CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 118Diverse Music Education InsightsNeuroscience and Music PerceptionMusic Therapy and Health

Please don't stop the music: A meta-analysis of the cognitive and academic benefits of instrumental musical training in childhood and adolescence

Open access
Román-Caballero, Rafael, Vadillo, Miguel A., Trainor, Laurel J., Lupiáñez, Juan·2022·Educational Research Review
DOI 10.1016/j.edurev.2022.100436
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

An extensive literature has investigated the impact of musical training on cognitive skills and academic achievement in children and adolescents. However, most of the studies have relied on cross-sectional designs, which makes it impossible to elucidate whether the observed differences are a consequence of the engagement in musical activities. Previous meta-analyses with longitudinal studies have also found inconsistent results, possibly due to their reliance on vague definitions of musical training. In addition, more evidence has appeared in recent years. The current meta-analysis investigates the impact of early programs that involve learning to play musical instruments on cognitive skills and academic achievement, as previous meta-analyses have not focused on this form of musical training. Following a systematic search, 34 independent samples of children and adolescents were included, with a total of 176 effect sizes and 5998 participants. All the studies had pre-post designs and, at least, one control group. Overall, we found a small but significant benefit (g‾Δ = 0.26) with short-term programs, regardless of whether they were randomized or not. In addition, a small advantage at baseline was observed in studies with self-selection (g‾pre = 0.28), indicating that participants who had the opportunity to select the activity consistently showed a slightly superior performance prior to the beginning of the intervention. Our findings support a nature and nurture approach to the relationship between instrumental training and cognitive skills. Nevertheless, evidence from well-conducted studies is still scarce and more studies are necessary to reach firmer conclusions.

AI snapshot

Written from the paper’s full text.

TL;DR

This meta-analysis of 34 independent samples (5,998 participants) found a small but significant benefit of instrumental musical training on cognitive and academic outcomes in children and adolescents (gΔ = 0.26). It also found a baseline advantage in self-selection studies (gpre = 0.29), supporting a nature-and-nurture interpretation, though the authors note that reliable evidence remains scarce.

Key findings

  • Across randomized and non-randomized pre-post studies, instrumental training showed a positive overall effect: gΔ = 0.26, 95% CI [0.12, 0.39], p < .001; randomized studies alone showed gΔ = 0.26, p = .013, and non-randomized studies gΔ = 0.25, p = .015.
  • Self-selection studies showed a significant baseline advantage for music groups before training: gpre = 0.29, 95% CI [0.12, 0.47], p = .003; randomized studies showed no baseline difference (gpre = 0.00, p = .957) and non-randomized studies showed none (gpre = 0.03, p = .510).
  • Most moderators were not significant, but in randomized studies the best model included age, baseline difference, and low SES: effects were smaller in older participants and those with higher baseline performance, and larger in low-SES samples.
  • Outcome-specific effects varied: executive functions gΔ = 0.41 [0.12, 0.70], short-term memory gΔ = 0.28 [0.15, 0.41], literacy gΔ = 0.20 [0.06, 0.34], while mathematics was not significant (gΔ = 0.23 [−0.41, 0.87]). Publication-bias tests showed little evidence of bias; an η ≈ 9 was needed to reduce the estimate to gΔ = 0.10.

Methods

  • Systematic search of PubMed, ProQuest, Scopus, Web of Science, and ProQuest Dissertation & Theses in February 2021 with no time restriction; 8,560 results yielded 32 studies, 34 independent samples, 179 effect sizes, and 5,998 participants. Inclusion required instrumental training, pre-post measures, at least one control group, no prior formal musical training, ages 3–16, and non-musical cognitive/academic outcomes.
  • Main effect size was Hedges’ gΔ (Morris, 2008), the standardized pre-post change difference between groups; baseline differences used gpre. Analyses used robust variance estimation (RVE) with correlated dependence and small-sample corrections, plus heterogeneity indexes (τ², I²), moderator analyses, and multiple publication-bias methods (trim-and-fill, selection model, RVE PET/PEESE, Mathur & VanderWeele sensitivity analysis).
  • Samples included 8 randomized, 12 non-randomized, and 14 self-selection studies; mean age was 8 years (SD = 2.2, range 3.9–14.7), mean program duration was 17 months (SD = 16.3, range 0.75–60), with 1,664 children/adolescents in music training and 4,334 controls (3,670 passive, 664 active).

