The Mozart effect
is a
silly but familiar bit of
nonsensepop psychology according to which listening toMozart’s
music will, for some unclear reason, increase your intelligence.
It was first proposed by real
researchers (Shaw et al.), but their study failed to replicate and a meta-study
showed no effect (at least not beyond whatever might
have been caused by mood changes). But hah! When has lack of
evidence, plausibility or mechanism stopped a potentially profitable piece of
pseudopsychology? Several attempts were made to turn the mythical effect into a
cash cow, the most important (outside of Austria) probably being Don Campbell’s
Mozart Effect Resource Center, which peddles a variety of pseudo-scientific
products based on the myth (he even trademarked the purported effect).
Campbell subsequently wrote a number of books and published numerous albums with
Mozart’s music, including The Mozart Effect for Children, where he
explains, in the chapter “Twinkle
Twinkle, Little Neuron”, that Mozart’s music enhances the network of
connections forming in the infant brain, based on the fact that it sounds properly
sciency and gentrified for his audiences to say something like that. That said,
even Campbell has criticized the original Shaw et al.-study for its lack of
controls – concluding, predictably and based on no evidence whatsoever, that
had the controls been in place, the effect observed would have been even more
dramatic. It demonstrably would not.
But not
only does Mozart increase your intelligence, as Campbell sees it; Mozart is
rather an all-purpose source of magic, and can even cure disease – according to
Campbell, he himself made a blood
clot in his brain disappear by humming, praying, and envisioning a vibrating
hand on the right side of his skull. The finding didn’t quite reach peer review. But it is not Campbell’s
only flimsyanecdote about the disease-curing
properties of music written by a generally sickly person with numerous health
problems who died at the age of 35. As it is, Campbell remains a popular
speaker for post-truth middle-class audiences.
Diagnosis:
Mostly a cynical but savvy opportunist, we assume, but people who keep
repeating nonsense for decades will usually end up convincing themselves, too.
Not the most immediately harmful of woo, perhaps, but woo nonetheless.
