The DOI matches its Crossref record; 127 of the 127 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; 20 of the 45 sources its claims cite were checked for support.
Please don't stop the music: A meta-analysis of the cognitive and academic benefits of instrumental musical training in childhood and adolescence
Open accessAbstract
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.
Overview
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
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
20 of 45 cited sources checked · 12 supported · 0 flagged · accuracy not yet measured
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“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).”
§ Please don't stop the music: A meta-analysis of the cognitive and academic benefits of instrumental musical training in childhood and adolescence > 2.2. Selection criteria
What the sources say
- Supportedcites Corrigall et al., 2013 source
The General Discussion reports associations between cognitive ability, personality traits, and the duration of music training in both adults and children. It also says these individual differences help predict who takes music lessons and for how long, matching the citing sentence’s hedged claim without asserting causation. (LLM, conf=0.94)
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passes- Supported
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“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).”
§ Please don't stop the music: A meta-analysis of the cognitive and academic benefits of instrumental musical training in childhood and adolescence > 2.3.3. Publication bias
What the sources say
- Supportedcites Mathur & VanderWeele, 2020 source
The Simulation study reports that the estimator μ̂η was approximately unbiased in scenarios with η ≤ 20, which supports the qualified claim. The Abstract defines η as the publication-probability ratio for statistically significant positive results versus negative or non-significant results. (LLM, conf=0.92)
Strength:hedged· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passes- Supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“only a third of the studies included in Sala and Gobet's meta-analysis had instrumental programs (19 out of 54)”
§ Please don't stop the music: A meta-analysis of the cognitive and academic benefits of instrumental musical training in childhood and adolescence > 1. Introduction
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites Sala & Gobet, 2020 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
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)
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passes- Partly supported
The cited sources that could be checked couldn’t confirm or dispute this claim.
In the paper
“studies involving instrumental training were underrepresented among Sala and Gobet's studies with random assignment and/or with an active control group.”
§ Please don't stop the music: A meta-analysis of the cognitive and academic benefits of instrumental musical training in childhood and adolescence > 1. Introduction
What the sources say
- Could not verifycites Sala & Gobet, 2020 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
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)
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passes- Could not verify
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“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)”
§ Please don't stop the music: A meta-analysis of the cognitive and academic benefits of instrumental musical training in childhood and adolescence > 4.3. Practical significance
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Costa-Giomi, 1999, 2004
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Partly supportedcites James et al., 2020 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
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)
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Portowitz et al., 2009 source
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passes- Not matched
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“Therefore, any benefit in attention and executive functions might indirectly influence performance in those activities (i.e., acting as a mediator factor between musical training and non-musical skills; Hannon & Trainor, 2007;Moreno & Farzan, 2015;Román-Caballero et al., 2018).”
§ Please don't stop the music: A meta-analysis of the cognitive and academic benefits of instrumental musical training in childhood and adolescence > 4.2. Transfer in musical training
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Hannon & Trainor, 2007 source
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Moreno & Farzan, 2015 source
- Partly supportedcites Román-Caballero et al., 2018 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Discussion (‘Explanations on the cognitive benefits of musical practice’) proposes that attention has a crosscutting influence on other cognitive processes and that greater inhibitory capacity could underlie other benefits observed in musicians. This supports the suggested indirect pathway to non-musical cognitive skills, but our copy does not address performance in academic activities. (LLM, conf=0.84)
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passes- Rests on an assumption: 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.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Three outliers (Rauscher et al., 1997;Rauscher & Zupan, 2000;Roden, Könen, et al., 2014) were detected, as they contributed with implausibly large effect sizes (some of them larger than g Δ = 1).”
§ Please don't stop the music: A meta-analysis of the cognitive and academic benefits of instrumental musical training in childhood and adolescence > 3.1. Overall effect
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesA result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Visual inspectioning the funnel plot of the aggregates of randomized and non-randomized studies (self-selection studies were not included in publication bias analyses), there was no clear asymmetry in the distribution of effects (Fig. 4).”