Limitations

  • Stated in the paper: evidence from well-conducted studies is still scarce and more studies are necessary for firmer conclusions; heterogeneity remained moderate in the best randomized model (I² = 59.56%), and outcome-specific analyses were underpowered because only two of nine cognitive/academic domains were assessed in at least ten studies.
  • Stated in the paper: participants’ engagement and between-lesson practice were rarely reported, making it hard to detect related biases; the mechanisms for transfer remain unknown.
  • Evident from the text: overall heterogeneity was high (I² = 83.89% before outlier removal; 70.35% after), many included studies were non-randomized or self-selection, and interventions were often short with small samples, limiting causal certainty and generalizability.

Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.edurev.2022.100436

Cites

126 of 126 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

20 of 45 cited sources checked · 12 supported · 0 flagged · accuracy not yet measured

  • Premisecitation

    Previous research suggests there are cognitive and personality differences in individuals who choose and continue with musical training.

    “Previous research suggests that there are cognitive and personality differences in individuals who choose and continue with musical training as an activity (Corrigall et al., 2013).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim1 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Corrigall et al., 2013 source
  • Premisecitation

    The Mathur and VanderWeele's sensitivity analysis seems to be relatively unbiased with values of η below 20 (i.e., a publication probability 20 times higher for positive than null or negative results).

    “Finally, the Mathur and VanderWeele's sensitivity analysis seems to be relatively unbiased with values of η below 20 (i.e., a publication probability 20 times higher for positive than null or negative results; Mathur & VanderWeele, 2020).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim1 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Mathur & VanderWeele, 2020 source
  • Premisecitation

    Only a third of the studies included in Sala and Gobet's meta-analysis had instrumental programs (19 out of 54).

    “only a third of the studies included in Sala and Gobet's meta-analysis had instrumental programs (19 out of 54)”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim1 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Sala & Gobet, 2020 source

      The Method (Inclusion criteria; page unavailable) confirms that the meta-analysis included 54 studies. It says 19 were new to previous meta-analyses, not that 19 had instrumental programs. The inclusion criteria mention learning instruments as one possible program, but our copy gives no count for instrumental programs. (LLM, conf=0.88)

      Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Premiseown data

    Studies involving instrumental training were underrepresented among Sala and Gobet's studies with random assignment and/or with an active control group.

    “studies involving instrumental training were underrepresented among Sala and Gobet's studies with random assignment and/or with an active control group.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim1 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Sala & Gobet, 2020 source

      The Method (Inclusion criteria; page unavailable) includes learning to play instruments as an eligible music-training program. The Results (Descriptive statistics; page unavailable) count studies by randomization and control type, but do not report how many in either group involved instrumental training. Searches for instrumental training, underrepresentation, random assignment, and active controls found no passage establishing the claimed comparison. (LLM, conf=0.72)

      Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Premisecitation

    The few studies that assessed longer training periods have shown a greater impact of playing an instrument.

    “The few studies that assessed longer training periods have shown a greater impact of playing an instrument (Costa-Giomi, 1999, 2004: 36 months, mean g = 0.43; James et al., 2020: 48 months, mean g = 0.39; Portowitz et al., 2009: 24 months, mean g = 0.73)”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim1 of 3 sources checked
    • cites Costa-Giomi, 1999, 2004

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

    • cites James et al., 2020 source

      The Conclusion reports cognitive and sensorimotor benefits after two years of instrumental training, supporting the general point that an extended training period can have an impact. But the Limitations section says the program would last four years only after a future extension; this study did not assess 48 months. Our copy also does not report a mean g of 0.39 or establish that longer training produced a greater impact than shorter training. (LLM, conf=0.91)

      Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
    • cites Portowitz et al., 2009 source
  • May combine two claims. 41
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. 18

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Only 27% of the randomized studies (6 out of 22), 36% of those using an active control group (9 out of 25), and 31% of those using both randomization and an active control group (4 out of 13) had instrumental training.

