Cited by 104Cognitive Abilities and TestingDiverse Music Education InsightsNeuroscience and Music Perception

Investigating cognitive transfer within the framework of music practice: genetic pleiotropy rather than causality

Mosing, Miriam A., Madison, Guy, Pedersen, Nancy L., Ullén, Fredrik·2016·Developmental Science

Abstract

The idea of far transfer effects in the cognitive sciences has received much attention in recent years. One domain where far transfer effects have frequently been reported is music education, with the prevailing idea that music practice entails an increase in cognitive ability (IQ). While cross‐sectional studies consistently find significant associations between music practice and IQ, randomized controlled trials, however, report mixed results. An alternative to the hypothesis of cognitive transfer effects is that some underlying factors, such as shared genes, influence practice behaviour and IQ causing associations on the phenotypic level. Here we explored the hypothesis of far transfer within the framework of music practice. A co‐twin control design combined with classical twin‐modelling based on a sample of more than 10,500 twins was used to explore causal associations between music practice and IQ as well as underlying genetic and environmental influences. As expected, phenotypic associations were moderate (r = 0.11 and r = 0.10 for males and females, respectively). However, the relationship disappeared when controlling for genetic and shared environmental influences using the co‐twin control method, indicating that a highly practiced twin did not have higher IQ than the untrained co‐twin. In line with that finding, the relationship between practice and IQ was mostly due to shared genetic influences. Findings strongly suggest that associations between music practice and IQ in the general population are non‐causal in nature. The implications of the present findings for research on plasticity, modularity, and transfer are discussed.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/desc.12306

Cites

7 of 7 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Mosing, M. A., Madison, G., Pedersen, N. L., & Ullén, F.
Affiliations
  • Karolinska Institutet (SE)
  • Umeå University (SE)
Corresponding author
Mosing, Miriam A.
Venue
Developmental Science
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2015-05
Volume
19
Issue
3
Pages
504-512
ISSN
  • 1363-755X (ISSN-L)
  • 1467-7687
OpenAlex
W2021333070
Cited by
104
References
7
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 11 · 2022: 27 · 2021: 11 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 12 · 2017: 7 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 1 · 2014: 1
FWCI
12.31
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Developmental Science (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • Sven and Dagmar Salén Foundation
  • The Bank of Sweden Tercentenary Foundation (M11-0451:1)
  • the Swedish Scientific Council (521-2010-3195)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Cognitive Abilities and Testing
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Music › Diverse Music Education Insights
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neuroscience and Music Perception
Keywords
music practice, far transfer, IQ, pleiotropy, causal inference, shared genetic influences, shared environment, co-twin control, music education, cognitive ability, neuroplasticity, modularity
MeSH terms
Adult, Cognition, Female, Humans, Intelligence, Male, Middle Aged, Music, Time Factors, Twins, Dizygotic, Twins, Monozygotic, Cohort Studies, Multivariate Analysis, Genetic Pleiotropy

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.

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