The “Mozart Effect”

As a musician who has performed various pieces of Saint-Saens, who was one of the composers which Zell Miller planned to include in his compilation tape, this topic caught my attention. I can hardly recall the number of times I have heard statements made to me by past directors and conductors on how having instrumental musical talent promotes cognitive function and helps reduce the chance of Alzheimer’s Dementia. While pieces such as “Moon River” are enjoyable and in fact soothing, Governor Miller, who claimed to have had extensive research and personal experience with the connection between music and child development, really should have better examined the experimental designs of some of these studies. The 1993 study performed by Rauscher et al. attempted to prove the causal relationship between musical activity and spatial reasoning based on the idea musical activity and complex cognitive functions share inherent neural firing patterns throughout the cortex. They tested this hypothesis on 36 undergraduate students specializing in psychology. This marks Miller’s first flaw in his utilization of this study: the study was not conducted on babies or infants, but was conducted on undergrad psychology students. This means that the obtained results would not be generalizable to Miller’s intended population. Statistical analyses revealed students who listened to Mozart Sonatas did exhibit improvement in spatial reasoning tasks. On the other hand, one result they did fine was that students who were subject to both silence and Mozart Sonata exhibited no significant day-to-day improvement. This finding really does not promote conformation of the hypothesis, as it just shows how Mozart’s Sonatas only facilitate spatial task improvements when participants are exposed to them every time they perform a spatial task. The researchers also experimented on how music could improve short term memory, which they were unable to confirm, probably as the prefrontal cortex, which is underdeveloped in most undergraduates, plays a role in this. They also found preschoolers who had music lessons performed better on object assembly tests. One point made in the research article touched on how music training enhances pattern developments of neuron groups, which appears to be a valid point as it reflects the idea of long-term potentiation. Overall, one statement made in the conclusion reflects my opinion on if Miller’s idea was a good one or not. They state their hopes of integrating music training into schools, as the effect of long-term musical exposure is what appeared to promote the most improvement. I personally believe that music very well affects cognitive performance, but only when someone is repeatedly exposed to musical learning and training for long periods of time, in the same way musicians are for example. Cognitive functions are strengthened best with repeated exposure (promotion of long-term potentiation) throughout one’s lifetime. One final thing to note is that Miller’s idea does not really follow the privacy clause dictated by the 14th amendment. It is unlikely every parent agrees with Miller or the research used by Miller. What is likely is not every parent would appreciate the state attempting to convince them of how best to parent. At the end of the day, it is not the decision of the state to decide what is most helpful for child development, as this is the private right of the parents, not to mention every child is different.


Believing Your Intelligence

Week 9’s First Impression Prompt covers the topic of intelligence. In this discussion, we were asked to watch three videos: Jane Elliott’s classic blue eyes/brown eyes experiment, Claude Steele explaining stereotype threat, and Rosenthal & Jacobson’s discovery of the Pygmalion effect. I will discuss each of these videos in the order listed.

Jane Elliott Brown Eyes vs Blue Eyes (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1CtrpLh6TKk): This video was a demonstration of imposed discrimination the third grade teacher, Jane Elliott, introduced her class to. She separated the class by blue eyes and brown eyes, permitting the blue eyed people to be “superior” to their brown eyed counterparts. She wanted to demonstrate among her kids of how it feels to be discriminated against. She successfully did so; it was quite shocking of just how the children had changed in demeanor so quickly, as she had commented.

Claude Steele explaining stereotype threat (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nGEUVM6QuMg): As learned in Chapter 7, a stereotype threat is where a person feels themselves being at risk for being stereotyped because of some type of social group/class they are in. In this video it is observed that when people have the feeling of being under a stereotypical threat, they will adjust their behavior that ends up fitting more towards the stereotype. In this short clip, psychologists Jeff Stone observed a group of white and black male athletes. He told them that they would be tested for 1) their athleticism, and then 2) their sports strategy skills. The first test the black male group prevailed in, while the second question had the white male students come out on top. This is a match-up with stereotypes, however it is assumed because of the way the questions were presented and expressed. It is disheartening to know that this effect is shown to be true. It does make quite a bit of sense, however I do question the accuracy in these findings. I think it would be much more relevant to prove more of how these people feel that they are being stereotyped versus if it actually is how they are.