    “only 27% of the randomized studies (6 out of 22), 36% of those using an active control group (9 out of 25), and 31% of those using both randomization and an active control group (4 out of 13), had instrumental training.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim1 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Sala & Gobet, 2020 source

      The Results > Descriptive statistics table lists 23 randomized studies and 23 studies with active controls, but does not break either group down by instrumental training. Searches for “instrumental training” and the claimed fractions found no passage reporting the three percentages or counts; the paper’s reported totals also differ from the claim’s denominators. (LLM, conf=0.76)

      Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Sala & Gobet (2020) found a positive small effect of musical training (g = 0.18, p < .001) that was reduced to null when characteristics of design quality (random allocation and active control) were taken into account (g ≈ 0).

    “the most recent and comprehensive meta-analysis (i.e., Sala & Gobet, 2020), which included different musical interventions, found a positive small effect of musical training (g = 0.18, p < .001) that was reduced to null when characteristics of design quality (i.e., random allocation and active control) were taken into account (g ≈ 0).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim1 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Sala & Gobet, 2020 source

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Instrument engagement was highly heritable and genetically correlated with verbal abilities at 12 and 16 years of age, suggesting that a common set of genetic influences predisposes individuals towards both music engagement and high verbal intelligence (i.e., selection bias).

    “Instrument engagement was highly heritable and genetically correlated with verbal abilities at 12 and 16 years of age, suggesting that a common set of genetic influences predisposes individuals towards both music engagement and high verbal intelligence (i.e., selection bias).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim1 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Gustavson et al., 2021 source

      Split into 2 atoms — 1 confirmed, 1 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.

      Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    New studies have appeared since the publication of Sala & Gobet (2020), and some studies never included in any previous meta-analysis were found, including unpublished doctoral theses.

    “new studies have appeared since the publication of the most recent meta-analysis (Sala & Gobet, 2020) and we additionally found some studies that have never been included in any previous meta-analysis, including some from unpublished doctoral theses”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim1 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Sala & Gobet, 2020 source

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Instrument engagement was associated with later verbal ability (at 16 years old) even when controlling for 12-year full-scale intelligence or 12-year verbal intelligence, providing evidence for small direct benefits of musical training on later language abilities.

    “However, instrument engagement was associated with later verbal ability (at 16 years old) even when controlling for 12-year full-scale intelligence or 12-year verbal intelligence, providing evidence for small direct benefits of musical training on later language abilities.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim1 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Gustavson et al., 2021 source

      Split into 2 atoms — 1 confirmed, 1 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.

      Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Some outcomes included in the meta-analyses by Sala and Gobet (2017, 2020) were measures of skills trained with active control activities and therefore should not be analyzed in a far-transfer meta-analysis.

    “some outcomes included in the meta-analyses by Sala andGobet (2017, 2020) were measures of skills trained with active control activities (e.g., phonological abilities with phonological training), and therefore should not be analyzed in a far-transfer meta-analysis (Bigand & Tillmann, 2021).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim1 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Bigand & Tillmann, 2021 source

  • May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductown data

    A multilevel Bayesian approach replicated previous results: strong evidence for lack of difference at baseline in randomized studies (BF 10 = 0.09) and non-randomized studies (BF 10 = 0.06); substantial evidence for preexisting differences in self-selection studies (BF 10 = 7.20).

    “A multilevel Bayesian approach using the brms R package (Bürkner, 2017) replicated previous results.Whereas there was strong evidence in favor of the lack of difference at baseline in randomized studies, BF 10 = 0.09, and non-randomized studies, BF 10 = 0.06; it showed substantial evidence in favor of preexisting differences in self-selection studies, BF 10 = 7.20.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim1 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Bürkner, 2017 source

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisecitation

    A plausible alternative explanation for cognitive and academic advantages in correlational and non-randomized intervention studies is preexisting differences in children's intelligence, temperament, and environment.

    “From this point of view, most of the cognitive and academic advantages observed in correlational studies and interventions without random assignment (where participants and their families chose musical activities) could be due to preexisting differences in children's intelligence, temperament, and environment.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim1 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Corrigall et al., 2013 source
    • cites Swaminathan et al., 2017 source

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Study design and conductcitation

    A systematic search strategy was used following PRISMA recommendations.

    “A systematic search strategy was used following the recommendations of PRISMA (Moher et al., 2009).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim1 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Moher et al., 2009 source

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    Training on unfamiliar or highly demanding tasks, such as learning to play an instrument, leads to the development of new complex cognitive skills.

