemble, performance goals,
ture and function have been observed in musicians who resourcing, rehearsal space and frequency, student per-
have learned a musical instrument in a weekly one-to-one sonalities, and teaching style. For a scientist, the number
lesson for more than 2 years and have commenced learn- of variables this context introduces makes it unattractive
ing as early as is appropriate for their instrument. In terms for scientific study. Yet some scientific studies have
of music education, this definition would support the con- examined this aspect of music education (Koelsch &
cept of experiential learning or learning through doing Siebel, 2005), and Sloboda (1991) argues that the physi-
that Dewey (1910) and Eisner (2002) understood educa- cal setting and social dynamics of a music making experi-
tion to be. This type of music education would fall into the ence are just as important as any brain development that
paradigm on which many of our state and national curri- occurs. Research in this area, using the small knowledge
cula are based, that music education must occur through base that already exists, could assist music educators to
the medium of music making. In an even narrower sense, understand how and why music education in a group can
it is music making that occurs through performance, rather affect brain development. Similarly, the imperative for
than composition. This definition also supports the direct active music making rather than more passive music
instruction or master and apprentice model of music edu- appreciation could be bolstered by such research.
cation that includes regular weekly connection with an The age at which music education begins has been
expert on the instrument. This has been the predominant widely researched and findings in this area are similar;
model for instrumental tuition for centuries, but rather the earlier a child begins to be exposed and understand
than consider this as a best practice model, it should move music the more they benefit. Although this idea is impor-
appropriately to be considered the most established or pre- tant, it will be just as important to follow the musical
dominant. The minimum of 2 years tuition in this format learning and brain development of children over a longer
is an interesting finding for music educators. Music pro- period than 2 years, which will likely happen as the field
grams can be organized in a myriad ways, but a common continues to grow and research questions become more
learning period is for one semester or 1 year. Looking at sophisticated.
6 Update XX(X)

The purpose of research should always be to inform References

and improve practice. The findings from this review could Austin, J. R., & Reinhardt, D. (1999). Philosophy and advo-
be applied in a broad range of circumstances, including cacy: An examination of preservice music teachers’ beliefs.
the following: Journal of Research in Music Education, 47(1), 18–30.
Campbell, D. (2001). The Mozart effect: Tapping the power of
• Supporting research for the establishment of an music to heal the body, strengthen the mind, and unlock the
instrumental music program creative spirit. New York, NY: HarperCollins.
• Supporting research for the extension of a compul- Dammann, G. (2009, August 27). Hearts and minds. Retrieved
sory music program to a minimum of 2 years from http://www.newstatesman.com/music/2009/08/music-
love-ensemble
• Supporting research for the expansion of an
Degé, F., Wehrum, S., Stark, R., & Schwarzer, G. (2011). The
instrumental music program that may have been influence of two years of school music training in sec-
established on a pilot, voluntary, or user-pays ondary school on visual and auditory memory. European
basis Journal of Developmental Psychology, 8, 608–623.
• Supporting research for the justification of the Dewey, J. (1910). How we think. Boston, MA: D. C. Heath.
continuation of an instrumental music program Dunbar, K. N. (2008). Arts education, the brain, and language. In
that is in danger of closure M. Gazzaniga (Ed.), Learning, arts, and the brain: The Dana
• Supporting research in the education of parents, Consortium Report on Arts and Cognition (pp. 81–104). New
community bodies, and school administrators on York, NY: Dana Consortium.
the benefits of instrumental music education Eisner, E. W. (2002). The arts and the creation of mind. New
Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
Geake, J. (2009). Brain at school: Educational neuroscience in
As music educators, we find ourselves consistently
the classroom. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill Education.
arguing for the importance and value of our discipline. In Gibson, C., Folley, B. S., & Park, S. (2009). Enhanced diver-
these times of economic restraint and the constant call to gent thinking and creativity in musicians: A behavioral and
fit more learning into a smaller time frame, we will see near-infrared spectroscopy study. Brain and Cognition, 69,
ourselves continue to argue our case. In the past, our 162–169.
arguments have been based predominantly on the aes- Gruhn, W. (2004, July 11–16). Neurodidactics: A new sci-
thetic benefits of the arts in the development of a well- entific trend in music education? In A. Giráldez (Ed.),
rounded student. I do not believe we should cast aside Sound worlds to discover proceedings [ISME 2004,
those important points in favor of a scientific-based argu- 26th International Society for Music Education World
ment, but by presenting our position with findings from Conference, 11–16 July, Tenerife, Spain] (pp. 195–200).
both sides, it is more likely that our arguments will reach Madrid, Spain: Enclave Creativa Ediciones.
Hanna-Pladdy, B., & MacKay, A. (2011). The relation
and influence a larger number of people who value differ-
between instrumental musical activity and cognitive aging.
ent types of evidence. The ultimate goal of this approach Neuropsychology, 25, 378–386.
is to shift the current paradigm of the value of music edu- Hannon, E. E., & Trainor, L. J. (2007). Music acquisition:
cation in each child’s development to reflect Oliver Effects of enculturation and formal training on develop-
Sacks’s conviction that “for the vast majority of students, ment. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 11, 465–472.
music can be every bit as important educationally as read- Haslinger, B., Erhard, P., Altenmuller, E., Schroeder, U.,
ing and writing” (2007, p. 102). Importantly, the research Boecker, H., & Ceballos-Baumann, A. O. (2005).
field has advanced sufficiently to the point that instead of Transmodal sensorimotor networks during action obser-
passively reading the questions posed by the neurosci- vation in professional pianists. Journal of Cognitive
ence, we may begin to actively ask the questions our- Neuroscience, 17, 282–293.
selves and work together to better understand music Hyde, K., Lerch, J., Norton, A., Forgeard, M., Winner, E.,
Evans, A. C., & Schlaug, G. (2009). Musical training shapes
education.
structural brain development. Journal of Neuroscience, 29,
3019–3025.
Declaration of Conflicting Interests Jonides, J. (2008). Musical skill and cognition. InM. Gazzaniga
The author declared no potential conflicts of interest with (Ed.), Learning, arts, and the brain: The Dana Consortium
respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this Report on Arts and Cognition (pp. 11–17). New York, NY:
article. Dana Consortium.
Koelsch, S. (2011). Toward a neural basis of music perception:
A review and update model. Frontiers in Psychology, 2,
Funding 1–20.
The author received no financial support for the research, Koelsch, S., & Siebel, W. A. (2005). Towards a neural basis of
authorship, and/or publication of this article. music perception. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 9, 578–584.
 Collins 7

