conditions might seem boring to participants (compared to listening to music), promoting
relatively low levels of cognitive arousal or negative mood states. As a first attempt to
address this possibility, Nantais and Schellenberg^36 replicated and extended the original
findings. In their first experiment, each participant was tested on the PF&C task twice, once
after listening to 10 min of music and once after sitting in silence for 10 min. For some part-
icipants, the music was the same Mozart piece used by Rauscher and her colleagues. For
others, a piece by Schubert (from the same compact disk as the Mozart piece, performed
by the same pianists) was used instead. This experiment was also the first to use a computer-
controlled procedure administered to participants individually. Indeed, the potential
impact of group dynamics on the results of earlier studies is unknown.13,24,33,35,37(Imagine
a classroom of undergraduates being required to sit in silence for 10 min!)
As shown in Figure 28.1 (upper left panel), performance on the PF&C test was better
after listening to Mozart than after sitting in silence. In other words, the Mozart effect was434 Figure 28.1Scores on the paper-folding-and-cutting task for participants tested by Nantais and Schellenberg.^36
Each participant was tested twice. The upper left panel illustrates scores after listening to Mozart or sitting in
silence. A piece by Schubert was used instead of Mozart for other participants (upper right panel). A third group
was tested after listening to either Mozart or a narrated story (lower panel). The line on the diagonal represents
equivalent performance across conditions.16
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
02468
SilenceMozart10 12 14 1616
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
02468
SilenceMozart10 12 14 1616
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
02468
StoryMozart10 12 14 161 person
2 person
3 personZat-Ch28.qxd 6/6/03 12:00 AM Page 434