    “The cognitive routine framework (Gathercole et al., 2019) posits that training on unfamiliar or highly demanding tasks, such as learning to play an instrument, leads to the development of new complex cognitive skills.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim1 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Gathercole et al., 2019 source

      In “The cognitive routine framework” (page unavailable), the paper proposes that training on unfamiliar working-memory tasks develops new cognitive routines; “Cognitive training as skill acquisition” describes these as complex cognitive skills. The framework is specifically about working-memory training, and the passages do not establish that it applies to learning to play an instrument. (LLM, conf=0.87)

      Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable), S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    Transfer can be conceptualized as the consequence of acquiring complex cognitive skills that can be applied to untrained tasks with some overlap.

    “An alternative proposal conceptualizes transfer as the consequence of acquiring complex cognitive skills that can be applied to untrained tasks with some overlap (Gathercole et al., 2019;Taatgen, 2013).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim2 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Gathercole et al., 2019 source
    • cites Taatgen, 2013 source

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Several longitudinal studies have found benefits of musical training in emotional development and empathy, prosocial skills, self-esteem, academic self-esteem, and mood and quality of life.

    “Along these lines, several longitudinal studies have found benefits in such types of domains: emotional development and empathy (Rabinowitch et al., 2013), prosocial skills (Schellenberg et al., 2015), self-esteem (Costa-Giomi, 2004;Rickard et al., 2013), academic self-esteem (Degé et al., 2014;Degé & Schwarzer, 2018), and mood and quality of life (Seinfeld et al., 2013).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim2 of 3 sources checked
    • cites Rabinowitch et al., 2013 source
    • cites Schellenberg et al., 2015 source
    • cites Costa-Giomi, 2004 source

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Overall, instrumental musical training produced a small but significant benefit (gΔ = 0.26) with short-term programs, regardless of whether studies were randomized or not.

    “Overall, we found a small but significant benefit (g Δ = 0.26) with short-term programs, regardless of whether they were randomized or not.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    The search found 8560 potentially relevant results, of which 32 met inclusion criteria and were included.

    “In total, 8560 potentially relevant results were found, among which 32 met the inclusion criteria described below and were included in our meta-analysis”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    The meta-analysis extracted 75 correlation coefficients from 14 studies, with a meta-analytic mean r of 0.71.

    “we could extract 75 correlation coefficients and their respective variances from 14 studies, with a metaanalytic mean r of 0.71”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    The meta-analysis included 34 independent samples of children and adolescents and 5998 participants.

    “Following a systematic search, 34 independent samples of children and adolescents were included, with a total of 176 effect sizes and 5998 participants.”
    • Also stated in: § 2.1. Literature search · plain
      “These studies included 34 independent samples, 179 effect sizes, and a total of 5998 participants.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    The overall meta-analysis, including both randomized and non-randomized studies, showed a positive and significant average effect of musical training, g Δ = 0.26, 95% CI [0.12, 0.39], p < .001, although heterogeneity was high, τ 2 = 0.15; I 2 = 83.89%.

    “The overall meta-analysis, including both randomized and non-randomized studies, showed a positive and significant average effect of musical training, g Δ = 0.26, 95% CI [0.12, 0.39], p < .001,although heterogeneity was high, τ 2 = 0.15; I 2 = 83.89%.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Thirty-two empirical studies meeting the selection criteria were included in the systematic review, contributing a total of 179 cognitive/academic outcomes from 34 independent samples.

    “Thirty-two empirical studies meeting the selection criteria were included in the systematic review, contributing a total of 179 cognitive/academic outcomes from 34 independent samples.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    In the Mathur and VanderWeele's sensitivity analysis, no value of η could render the estimate equal to 0 or non-significant; an η ≈ 9 was necessary to diminish the final estimate to g Δ = 0.10.

    “Finally, in the Mathur and VanderWeele's sensitivity analysis, no value of η could render the estimate equal to 0 or non-significant.An η ≈ 9 was necessary to diminish the final estimate to g Δ = 0.10.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    The type of outcome was a significant moderator when it was individually entered in the overall model, suggesting that the impact of the interventions is not the same for all cognitive and academic domains.

    “In this sense, the type of outcome was a significant moderator when it was individually entered in the overall model, suggesting that the impact of the interventions is not the same for all cognitive and academic domains.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Under the predefined conditions of the simulation analysis, the selection model achieved the best performance correcting the estimate (in terms of root square mean error and coverage) and trim-and-fill the worst, systematically overestimating the effect; the performance of PET-PEESE fell between both extremes.