§ Please don't stop the music: A meta-analysis of the cognitive and academic benefits of instrumental musical training in childhood and adolescence > 3.4. Publication bias
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesThe paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In the same vein, participants with lower SES showed greater improvements compared to those with middle-high SES.”
§ Please don't stop the music: A meta-analysis of the cognitive and academic benefits of instrumental musical training in childhood and adolescence > 4.1.2. Baseline differences, socioeconomic status, and age of the participants
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesA result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Unlike previous studies reporting an inverse relationship between design quality and the magnitude of the effects (see Sala & Gobet, 2017a, 2020), we did not find a significant reduction in the size of the outcome of randomized studies compared to non-randomized ones.”
§ Please don't stop the music: A meta-analysis of the cognitive and academic benefits of instrumental musical training in childhood and adolescence > 4.1.1. Methodological quality and other musical programs
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passes
- It may state two separate claims as one. 41
- Probably not a substantial claim. 18
The cited sources that could be checked couldn’t confirm or dispute this claim.
In the paper
“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.”
§ Please don't stop the music: A meta-analysis of the cognitive and academic benefits of instrumental musical training in childhood and adolescence > 1. Introduction
What the sources say
- Could not verifycites Sala & Gobet, 2020 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
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)
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
- Could not verify
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“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).”
§ Please don't stop the music: A meta-analysis of the cognitive and academic benefits of instrumental musical training in childhood and adolescence > 1. Introduction
What the sources say
- Supportedcites Sala & Gobet, 2020 source
The Results (Main analyses; page not provided) report a small overall effect of g = 0.184, p < .001. The Results (Sensitivity analyses; page not provided) report near-zero effects for randomized studies and null effects for studies with active controls, supporting the claim about design quality. (LLM, conf=0.94)
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
- Supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“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).”
§ Please don't stop the music: A meta-analysis of the cognitive and academic benefits of instrumental musical training in childhood and adolescence > R0: 1 missing study
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites Gustavson et al., 2021 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
Split into 2 atoms — 1 confirmed, 1 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
- Partly supported
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“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”
§ Please don't stop the music: A meta-analysis of the cognitive and academic benefits of instrumental musical training in childhood and adolescence > 1. Introduction
What the sources say
- Supportedcites Sala & Gobet, 2020 source
The Introduction (‘The present meta-analysis’) identifies Sala and Gobet’s 2020 work as a meta-analysis of music training, supporting the citation’s identification of that work. The statements about studies appearing after 2020 and the citing authors finding unpublished theses are their own account, not claims attributed to Sala and Gobet. (LLM, conf=0.93)
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
- Supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“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.”
§ Please don't stop the music: A meta-analysis of the cognitive and academic benefits of instrumental musical training in childhood and adolescence > R0: 1 missing study
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites Gustavson et al., 2021 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
Split into 2 atoms — 1 confirmed, 1 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
- Partly supported
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“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).”
§ Please don't stop the music: A meta-analysis of the cognitive and academic benefits of instrumental musical training in childhood and adolescence > 1. Introduction
What the sources say
- Supportedcites Bigand & Tillmann, 2021 source
In “Near versus far transfer in control versus experimental training programs” (page unavailable), the paper says that phonological training followed by phonological testing measures near transfer in an active control group, although the same test measures far transfer for the music-training group. The authors removed 21 such effect sizes from their reanalysis of Sala and Gobet (2020); the Conclusion says this unbalanced comparison affected all of Sala and Gobet’s music-training meta-analyses, including their 2017 analysis. (LLM, conf=0.92)
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
- Supported
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“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.”
§ Please don't stop the music: A meta-analysis of the cognitive and academic benefits of instrumental musical training in childhood and adolescence > 3.2. Assessment of baseline differences
What the sources say
- Supportedcites Bürkner, 2017 source
Split into 2 atoms — 2 confirmed, 0 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
- Supported
The sources with a verdict support this claim; the rest weren’t checked yet, have no full text we could read, or their verdicts aren’t rated yet.
