Listening habits and subjective effects of background music in young adults with and without ADHD
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Adults listen to an average of 20.7 hours of music per week, according to a study conducted across 26 countries. Numerous studies indicate that listening to music can have beneficial effects on cognitive performance and emotional well-being. Music listening habits may vary depending on individual needs and listening contexts. However, a limited number of studies have specifically examined the patterns of background music usage during various more or less cognitive activities, especially among individuals with attentional difficulties related to ADHD. This study primarily aimed to compare music listening habits during daily activities that are more and less cognitive (e.g., studying, problem-solving versus cleaning, engaging in sports) between neurotypical young adults and those screened for ADHD (respondents who were identified as likely having ADHD based on the number of self-reported symptoms). To achieve this, 434 young adults aged 17 to 30 responded to an online survey. The results indicate that certain listening habits differ significantly between the neurotypical and ADHD-screened groups. The ADHD-screened group reports significantly more background music listening during less cognitive activities and while studying, compared to the neurotypical group. The results also reveal a difference in the proportion of individuals preferring stimulating music between the groups: ADHD-screened individuals report significantly more frequent listening to stimulating music, regardless of the activity type (more or less cognitive). Other aspects of music listening are common to both groups. Regardless of the group, more respondents reported preferring to listen to relaxing, instrumental, familiar and self-chosen music during more cognitive activities, whereas for less cognitive activities, more individuals mentioned preferring to listen to music that is stimulating, with lyrics, familiar and self-chosen. Overall, the results confirm that most young adults listen to music during their daily activities and perceive positive effects from this listening.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".