Are the Effects of Piano and Music Education Real? Thinking It Through with Evidence

Why this topic is on your mind

“Having children learn music makes them smarter”: a phrase often seen in parenting books and in piano class brochures. Around age 4 is when many families consider activities such as piano, eurhythmics, and violin. That is exactly why several questions come up that make it hard to decide.

• Is “music is good for the brain” true? What age is best to start?
• Is it a fact that learning piano raises IQ?
• How true is the story that playing Mozart to children makes them smarter?
• Paying monthly fees and keeping a child company in daily practice: are there “effects” worth that investment?
• If “other abilities don’t grow”, is there any point in having a child learn piano?

This theme is an area where research has not settled on a single conclusion. That is why we set out, in order, “what Study A says”, “what Study B says”, and “how to read them”.

What does the research say?

The relationship between music education and cognitive ability is a theme that has been examined repeatedly for more than 20 years. Here we put two major lines of research pointing in different directions side by side and set out how to read them.

Study A: A small IQ increase was observed with piano and voice lessons

is one study that drew particular attention in music education research.

The result was that the full-scale IQ of the groups that received piano or voice lessons rose by about 3 points more than that of the control groups. The effect size was small, but it is reported to have appeared uniformly in IQ subscales and in standard achievement tests.

Because it showed, with a relatively rigorous design of random assignment, that “music lessons may have a small positive effect on cognitive ability”, this study became the starting point of the debate that followed.

Study B: In meta-analyses, “transfer to other abilities” could barely be confirmed

On the other hand, in the ten-plus years after Schellenberg, many replications and related studies were carried out around the world. The following meta-analyses attempted to set out the overall picture.

showed that the overall effect size was only d=0.16 (very small), and moreover that the higher the quality of study design, the smaller the effect. The researchers concluded that “it cannot be said that music training reliably raises children’s cognitive abilities or school performance”.

Furthermore, in Sala & Gobet (2020)a follow-up multilevel meta-analysis by the same authors integrating 54 studies (6,984 participants in total), it was reported that once the quality of study design is controlled for, the effect of music training programs converges to almost zero. The result was that small significant differences were seen only in studies without random assignment or studies comparing with control groups that did no activity.

In other words, the effect of music training itself “developing other cognitive abilities (IQ, memory, reading comprehension, math, etc.)” is not strongly supported at present.

Note that, in response to Sala & Gobet’s conclusions, reanalyses and rebuttals have since come from Bigand & Tillmann (2021) and others, arguing that “the methodological controls may be overly strict” and that “effects are seen in programs where children actually play an instrument”, and this point is still being debated in academia today.

How to read Study A and Study B

At first glance, these two sets of research results seem to contradict each other head-on. But reading them carefully shows that they answer questions at different levels, each with its own method.

In other words, the proposition that “having a child learn piano makes them smarter” is not supported by research as a whole at present. But neither is it at all the case that “piano has no meaning”: this is the conclusion that comes from putting the research side by side.

The Mozart effect: a famous story that spread and was later corrected

When talking about music and cognitive ability, the “Mozart effect” cannot be avoided.

was published in Nature as a one-page short report. The result was that “immediately after listening to Mozart, performance on a spatial reasoning test temporarily rose a little”.

However, this study was greatly stretched in the media into “listening to Mozart makes you smarter” and “it’s good for prenatal education too”. The author herself later repeatedly explained that this was “strictly a temporary effect of 10 to 15 minutes on a particular spatial task, not an increase in IQ in general”.

After that, several replications and comprehensive meta-analyses (e.g., Pietschnig, Voracek & Formann, 2010) were carried out, showing that the strong claim that “listening to Mozart makes you smarter” is not supported, and that the small effects observed can most likely be explained by “an increase in mood or arousal”.

“Mozart for prenatal education” and “babies will get smarter if they listen to it”: these are now summed up, in research terms, as popular beliefs that are not supported.

Even so, do piano and music education have value?

Reading only this far, you may feel “so is there no point in having my child learn piano?” But research does not go as far as saying “music education itself has no value”. Rather, the conclusion after summing up is that “as long as you don’t mistake the purpose, piano is a fully worthwhile activity”.

Value 1: Enjoying music itself and acquiring it as a skill

If you set aside “whether it transfers to other abilities”, becoming able to play the piano, read sheet music, and take part in ensembles is itself fine learning. Sala & Gobet’s meta-analyses do not deny that “musical skills are indeed acquired as musical skills (near-transfer happens)”. What is denied is strictly the part about “spillover to schoolwork and intelligence outside music”.

Value 2: The experience of continuing for a long time and making an effort

Sitting down to practice every day even for 10 minutes, taking on difficult pieces, preparing toward the goal of a recital: these experiences of continuing and self-regulation can be substituted by activities other than piano, but music is one subject that fits them well. It cannot be said that “music is especially effective because it’s music”, but it can be said that “it works well with music too”.

Value 3: Time for parent and child to enjoy together, and emotional experiences

What Schellenberg himself repeatedly showed in later papers is that musical activities are relatively visibly connected not to intelligence but to “social skills, emotions, and self-concept”. Getting through the nerves before a recital together, being delighted at becoming able to play a favorite piece: experiences like these are hard to quantify, but they definitely remain for the family.

What to do if you actually go ahead

Based on the research, here are points that help when bringing piano and music education into the home.

1. Reset the purpose from “to become smart” to “to enjoy music”

This is the biggest turning point. If you think of it as “an investment to raise IQ”, you are likely to get anxious about results you can’t see. If you reset the purpose to “bringing music itself into your child’s life”, the meaning of each weekly lesson changes.

2. Make “whether she is enjoying it” the main indicator

What can be said clearly in research terms is that there is no guarantee cognitive abilities will grow dramatically if a child continues reluctantly. Conversely, if your child is enjoying it, it definitely remains as musical skill (near transfer), and the more she continues, the more it builds up. Just asking “How was today’s lesson?” or “Which piece do you like?” gives you material for deciding whether to continue or stop.

3. Value “frequency of contact” over amount of practice

At ages 4 to 6, having time to touch the piano every day, even for 5 minutes, is a design that is easier to sustain than 30 minutes of formal practice every day. A stance of playing longer on days when she thinks “I want to play more” lasts longer in the end.

4. Make use of settings with “goals” and “peers”, such as recitals and ensembles

Piano tends to center on individual practice, but recitals, performances in front of the family, ensembles in eurhythmics classes: having experiences of “someone listening to you” greatly changes a child’s motivation. How many such opportunities are included in the monthly fee is a perspective for choosing a class.

5. Decide from the start that it’s fine to quit

“It’s pointless unless she continues for three years” or “quitting partway won’t build grit”: anxieties like these have little basis in research. If parent and child promise from the start that “if it stops being fun, we’ll talk about it, and it’s fine to quit”, the period of continuing also becomes healthier. Even after quitting, ways of being involved with music continue, such as singing favorite songs or trying another instrument.

Closing dialogue