In the paper
“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.”
§ Please don't stop the music: A meta-analysis of the cognitive and academic benefits of instrumental musical training in childhood and adolescence > 1. Introduction
What the sources say
- Supportedcites Corrigall et al., 2013 source
The Introduction says that large cognitive differences in correlational studies are best interpreted as reflecting high-functioning children being more likely to take music lessons. Study 2 links both cognitive ability and parents’ education to music training and suggests that personality helps explain trained children’s higher grades. The General Discussion explicitly proposes that pre-existing individual differences influence who chooses music lessons, while acknowledging a role for environment. (LLM, conf=0.90)
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Swaminathan et al., 2017 source
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim.
- Supported
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“A systematic search strategy was used following the recommendations of PRISMA (Moher et al., 2009).”
§ Please don't stop the music: A meta-analysis of the cognitive and academic benefits of instrumental musical training in childhood and adolescence > 2.1. Literature search
What the sources say
- Supportedcites Moher et al., 2009 source
The PRISMA Statement section identifies PRISMA as a checklist and flow diagram for systematic reviews. The From QUOROM to PRISMA section says review teams must search the literature before screening records, so the citation appropriately identifies PRISMA recommendations relevant to the citing authors’ search. The source does not independently verify that the citing authors followed them; that is their own account of their methods. (LLM, conf=0.84)
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim.
- Supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“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.”
§ Please don't stop the music: A meta-analysis of the cognitive and academic benefits of instrumental musical training in childhood and adolescence > 4.2. Transfer in musical training
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites Gathercole et al., 2019 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
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)
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Partly supported
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“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).”
§ Please don't stop the music: A meta-analysis of the cognitive and academic benefits of instrumental musical training in childhood and adolescence > 4.2. Transfer in musical training
What the sources say
- Supportedcites Gathercole et al., 2019 source
In “Theories of transfer > Cognitive training as skill acquisition” (page not provided), the authors explicitly conceptualize transfer as acquiring complex cognitive skills that can be applied to untrained tasks with similar demands. This directly supports the cited paraphrase. (LLM, conf=0.95)
- Supportedcites Taatgen, 2013 source
In “The Nature and Transfer of Cognitive Skills” (p. 1), Taatgen proposes that learning combines primitive elements into larger cognitive-skill units. When tasks overlap, units learned for one task can be reused for another, producing transfer. (LLM, conf=0.94)
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✗ Checkable: fails✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Supported
The sources with a verdict support this claim; the rest weren’t checked yet, have no full text we could read, or their verdicts aren’t rated yet.
In the paper
“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).”
§ Please don't stop the music: A meta-analysis of the cognitive and academic benefits of instrumental musical training in childhood and adolescence > 4.3. Practical significance
What the sources say
- Supportedcites Rabinowitch et al., 2013 source
Rabinowitch et al. is cited for emotional development and empathy, not for the other outcomes listed in the sentence. In Method Participants, the paper describes a year-long study of children; in Empathy Measures (page unavailable), it reports a significant increase in emotional-empathy scores in the music groups but not the control groups. (LLM, conf=0.90)
- Supportedcites Schellenberg et al., 2015 source
The citation to Schellenberg et al. supports the prosocial-skills part of the sentence, not the other domains assigned to other citations. The Introduction describes testing children before and after a school year of group music lessons, and the Discussion reports a positive association with prosocial skills, limited to children who began with poor social skills. (LLM, conf=0.90)
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Costa-Giomi, 2004 source
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
- Supported
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Overall, we found a small but significant benefit (g Δ = 0.26) with short-term programs, regardless of whether they were randomized or not.”
§ Please don't stop the music: A meta-analysis of the cognitive and academic benefits of instrumental musical training in childhood and adolescence > Abstract
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In total, 8560 potentially relevant results were found, among which 32 met the inclusion criteria described below and were included in our meta-analysis”
§ Please don't stop the music: A meta-analysis of the cognitive and academic benefits of instrumental musical training in childhood and adolescence > 2.1. Literature search
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“we could extract 75 correlation coefficients and their respective variances from 14 studies, with a metaanalytic mean r of 0.71”
§ Please don't stop the music: A meta-analysis of the cognitive and academic benefits of instrumental musical training in childhood and adolescence > 2.3. Statistical analysis 2.3.1. Effect size
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“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.”