Rosenthal & Jacobson’s discovery of the Pygmalion effect (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hTghEXKNj7g): Two psychologists implanted in teacher’s heads that particular students were ‘late bloomers’ to see the effects it could have. In a short time, they had started to treat their children differently. They had a more positive expectations among their students, which increased their performance in doing well. This falls under the Pygmalion effect, which is the believed effect that higher expectations will lead to an increase in performance ability. Climate, input, response opportunity, & feedback are four factors the psychologists observed effect the children and teachers learning opportunities within the study and how well the child prevailed throughout the next school year. I thought it was interesting how the teachers would pick out the children that were expected to be smarter than the others, while dismissing the other children. It makes me disappointed in many teachers for treating between the ‘types’ of children differently without acknowledging how it will affect them in the future of their education.

 

All in all, I thought all of these videos were quite interesting and brought out valid points to take note of for the education system. Looking back at my own school experiences, I can firmly believe these instances. In a specific case with myself, there was a time where I was so awful at math. (I still am, just not as much!). The teachers did not do a great deal to help me, or give me outside resources to turn to for a different perspective for help; it was as if they had given up on me. However, a professor that greatly appreciated my desire to become better at math helped me tremendously in giving me extra help as well as encouragement in doing so – so, instead of ending the semester with a low C as expected, I finished with a high B. It helps tremendously is a person – especially an educator – believes in the student, and that they will be successful in learning. There are other factors that can be put into play for being able to comprehend information, however the way a professor, mentor, etc., presents and delivers the information can also have a withstanding impact on the student of individual.


Week 9 First Impression Prompt

Hand writing on a notebook

Here are the two prompts for this week. Regardless of which one you choose, please use the tag “Intelligence.”

Option 1:

Many people consider intelligence to be largely determined by genetics, but there is substantial evidence that the environment and social processes play a large role as well. Since schools are a place where children try to determine how smart they really are, it is important for educators to understand the impacts of their subtle or not-so-subtle interactions with students. Watch these three videos: Jane Elliott’s classic blue eyes/brown eyes experiment, Claude Steele explaining stereotype threat, and Rosenthal & Jacobson’s discovery of the Pygmalion effect. In your blog post, react to what you saw in the videos, reflect on your own interactions with educators throughout your school career, and discuss what, if any, changes to the school system based on the concepts in these videos could improve students’ performance in the classroom.

Option 2:

In 1998, the Governor of Georgia, Zell Miller, proposed spending $105,000 of the state’s budget to distribute a cassette or CD of classical music to the parents of each new child born in Georgia (see the NY Times article). Governor Miller was a staunch believer in the Mozart effect, a theory that listening to Mozart can increase intelligence. The Mozart effect is highly controversial and has spurred numerous research studies, but was based on one study published in 1993. Read the original journal article by Rauscher, Shaw, & Ky and discuss whether or not the original evidence supports Governor Miller’s decision.

I look forward to seeing what you write!

Header image: CC by Flickr user Caitlinator
Share Via: FacebooktwitterredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmailFacebooktwitterredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmail

Week 8 First Impression

As a child who grew up in a small town with very few people my age, books and video games were my two primary sources of entertainment. At the time, I shied away from some of the more graphic games, but I think that might have had more to do with my fondness for puzzle games than anything else. Video games that are gratuitously violent or gory tend to annoy me because I don’t think it’s necessary most of the time. If the game itself is focused on action, then I can understand the desire to make it more realistic and to more accurately portray the damage in the game. It’s games like Mortal Kombat and its “fatalities” for example that I think are needlessly and excessively violent. To some up my thoughts on violent video games, I don’t have a problem with violence as long as it serves to further or enhance the story that is already being told. If the focus is not on any discernible story but is instead on the violence itself, then I take issue.

