Music and Steroids – Music Facilitates Steroid–Induced Synaptic Plasticity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Music and medicine have always been closely related. This remains true even in huntergatherer cultures that are thought to reflect primitive human forms, as clarified by cultural anthropological and ethno-musicological studies (Lee & Daly, 2005; Merriam & Merriam, 1964). Interestingly, music has also been used for the treatment of neuropsychiatric disorders in hunter-gatherer cultures (Lee & Daly, 2005; Merriam & Merriam, 1964). However, in westernized societies, no established music therapy exists for neuropsychiatric disorders such as stress disorders, mood disorders (depression), and dementia. Experience has shown that music has certain therapeutic effects on neuropsychiatric disorders (both functional and organic disorders), and music therapy is currently being used in the United States and Europe in clinical and welfare settings. However, the mechanisms of action underlying music therapy remain unknown. Various studies have examined the effects of listening to music on the brain (Bermudez & Zatorre, 2005; Nan et al., 2008). The study by Rauscher et al. on the “Mozart effect” is one of the most famous studies and has had both positive and negative impacts on music therapy (Rauscher et al., 1993). However, many subsequent studies have questioned the reliability of those results, and Chabris et al. published a study disproving the Mozart effect (Chabris, 1999). However, the fact that music affects the human body and mind was not disproved. In fact, more scientific studies on music have been conducted in recent years, mainly in the field of neuroscience, and the level of interest among researchers is increasing (Zatorre, 2003; Zatorre & McGill, 2005). Results of past studies have clarified that music influences and affects cerebral nerves in humans from fetuses to adults (Abbott, 2002). The most significant finding has been that music enhances synaptic changes in the brain. In other words, studies comparing musicians and non-musicians and music learners and nonlearners have clarified that music brings about cerebral plasticity. Music affects neuronal learning and readjustment (response of brain cells to sound and music stimuli, and changes in cell counts), and this effect lasts for a long period (Abbott, 2002). For example, even when neurodegenerative diseases such as Alzheimer’s disease cause memory loss, patients can still remember music from the past, and listening to music can facilitate the recovery of other memories. This type of memory recovery is accompanied by the reconfiguration of existing neuron networks, which may allow access to long-term memory. However, most studies have been based on brain imaging modalities such as positron emission tomography (PET) or functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI). The effects of music at a cellular
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".