§ Please don't stop the music: A meta-analysis of the cognitive and academic benefits of instrumental musical training in childhood and adolescence > Abstract
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedn = 34Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
- Also stated in: § 2.1. Literature search · plain
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“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%.”
§ Please don't stop the music: A meta-analysis of the cognitive and academic benefits of instrumental musical training in childhood and adolescence > 3.1. Overall effect
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“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.”
§ Please don't stop the music: A meta-analysis of the cognitive and academic benefits of instrumental musical training in childhood and adolescence > 3. Results
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“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.”
§ Please don't stop the music: A meta-analysis of the cognitive and academic benefits of instrumental musical training in childhood and adolescence > 3.4. Publication bias
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“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.”
§ Please don't stop the music: A meta-analysis of the cognitive and academic benefits of instrumental musical training in childhood and adolescence > 4.1.3. Type of outcome and other moderators
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“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.”
§ Please don't stop the music: A meta-analysis of the cognitive and academic benefits of instrumental musical training in childhood and adolescence > 2.3.3. Publication bias
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Interestingly, these three studies did not randomly assign participants to groups and had small samples, factors that might have contributed to their outcomes.”
§ Please don't stop the music: A meta-analysis of the cognitive and academic benefits of instrumental musical training in childhood and adolescence > 3.1. Overall effect
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“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).”
§ Please don't stop the music: A meta-analysis of the cognitive and academic benefits of instrumental musical training in childhood and adolescence > 3.1. Overall effect
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“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).”
§ Please don't stop the music: A meta-analysis of the cognitive and academic benefits of instrumental musical training in childhood and adolescence > 3.1. Overall effect
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“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%.”
§ Please don't stop the music: A meta-analysis of the cognitive and academic benefits of instrumental musical training in childhood and adolescence > 3.1. Overall effect
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“most of the included studies contributed with more than one effect size from the same sample, which rendered the outcomes not independent.”
§ Please don't stop the music: A meta-analysis of the cognitive and academic benefits of instrumental musical training in childhood and adolescence > 2.3.2. Meta-analysis, heterogeneity and moderator analysis
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Similarly, our meta-analysis of studies with programs lasting 16 months on average showed a similar overall increase, corresponding to about 3 IQ points.”
§ Please don't stop the music: A meta-analysis of the cognitive and academic benefits of instrumental musical training in childhood and adolescence > 4.3. Practical significance
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Our results support that learning to play a musical instrument is an activity with cognitive and academic benefits, although they are fairly small.”
§ Please don't stop the music: A meta-analysis of the cognitive and academic benefits of instrumental musical training in childhood and adolescence > 4.3. Practical significance
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“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).”
§ Please don't stop the music: A meta-analysis of the cognitive and academic benefits of instrumental musical training in childhood and adolescence > 4.3. Practical significance
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“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.”
§ Please don't stop the music: A meta-analysis of the cognitive and academic benefits of instrumental musical training in childhood and adolescence > 5. Conclusions
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes? Based: unclearIt may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“experimental studies with random assignment of the participants allow drawing causal inferences about the effects of musical training”
§ Please don't stop the music: A meta-analysis of the cognitive and academic benefits of instrumental musical training in childhood and adolescence > 1. Introduction
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✗ Based: failsProbably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“All the studies had pre-post designs and, at least, one control group.”
§ Please don't stop the music: A meta-analysis of the cognitive and academic benefits of instrumental musical training in childhood and adolescence > Abstract
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“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.”
§ Please don't stop the music: A meta-analysis of the cognitive and academic benefits of instrumental musical training in childhood and adolescence > 2.2. Selection criteria
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“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.”
