Nicholas J. Yasillo ([log in to unmask]) wrote:

>Does exposure to "classical" music enhance development in other cognitive
>areas? Is math and spatial reasoning enhanced by learning about music at a
>very young age? Does early training in music shape a child's brain in
>beneficial ways?
>
>The (some would say) very convincing arguments presented by authors Francis
>Rauscher, Gordon Shaw and Martin Gardiner (among others) would say so.
>Despite some recently published work that challenges the "Mozart Effect",
>most open minded persons would probably conclude that the jury is still
>out.

Having done two years (out of three - it's a long story) of a mathematics
degree at Cambridge - wherein lurk some people who are seriously good at
hard sums - my observation was that most mathematicians - or 'prentice ones
anyway - were interested, often to the point of obsession, in any two and
often all three of music, chess and bridge.

We can probably disregard, or at least downgrade, bridge as an influence,
for I don't think many of us took it up at an early enough age.

But music and chess are both often taken up at a very early age indeed.

So I cannot help but agree with your proposition:

>On the other hand, I suspect that anyone on this list would believe that
>exposure to "good" music at an early age should be beneficial to any child,
>if only to develop an appreciation for the music that we all love.

Although I suspect that the chief benefit comes from a more active
participation than simply listening.  Which is why I'm not that surprised
that the Mozaetr Effect has been at least partially debunked, because it
was probably measuring the wrong thing.  if it was measuring IQ, it was
*definitely* measuring the wrong thing, but that's another story.

What I'd be interested in is a followup study in which the kids who
developed an active interest in the music were studied.  See how *they* do.

Deryk Barker
[log in to unmask]