    “Under the predefined conditions, the selection model achieved the best performance correcting the estimate (in terms of root square mean error and coverage) and trim-and-fill the worst, systematically overestimating the effect.The performance of PET-PEESE fell between both extremes.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    These three outlier studies did not randomly assign participants to groups and had small samples.

    “Interestingly, these three studies did not randomly assign participants to groups and had small samples, factors that might have contributed to their outcomes.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    The pre-posttest difference was similar among the three groups of studies, even numerically smaller for self-selection studies (randomized: g Δ = 0.26, p = .013; non-randomized: g Δ = 0.25, p = .015; self-selection: g Δ = 0.11, p = .023).

    “Interestingly, the pre-posttest difference was similar among the three groups of studies, even numerically smaller for selfselection studies (randomized: g Δ = 0.26, p = .013;non-randomized: g Δ = 0.25, p = .015;self-selection: g Δ = 0.11, p = .023).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    The final estimates of the three groups of studies did not differ (randomized: g Δ = 0.26, p = .013; non-randomized: g Δ = 0.25, p = .021; self-selection: g Δ = 0.11, p = .023).

    “Again, the final estimates of the three groups of studies did not differ (randomized: g Δ = 0.26, p = .013,see Fig. 2; non-randomized: g Δ = 0.25, p = .021,see Fig. 3; self-selection: g Δ = 0.11, p = .023,see Appendix F, Figure F.1).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    After excluding the outliers, the overall effect (with randomized and non-randomized studies) remained significant but heterogeneity was still substantial, g Δ = 0.26, 95% CI [0.13, 0.39], p < .001; τ 2 = 0.08; I 2 = 70.35%.

    “The overall effect (with randomized and non-randomized studies) remained significant but heterogeneity was still substantial, g Δ = 0.26, 95% CI [0.13, 0.39], p < .001;τ 2 = 0.08; I 2 = 70.35%.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Most included studies contributed more than one effect size from the same sample, rendering outcomes not independent.

    “most of the included studies contributed with more than one effect size from the same sample, which rendered the outcomes not independent.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Our meta-analysis of studies with programs lasting 16 months on average showed a similar overall increase, corresponding to about 3 IQ points.

    “Similarly, our meta-analysis of studies with programs lasting 16 months on average showed a similar overall increase, corresponding to about 3 IQ points.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Learning to play a musical instrument is an activity with cognitive and academic benefits, although they are fairly small.

    “Our results support that learning to play a musical instrument is an activity with cognitive and academic benefits, although they are fairly small.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    The overall effect in the present meta-analysis is g Δ = 0.26, indicating a probability of 57.3% that a randomly selected person from the musical training group will show higher cognitive skills and academic achievement than a person selected from the control group.

    “The overall effect in the present meta-analysis (g Δ = 0.26) indicates a probability of 57.3% that a randomly selected person from the musical training group will show higher cognitive skills and academic achievement than a person selected from the control group (only 7.3% above chance level).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingnone given

    Longitudinal evidence suggests both a causal role of musical training and the existence of a self-selection bias, whereby children with favorable backgrounds and higher initial functioning are more likely to choose to learn to play or keep learning an instrument.

    “Longitudinal evidence suggests both a causal role of musical training and the existence of a self-selection bias, whereby children with favorable backgrounds and higher initial functioning are more likely to choose to learn to play or keep learning an instrument.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S4 (based).

    Premisenone given

    Experimental studies with random assignment allow drawing causal inferences about the effects of musical training.

    “experimental studies with random assignment of the participants allow drawing causal inferences about the effects of musical training”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductnone given

    All included studies had pre-post designs and at least one control group.

    “All the studies had pre-post designs and, at least, one control group.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductreasoning

    The main inferences about causality, moderating variables, and publication bias were based on randomized and non-randomized studies, while self-selection studies were restricted to baseline differences and overall analysis for comparison.

    “Whereas we based the main inferences about causality, moderating variables and publication bias on randomized and non-randomized studies, the inclusion of self-selection studies was restricted to the assessment of baseline differences and the overall analysis for comparison purpose.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    Given that non-instrumental interventions likely have a smaller impact on cognitive skills and academic achievement compared to instrumental ones, the greater representation of non-instrumental studies in Sala and Gobet's study may have led to conclusions mostly related to non-instrumental musical training.