§ Please don't stop the music: A meta-analysis of the cognitive and academic benefits of instrumental musical training in childhood and adolescence > 1. Introduction
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes? Based: unclearIt may state two separate claims as one.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“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.”
§ Please don't stop the music: A meta-analysis of the cognitive and academic benefits of instrumental musical training in childhood and adolescence > 4.1.3. Type of outcome and other moderators
What the sources say
Strength:hedged· not yet calibratedCausal:conditional· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“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).”
§ Please don't stop the music: A meta-analysis of the cognitive and academic benefits of instrumental musical training in childhood and adolescence > 2.4. Sensitivity analyses
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“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).”
§ Please don't stop the music: A meta-analysis of the cognitive and academic benefits of instrumental musical training in childhood and adolescence > 2.3.2. Meta-analysis, heterogeneity and moderator analysis
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Fisher et al., 2017
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Tipton, 2015 source
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Also stated in: § 2.3.2. Meta-analysis, heterogeneity and moderator analysis · plain
In the paper
“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).”
§ Please don't stop the music: A meta-analysis of the cognitive and academic benefits of instrumental musical training in childhood and adolescence > 1. Introduction
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Schellenberg, 2020 source
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“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.”
§ Please don't stop the music: A meta-analysis of the cognitive and academic benefits of instrumental musical training in childhood and adolescence > 3.2. Assessment of baseline differences
Load-bearingStrength:boosted· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“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.”
§ Please don't stop the music: A meta-analysis of the cognitive and academic benefits of instrumental musical training in childhood and adolescence > 1. Introduction
Load-bearingStrength:hedged· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes? Based: unclearIt may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“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.”
§ Please don't stop the music: A meta-analysis of the cognitive and academic benefits of instrumental musical training in childhood and adolescence > 1. Introduction
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“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.”
§ Please don't stop the music: A meta-analysis of the cognitive and academic benefits of instrumental musical training in childhood and adolescence > 3.3. Moderator analyses
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“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.”
§ Please don't stop the music: A meta-analysis of the cognitive and academic benefits of instrumental musical training in childhood and adolescence > 2.3.3. Publication bias
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“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.”
§ Please don't stop the music: A meta-analysis of the cognitive and academic benefits of instrumental musical training in childhood and adolescence > 4.1.1. Methodological quality and other musical programs
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“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).”
§ Please don't stop the music: A meta-analysis of the cognitive and academic benefits of instrumental musical training in childhood and adolescence > 2.3.3. Publication bias
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Sala & Gobet, 2017a, 2020
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“When there is selective reporting, the three methods have low power, especially trim-and-fill, although selection model can detect publication bias more often.”
§ Please don't stop the music: A meta-analysis of the cognitive and academic benefits of instrumental musical training in childhood and adolescence > 2.3.3. Publication bias
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:correlational· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“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.”
§ Please don't stop the music: A meta-analysis of the cognitive and academic benefits of instrumental musical training in childhood and adolescence > 1. Introduction
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✗ Checkable: fails✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.
In the paper
“Furthermore, its estimate should be interpreted with caution in small meta-analyses (with 20 studies or less; Stanley, 2017).”
§ Please don't stop the music: A meta-analysis of the cognitive and academic benefits of instrumental musical training in childhood and adolescence > 2.3.3. Publication bias
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Stanley, 2017 source
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“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.”
§ Please don't stop the music: A meta-analysis of the cognitive and academic benefits of instrumental musical training in childhood and adolescence > 4.3. Practical significance
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Musical training and practice may also pose a unique type of ongoing challenge that might facilitate far transfer.”
§ Please don't stop the music: A meta-analysis of the cognitive and academic benefits of instrumental musical training in childhood and adolescence > 4.2. Transfer in musical training
Strength:hedged· not yet calibratedCausal:conditional· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✗ Checkable: fails✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- 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.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“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.”