I think calls to have violent video games banned are a knee-jerk reaction that, while well intentioned, would not likely be all that effective. To start, I can see why the impulse is there. I do think that if kids start playing these games too young that there can be some desensitization to violence. However, I don’t think these games necessarily increase levels of aggression in children. It’s very possible that children who are already prone to violence are the ones who will become more aggressive with exposure to these games. From a logistic perspective, there would likely be too much pushback from the adults who enjoy these games to ban them entirely. The best that we can get is a rating system such as the one we already have that could be perhaps improvement by more stringent evaluation.


Shooting for Fun or Shooting for Real

Desensitization is the concept that comes to mind when seeing the trends of video games going from violent to full on gore, as characters in the games are shooting and killing other characters with no mercy or consequence. The video gamers are constantly bombarded with images of appendages being blown off, with blood spilling out everywhere. And the messed up thing is, all this excessive carnage and body counts are actually encouraged for getting points to a better score, or for passing a certain round or area.

My perspective on this matter is one of great hesitation and fear. There are ratings set in place where parents can check the back to see if the game is appropriate for kids. However, some kids can still get a hold of games by going over to friends’ houses or by using the consoles of their older siblings. I don’t think that children ought to have access to or even be exposed to such violence.

Especially when the child or adult is playing these games day after day, they will get so immersed in the game. You can often witness this when trying to grab the attention of a child or teen playing a video game and they give no response to you whatsoever. This could be a problem since the players of the game are so into it that they start believing what they see on the screen is real and okay; that violence in games like Grand Theft Auto are fun and normal. And, if they see this enough, that perhaps they can inflict damage to people in the real world and get that same sense of thrill they get from a video game. I’m not necessarily sure whether it is making all kids around the world act more violently, as people can separate good from bad and from what is fantasy and reality, but a good amount of people can get used to the idea and feeling and feel no mercy or sense of consequence.

I don’t believe these games should be completely banned. I do, however, believe that young kids should not be able to get ahold of these video games. Early exposure I think is pretty dangerous in influencing the minds of our young generation.

 


Learning from Video Games

Growing up, I played many genres of video games from Pokémon to violent video games using guns where in order to win I would’ve have to shoot virtual people. It was fun playing violent games despite the fact that enjoying violent games is probably not a good sign. For one thing playing violent games may have especially negative effects on a person’s mindset, for example these games may affect how the player may perceive violence in everyday life. When I was younger I used to be a very big video gamer, I was so engrossed in that activity that without my family monitoring and checking up on me when I was playing these I would probably end up a different person today. The negative effects of video gaming are very individualized, and the effects when playing video games in general may not be seen as strongly in some people than in others. For one thing if a person is so engrossed in a game and becomes too serious about it, they may let their temperament get the better of them when they lose a game. This is one thing that should be looked into because while video games are fun, they should not cause such a violent reaction. When this happens people need to step away from the game controllers, step away from the virtual world, and have fun in reality. Something that I believe people can learn from any video game is no matter how fun it may be to  play video games nothing defeats playing games and having with other people in physical world.


Violence in Video Games:

The usage of video games in the United States is at a high rate with video games available to all ages. Personally, I think that video games do play a part on the behavior of the people playing them , but I do not think it is the main reason why there is so much violence in society. I think that the environment the children are exposed to at home plays a major role in how the child behaves. Being exposed to violent situations at home may cause the child to see these behaviors as “normal” in turn causing them to become violent themselves. Although video games are not a major reason as to why children become violent they still play a minor role because the kids are being exposed to killing, blood, guns, and gore for the “fun” of it.If parents allow their kids to play violent video games for hours they are allowing their kids to grow up learning that killing people for “fun” is okay both in a fictional as well as the real world setting.