    “Given that non-instrumental interventions likely have a smaller impact on cognitive skills and academic achievement compared to instrumental ones, the greater representation of the former in Sala and Gobet's study may have led to conclusions mostly related to non-instrumental musical training.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    Each instrument involves idiosyncratic skills that might have specific cognitive and academic consequences.

    “Studies such as Bianco et al. (2017) and Guhn et al. (2020) pointed out that each instrument involves idiosyncratic skills that might have specific cognitive and academic consequences.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Bianco et al. (2017) source
    • cites Guhn et al. (2020) source

  • May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductown data

    The results of all the sensitivity analyses (using different pre-posttest correlations and a multilevel Bayesian approach) were similar to the main results, showing far transfer with musical training, the modulating role of several variables on this effect, and little evidence of publication bias.

    “The results of all the sensitivity analyses were similar to those reported here, showing far transfer with musical training (Appendices C and D), the modulating role of several variables on this effect (Appendix C), and little evidence of publication bias (Appendix E).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductcitation

    The meta-analysis used robust variance estimation (RVE) with a correlated dependence model and small-sample corrections.

    “We used the robumeta package for R (Fisher et al., 2017) for implementation of RVE conducted in the main analyses”
    • Also stated in: § 2.3.2. Meta-analysis, heterogeneity and moderator analysis · plain
      “We chose a correlated dependence model with small-sample corrections (Tipton, 2015).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Fisher et al., 2017

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

    • cites Tipton, 2015 source

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Most studies in the field are correlational, which does not allow establishing firm conclusions about the causal role of musical training in cognitive advantages.

    “Unfortunately, most of the studies in the field are correlational, which does not allow establishing firm conclusions about the causal role of musical training in those advantages (Schellenberg, 2020).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Schellenberg, 2020 source

  • May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductown data

    The mean baseline effect size was non-significant for randomized studies, g pre = 0.00, 95% CI [-0.14, 0.15], p = .957; τ 2 = 0.01; I 2 = 14.20%, confirming that randomization had been successful in these studies.

    “As expected, the mean effect size was non-significant for randomized studies, g pre = 0.00, 95% CI [-0.14, 0.15], p = .957;τ 2 = 0.01; I 2 = 14.20% (see Appendix G, Figure G.1), confirming that randomization had been successful in these studies.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisenone given

    The impact of instrumental interventions has not been investigated separately in any previous meta-analysis, nor has it been tested as a moderator.

    “to the best of our knowledge, the impact of instrumental interventions has not been investigated separately in any previous meta-analysis, nor has it been tested as a moderator.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisenone given

    Most experimental studies involve short interventions (1-1.5 years long) and relatively small samples (≈25 participants per group), with subsequent lack of statistical power to detect small-to-medium effect sizes.

    “most of them involve short interventions (1-1.5 years long) and relatively small samples (≈ 25 participants per group), with the subsequent lack of statistical power to detect small-to-medium effect sizes.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationown data

    The model suggests that the effect of musical training in randomized studies was smaller in older individuals and individuals with higher performance at baseline, whereas larger effects were found with low SES.

    “The model suggests that the effect of musical training in randomized studies was smaller in older individuals and individuals with higher performance at baseline, whereas larger effects were found with low SES.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Study design and conductown data

    The meta-analysis assessed publication bias using four methods: trim-and-fill, selection model, RVE PET/PEESE, and Mathur and VanderWeele's sensitivity analysis.

    “we chose four methods to test publication bias and adjust the mean estimate: (i) the trim-and-fill method (with the L0 and R0 estimators) and (ii) the selection model, both using aggregates, (iii) the RVE regression-based approaches (RVE PET and RVE PEESE), and (iv) the Mathur and Van-derWeele's sensitivity analysis.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationown data

    The null result with high-quality designs reported by Sala and Gobet (2020) was biased by the overrepresentation of non-instrumental interventions (73% of the randomized studies) that, according to our reanalyses, do not seem to produce far transfer benefits.

    “Therefore, it seems that the null result with high-quality designs reported by Sala and Gobet (2020) was biased by the overrepresentation of non-instrumental interventions (73% of the randomized studies) that, according to our reanalyses, do not seem to produce far transfer benefits.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Previous comprehensive meta-analyses of the literature revealed moderate heterogeneity (τ ≈ 0.2), a small sample of studies using instrumental programs (m ≈ 20), some evidence of publication bias, and a small uncorrected effect (g ≈ 0.20).