Leonhard, C., & House, R. W. (1959). Foundations and prin- organization of music recognition. Annals of the New York
ciples of music education. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill. Academy of Sciences, 1169, 256–265.
Meyer, L. B. (1956). Emotion and meaning in music. Chicago, Posner, M., Rothbart, M. K., Sheese, B. E., & Kieras, J. (2008).
IL: University of Chicago Press. How arts training influences cognition. In M. Gazzaniga
Molnar-Szakacs, I., & Overy, K. (2006). Music and mirror (Ed.), Learning, arts, and the brain: The Dana Consortium
neurons: from motion to ‘e’motion. Social Cognitive & Report on Arts and Cognition (pp. 1–10). New York, NY:
Affective Neuroscience, 1, 235–241. Dana Consortium.
Moser, S. R. (2005). Beyond the Mozart effect: Age-related Rauscher, F., Shaw, G., & Ky, K. (1993). Music and spatial task
cognitive functioning in instrumental music participants. performance. Nature, 365, 611.
InM. Lammers (Ed.), Bulletin of the council for research Reimer, B. (1993). Justifying music education: Variations on a
in music education (Vol. 163, pp. 89–91). doi:10.1525/ theme. Music Educators Journal, 80(3), 10–15.
mp.2009.26.5.489 Sacks, O. (2007). Musicophilia: Tales of music and the brain.
Munte, T. F., Altenmuller, E., & Jancke, L. (2002). The musi- New York, NY: Alfred. A. Knopf.
cian’s brain as a model of neuroplasticity. Nature Reviews Schlaug, G. (2001). The brain of musicians: A model for func-
Neuroscience, 3, 473–478. tional and structural adaptation. Annals New York Academy
NAfME. (2011, August 1). National Association for Music of Sciences, 930, 281–299.
Education strategic plan. Retrieved from http://musiced. Sloboda, J. A. (1991). Music structure and emotional
nafme.org/files/2012/04/2011stratplanfinal.pdf response: Some empirical findings. Psychology of Music,
Oldfield, R. C. (1971). The assessment and analysis of handedness: 19, 110–120.
The Edinburgh inventory. Neuropsychologia, 9(1), 97–113. Swanwick, K. (1979). A basis for music education. London,
Overy, K., & Molnar-Szakacs, I. (2009). Being together in time: England: NFER.
Musical experience and the mirror neuron system. Music Wandell, B., Dougherty, R. F., Ben-Shachar, M., Deutsch, M. K.,
Perception, 26, 489–504. & Tsang, K. (2009). Training in the arts, reading, and brain
Patel, A. D. (2008). Science & music: Talk of the tone. Nature, imaging. In M. Gazzaniga (Ed.), Learning, arts, and the
453, 726–727. doi:10.1038/453726a brain: The Dana Consortium Report on Arts and Cognition
Patel, A. D. (2009). Music and the brain: Three links to lan- (pp. 51–61). New York, NY: Dana Consortium.
guage. In S. Hallam, I. Cross, & M. Thaut (Eds.), The Zatorre, R. J. (2005). Music, the food of neuroscience? Nature,
Oxford handbook of music psychology (pp. 208–216). 434, 312–315.
Oxford, England: Oxford University Press. Zatorre, R. J., Chen, J. L., & Penhune, V. B. (2007). When the brain
Peretz, I., Gosselin, N., Belin, P., Zartorre, R., Plailly, J., & plays music: Auditory–motor interactions in music perception
Tillmann, B. (2009). Music lexical networks: The cortical and production. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 8, 547–558.

View publication stats