I think that video games should not be banned because they provide entertainment to many different people. I think it should be the parents decision and responsibility to prevent the younger kids from playing these violent games because they may not be aware of the situation. Younger kids at times are not able to comprehend what is real and what isn’t and in turn it could cause them to behave as the characters in the game do just because they are being taught that this is normal or cool in a sense. All video games provide information to let the parents know what age groups should be allowed to play, and that is why the parents should pay more attention to what their kids are actually playing.

Personally, if I was a parent I would not allow my kids to play violent video games because they are being exposed to preposterous situations. The violence in the games can have a minor effect on the kids, but no matter how small the games are still glorifying violent situations ;therefore,  making the children want to behave like the characters do because that is what is in “style”.


Violence in Video Games

While I don’t think that violent video games are solely responsible for violent behavior in children, they do play a role in desensitizing children to violence. As with many things, if a child is exposed to a stimulus repeatedly they’ll slowly begin to ignore that stimulus. In the cause of violence, this can lead children to believe that violence is acceptable in situations where it isn’t called for, and can cause them to underestimate the impacts of violence. Video games, as a whole, can positively impact children via socialization, problem solving, abstract thinking, etc. Due to this, I don’t believe that they should be permanently banned. I believe it is up to the parents of the child to gauge how well their children can tolerate the negative effects of video games. Many psychological issues lead to overly-violent tendencies. Video games exaggerate these underlying problems, not cause them.


Violent Video Games

I feel as though violent video games do not have as big of an impact as the media and critics of these games have made them out to have. I myself have been playing violent video games for plenty of years (Well before the intended rating of M and 18+ applied to me) and consider myself a pacifist that would not and can not see myself even thinking about violence. Therefore I see these games as a release of character. These games are not meant to make you violent but in context could bring out the true you if you allow them. This being said I have seen first hand, violent video games been turned into charity acts and competitions pitting some of the best gaming athletes on this planet against each other, while at the same time bringing people and nations together to fight for the same cause. Many people see these games as only killing and guns, or money and reputation, when in reality “its just a game”. These so called violent games have gained me many friendships over the years with great people and have actually brought fun and excitement to millions of people world wide.

As for a so called ban on these games, I feel as though it would be a very stupid decision. This world has always been about expressing yourself especially in the U.S.A and taking these games away would deprive us of entertainment and freedom. If we really think that video games cause killers and violence we need to look inside the individual not the game.


Week 8 First Impression- Learning

Violent video games have been a hot topic for many years. They have also been blamed for a lot of the violence that occurs in our neighborhoods and society. While I do not believe they are the sole reason for violent behavior in children, I do believe they have an effect. Some kids will spend hours upon hours playing violent video games and even though they are pulling a virtual trigger, they are still pulling a trigger and killing. I think the big idea behind this is that after killing people for “fun”, even if it is fake, it may desensitize the child to violence. Since they have done it on a game it doesn’t seem like a much of a big deal if they were to do it in real life. Of course, this certainly does not apply to all children. I think this also leads to the reason why video games are rated. When games are rated “mature” they are intended for people over the age of 17. I think this is because older teenagers are more likely to understand what is wrong and what is right. They know that the violence in the game is fictional and should not be done in real life. However, younger kids may not be able to fully make this distinction.

Video games are obviously not the only possible reason for why a child is acting violently. Violent behavior has a lot to do with the child’s life and experiences at home. If a child is educated on what is wrong and what is right and on the fictional nature of the game, they may be less  likely to be violent in their daily lives. Parents should also limit the child’s playing time so they expend their energy in other forms. There is a large variety of healthy ways a child can expend their energy besides playing video games.

While the effects of violent video games may be exaggerated at times, I do believe the prolonged exposure to violence can certainly have an effect on a child’s behavior.