    “previous comprehensive meta-analyses of the literature (Sala & Gobet, 2017a, 2020) revealed moderate heterogeneity (τ ≈ 0.2), a small sample of studies using instrumental programs (m ≈ 20), some evidence of publication bias, and a small uncorrected effect (g ≈ 0.20).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Sala & Gobet, 2017a, 2020

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisenone given

    When there is selective reporting, trim-and-fill, selection model, and RVE meta-regression have low power, especially trim-and-fill, although selection model can detect publication bias more often.

    “When there is selective reporting, the three methods have low power, especially trim-and-fill, although selection model can detect publication bias more often.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable).

    Interpretationreasoning

    Studies examining the effects of formal programs in instrumental training are ideal for investigating the causal role of musical training on cognitive skills and academic achievement.

    “Arguably, studies examining the effects of formal programs in instrumental training are ideal for investigating the causal role of musical training on cognitive skills and academic achievement.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    PET-PEESE's estimate should be interpreted with caution in small meta-analyses (with 20 studies or less).

    “Furthermore, its estimate should be interpreted with caution in small meta-analyses (with 20 studies or less; Stanley, 2017).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Stanley, 2017 source

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    The contribution of musical training to cognitive enhancement is rather small and probably makes very little difference in daily life, so musical training might not be one of the first-choice interventions if the only purpose is cognitive enhancement.

    “This contribution is rather small and probably makes very little difference in daily life, so, in that case, musical training might be not one of the first-choice interventions if the only purpose is cognitive enhancement.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable), S3 (load-bearing).

    Interpretationreasoning

    Musical training and practice may pose a unique type of ongoing challenge that might facilitate far transfer.

    “Musical training and practice may also pose a unique type of ongoing challenge that might facilitate far transfer.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
    • Rests on an assumption: No matter what level of technical and artistic mastery a musician achieves, there is always room for improvement.
    • Rests on an assumption: There are always new pieces, interpretations, styles, and genres of music to learn.
    • Rests on an assumption: There are always different musicians and ensembles to play with, adjust to, and learn from.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    Involvement in playing a musical instrument enhances distant functions, besides improving domain-specific abilities.

    “Thus, our findings are in accordance with the idea that, besides improving domain-specific abilities, involvement in the stimulating activity of playing a musical instrument enhances distant functions.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
    • Rests on an assumption: The computerized psychological tasks and standardized tests used in the meta-analysis have little in common with playing a musical instrument at a concert or rehearsal.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Interpretationreasoning

    The expansion of cognitive capacities along with the development of new complex skills could explain the broad benefits observed with musical instrumental learning.

    “Accordingly, the expansion of cognitive capacities along with the development of new complex skills could explain the broad benefits observed with musical instrumental learning.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S1 (asserted).

    Premisecitation

    Transfer only occurs when trained and untrained processes share features in common.

    “Specifically, Thorndike (1906) proposed that transfer only occurs when trained and untrained processes share features in common.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Thorndike, 1906

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable), S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisereasoning

    Transfer occurs when one of these new skills can be applied to a novel activity.

    “Transfer then occurs when one of these new skills can be applied to a novel activity.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable), S3 (load-bearing).

    Interpretationreasoning

    Improvement through the application of effortful control can remain a rewarding challenge throughout the lifespan.

    “Thus, improvement through the application of effortful control can remain a rewarding challenge throughout the lifespan.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
    • Rests on an assumption: No matter what level of technical and artistic mastery a musician achieves, there is always room for improvement.
    • Rests on an assumption: There are always new pieces, interpretations, styles, and genres of music to learn.
    • Rests on an assumption: There are always different musicians and ensembles to play with, adjust to, and learn from.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Interpretationreasoning

    The main functions and motives to be involved in musical activities are historically distinct from cognitive enhancement.

    “It seems reasonable that the main functions and motives to be involved in musical activities (and subsequently, their more visible effects) are historically distinct from cognitive enhancement.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
56 of 56

  • The authors state this as an assumption.

    The variance of the pretest score is equal to the variance of the posttest score.

    “For instance, the variance of the pretest score is assumed to be equal to the variance of the posttest score.”