§ Please don't stop the music: A meta-analysis of the cognitive and academic benefits of instrumental musical training in childhood and adolescence > 4.2. Transfer in musical training
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
- 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.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Accordingly, the expansion of cognitive capacities along with the development of new complex skills could explain the broad benefits observed with musical instrumental learning.”
§ Please don't stop the music: A meta-analysis of the cognitive and academic benefits of instrumental musical training in childhood and adolescence > 4.2. Transfer in musical training
Strength:hedged· not yet calibratedCausal:conditional· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“Specifically, Thorndike (1906) proposed that transfer only occurs when trained and untrained processes share features in common.”
§ Please don't stop the music: A meta-analysis of the cognitive and academic benefits of instrumental musical training in childhood and adolescence > 4.2. Transfer in musical training
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Thorndike, 1906
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
Tests✗ Asserted: fails✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The authors may not put it forward as true.
- Not matched
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Transfer then occurs when one of these new skills can be applied to a novel activity.”
§ Please don't stop the music: A meta-analysis of the cognitive and academic benefits of instrumental musical training in childhood and adolescence > 4.2. Transfer in musical training
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✗ Checkable: fails✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Thus, improvement through the application of effortful control can remain a rewarding challenge throughout the lifespan.”
§ Please don't stop the music: A meta-analysis of the cognitive and academic benefits of instrumental musical training in childhood and adolescence > 4.2. Transfer in musical training
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✗ Checkable: fails✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- 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.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“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.”
§ Please don't stop the music: A meta-analysis of the cognitive and academic benefits of instrumental musical training in childhood and adolescence > 4.3. Practical significance
Strength:hedged· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
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.”
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”
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
MinorThe abstract reports 176 effect sizes, while the literature-search and results sections report 179 for the included studies.
“34 independent samples of children and adolescents were included, with a total of 176 effect sizes and 5998 participants.”
“These studies included 34 independent samples, 179 effect sizes, and a total of 5998 participants.”
Sensitivity analysis cites the wrong equations for pre-posttest correlation
MinorThe 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).
“Only a subset of the studies reported sufficient information to compute the pre-posttest correlation with Equations ( 6) and ( 7).”
“g pre = c p × ( M pre, T -M pre, C SD pooled, pre ) , (6 ) V gpre = c 2 p × ( N T + N C N T × N C + g 2 pre 2 × (N T + N C ) ) . (7”
Citations
Cites
Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement
Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., Altman, D. G., & The PRISMA Group (2009) · PLoS Medicine · doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.1000097 · Cited by 64,042
Bias in meta-analysis detected by a simple, graphical test
Egger, M., Smith, G. D., Schneider, M., & Minder, C. (1997) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.315.7109.629 · Cited by 56,722
Statistical power analyses using G∗Power 3.1: tests for correlation and regression analyses
Faul, F., Erdfelder, E., Buchner, A., & Lang, A.-G. (2009) · Behavior Research Methods · doi:10.3758/brm.41.4.1149 · Cited by 37,615
Conducting Meta-Analyses in R with the metafor Package
Viechtbauer, W. (2010) · Journal of Statistical Software · doi:10.18637/jss.v036.i03 · Cited by 20,464
Duval, S., & Tweedie, R. (2000) · Biometrics · doi:10.1111/j.0006-341x.2000.00455.x · Cited by 14,099
brms : An R Package for Bayesian Multilevel Models Using Stan
Bürkner, P.-C. (2017) · Journal of Statistical Software · doi:10.18637/jss.v080.i01 · Cited by 9,476 · cited 2×
“Moreover, we carried out sensitivity analyses following a multilevel Bayesian approach using the brms R package (Bürkner, 2017).”
