MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2065969172 · doi:10.2466/pms.2003.96.3c.1086

A Mozart Effect for Women on a Mental Rotations Task

2003· article· en· W2065969172 on OpenAlexaff
K Gilleta, Mirna Vrbancic, Lorin Elias, Deborah M. Saucier

Bibliographic record

VenuePerceptual and Motor Skills · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSpatial Cognition and Navigation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of SaskatchewanRoyal University Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMOZARTActive listeningTask (project management)PsychologyAudiologyCognitive psychologyDevelopmental psychologyCommunicationMedicineArtLiterature

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

During the past decade, there have been numerous reports of a brief, but statistically significant, improvement in immediate spatial-temporal performance after listening to 10 min. of Mozart's Sonata K.448, known as the "Mozart effect." The purpose of the present study was to assess whether production of the effect is influenced by length of listening conditions or sex. Each of 52 right-handed participants (26 females, 26 males) completed a paper-folding and cutting task and a Mental Rotations task following a listening condition in which the Mozart sonata was played and a silent condition (no music was played). A significant 3-way interaction among sex, listening condition, and task indicated that an effect was present only for women on the Mental Rotations task. As such, researchers should investigate the role of sex in production of the Mozart effect.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.034

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.005
GPT teacher head0.223
Teacher spread0.217 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations16
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePerceptual and Motor SkillsSame topicSpatial Cognition and NavigationFrench-language works237,207