  • The authors state this as an assumption.

    Both groups are equivalent in baseline performance.

    “Similarly, both groups are assumed to be equivalent in baseline performance.”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The computerized psychological tasks and standardized tests used in the meta-analysis have little in common with playing a musical instrument at a concert or rehearsal.

    “Computerized psychological tasks (e.g., go/no-go), and standardized tests of intelligence or academic achievement have little in common with playing a musical instrument at a concert or rehearsal.”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Music-making requires the coordination of several skills and sensory modalities and involves a wide and constantly augmented variety of stimuli, social situations, and types of performance.

    “Unlike many other cognitive activities involving highly specific contexts and tasks, music-making requires the coordination of several skills and sensory modalities and involves a wide and constantly augmented variety of stimuli, social situations, and types of performance.”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Attention and executive functions are engaged in many daily activities as well as in many of the tasks used in the studies included in the present meta-analysis for measuring academic achievement and cognitive functions.

    “Attention and executive functions are engaged in many daily activities as well as in many of the tasks used in the studies included in the present meta-analysis for measuring academic achievement and cognitive functions in the included studies.”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    No matter what level of technical and artistic mastery a musician achieves, there is always room for improvement.

    “No matter what level of technical and artistic mastery a musician achieves, there is always room for improvement.”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    There are always new pieces, interpretations, styles, and genres of music to learn.

    “Furthermore, there are always new pieces, interpretations, styles, and genres of music to learn.”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    There are always different musicians and ensembles to play with, adjust to, and learn from.

    “And different musicians and ensembles to play with, adjust to, and learn from.”
8 of 8

Statistics recomputed

Every reported test result, recomputed from its test statistic and degrees of freedom. A result shows as not adding up only once an independent check has confirmed it.

  • Consistentχ²(1) = 0.27reported p = .606 · recomputed p = .603

    “χ 2 (1) = 0.27, p = .606”

  • Consistentχ²(1) = 1.08reported p = .298 · recomputed p = .299

    “χ 2 (1) = 1.08, p = .298”

2 of 2

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.

  • Effect-size count differs between the abstract and main text

    Minor

    The abstract reports 176 effect sizes, while the literature-search and results sections report 179 for the included studies.

  • Sensitivity analysis cites the wrong equations for pre-posttest correlation

    Minor

    The sensitivity-analysis section says correlations were computed with Equations (6) and (7), but those equations define the baseline effect size and its variance. The correlation and its variance are given in Equations (4) and (5).

2 of 2

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Said, 2020, Effect of music education on the promotion of school performance in children, CoDAS, 32

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Román-Caballero, R., Vadillo, M. A., Trainor, L. J., & Lupiáñez, J.
Affiliations
  • Universidad de Granada (ES)
  • Universidad Autónoma de Madrid (ES)
  • Baycrest Hospital (CA)
Corresponding author
Román-Caballero, Rafael
ORCID
Venue
Educational Research Review
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2022-02
Volume
35
Pages
100436
ISSN
1747-938X (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.edurev.2022.100436
OpenAlex
W4206934517
Semantic Scholar
2d6230f15d584dbaa5e2250ca6ef5fe859dc682b
Cited by
118
References
124
Citations by year
2026: 36 · 2025: 32 · 2024: 28 · 2023: 19 · 2022: 3
FWCI
23.71
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Educational Research Review (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Institutional Repository of the University of Granada (University of Granada) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nd)
  • OSF Preprints (OSF Preprints) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • Comunidad de Madrid (2016-T1/SOC-1395)
  • Ministerio de Educación, Cultura y Deporte
  • Universidad de Granada
  • Ministerio de Asuntos Económicos y Transformación Digital, Gobierno de España (PSI2017-84926-P, PSI2017-85159-P)
  • Gobierno de Espana Ministerio de Educacion Cultura y Deporte (FPU17/02864)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Music › Diverse Music Education Insights
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neuroscience and Music Perception
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Music Therapy and Health
Keywords
music education, cognitive skills, academic performance, children, adolescents, nature versus nurture, self-selection

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Claims read by deepseek-v4.1-flash under definition version 3 (extract-v3) on 2026-11-03.

Classified by jev-1.13-20260917 (gold-guideline-v0.2) on 2026-11-03.

Cited sources are checked by gpt-6-sol.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review