MethodCohen, J. (1992) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037//0033-2909.112.1.155 · Cited by 8,771
Methods of Meta-Analysis: Correcting Error and Bias in Research Findings
Schmidt, F. L., & Hunter, J. E. (2015) · doi:10.4135/9781483398105 · Cited by 5,542
Meta-Analytic Procedures for Social Research
Rosenthal, R. (1991) · doi:10.4135/9781412984997 · Cited by 4,635
Testing the efficiency and independence of attentional networks
Fan, J., McCandliss, B. D., Sommer, T., Raz, A., & Posner, M. I. (2002) · Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience · doi:10.1162/089892902317361886 · Cited by 3,717 · cited 2×
“For instance, Medina and Barraza (2019) observed an extremely large advantage in executive control for professional pianists ( d = 1.51) using a visuospatial attentional task (i.e., the Attentional Networks Test or ANT; Fan et al., 2002), which correlated with the number of years of musical practice.”
MethodInfluential
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 1
- Said, 2020, Effect of music education on the promotion of school performance in children, CoDAS, 32
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Items 101–117 of 117
Lippolis, M. (2026) · QUADERNI DI DIDATTICA DELLA SCRITTURA · doi:10.3280/qds2026oa23010
Investigating links between early instrumental learning and literacy skills development
Zhukov, K., & Arthur, P. (2026) · The Australian Journal of Language and Literacy · doi:10.1007/s44020-026-00119-y
Çolak, H., Benzaquén, E., Guo, X., Lad, M., Sedley, W., & Griffiths, T. D. (2026) · Trends in Hearing · doi:10.1177/23312165261476429
Rethinking musicians as a model for plasticity and transfer
Lima, C. F., Talamini, F., & Schellenberg, E. G. (2026) · Trends in Cognitive Sciences · doi:10.1016/j.tics.2026.07.006
Musical Advantage in Thai Tone Word Learning
Cheng, R., & Choi, W. (2026) · Music Perception An Interdisciplinary Journal · doi:10.1525/mp.2026.2712189
García, C. F. D. C., Martínez‐Castilla, P., & Welch, G. F. (2026) · Psychology of Music · doi:10.1177/03057356261464606
Lucendo‐Noriega, A., Bamford, J. S., Danso, A., Baltazar, M., Tervaniemi, M. H., Carlson, E. J., Linnavalli, T., & Saarikallio, S. H. (2026) · Music & Science · doi:10.1177/20592043261476842
A Care Ethical Perspective on Music Making and Learning
Silverman, M., & Santos, F. H. (2026) · doi:10.1093/9780197755600.003.0005
Oner, O., & Scheef, A. R. (2026) · Teaching Exceptional Children · doi:10.1177/00400599261464896
Montreal Battery of Evaluation of Amusia (MBEA): badania pilotażowe w warunkach polskich
Swebodziński, B., & Łukaszewski, M. T. (2026) · Psychologia Rozwojowa · doi:10.4467/20843879pr.25.004.23617
The Effects of Music in Community and Educational Settings
Hallam, S., & Creech, A. (2026) · doi:10.1093/9780198976936.003.0053
Vazquez-Marin, P., Ortega, M., & Sandoval-Hernández, A. (2026) · Education Sciences · doi:10.3390/educsci16101593
Bareiß, L., Koch, N. N., & Wirzberger, M. (2026) · Acta Psychologica · doi:10.1016/j.actpsy.2026.107712
Tinch, J., Thomson, P., & Rakesh, D. (2026) · Developmental Cognitive Neuroscience · doi:10.1016/j.dcn.2026.101827
Muslim, R. A., Rohman, S., Roziqin, A., & Ulfah, U. (2026) · Indonesian Journal of Multidisciplinary on Social and Technology · doi:10.69693/ijmst.v4i3.11973
Peng, X., Shan, X., Zhang, M., Zhang, H., & Sun, K. (2026) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2026.1975580
dos Santos-Luíz, C., Mónico, L. D. S. M., Lemos, G. C., & Boal-Palheiros, G. (2026) · Psychology of Music · doi:10.1177/03057356261480042
Metadata
- 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
- Venue
- Educational Research Review
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2022-02
- Volume
- 35
- Pages
- 100436
- ISSN
- 1747-938X (ISSN-L)
- 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
- hybrid
- doi.org
- 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.
A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-11-03, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).
A second model labelled each claim on 2026-11-03 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).
Cited sources are checked with a language model’s help (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
