Jazz Piano Training Modulates Neural Oscillations and Executive Functions in Older Adults
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Musical improvisation is one of the most complex forms of creative behavior, often associated with increased executive functions. However, most traditional piano programs do not include improvisation skills. This research examined the effects of music improvisation in a novel jazz piano training intervention on executive functions and neural oscillatory activity in healthy older adults. Forty adults were recruited and randomly assigned to either jazz piano training (n = 20, 10 females) or a control group (n = 20, 13 females). The jazz piano training program included aural skills, basic technique, improvisation, and repertoire with 30 hours of training over 10 days. All participants at pre- and post-testing completed a battery of standardized cognitive measures (i.e., processing speed, inhibition, verbal fluency), and neurophysiological data was recorded during resting state and a musical improvisation task using electroencephalography (EEG). Results showed significantly enhanced processing speed and inhibition performance for those who received jazz piano training as compared to controls. EEG data revealed changes in frontal theta power during improvisation in the training group compared to controls. Learning to improvise may contribute to cognitive performance.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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".