Music and neuroscience research for mental health, cognition, and development: Ways forward

Agapaki, Maria; Pinkerton, Elizabeth A; Papatzikis, Efthymios

doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2022.976883

Cited by 1 publication

(1 citation statement)

References 57 publications

(104 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…If nothing else, it seems that at a specific domain level, the influence of music on neuroplasticity is justified by the quality of the research and the researchers’ knowledge on which it is based. Therefore, we believe 150 that more work like this one is further needed to present new technically critical content and processes that will certainly help to further improve the quality of the field's research outcomes.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Quality standards and recommendations for research in music and neuroplasticity

Papatzikis

Agapaki

Selvan

et al. 2022

Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Research on how music influences brain plasticity has gained momentum in recent years. Considering, however, the nonuniform methodological standards implemented, the findings end up being nonreplicable and less generalizable. To address the need for a standardized baseline of research quality, we gathered all the studies in the music and neuroplasticity field in 2019 and appraised their methodological rigor systematically and critically. The aim was to provide a preliminary and, at the minimum, acceptable quality threshold-and, ipso facto, suggested recommendations-whereupon further discussion and development may take place. Quality appraisal was performed on 89 articles by three independent raters, following a standardized scoring system. The raters' scoring was cross-referenced following an inter-rater reliability measure, and further studied by performing multiple ratings comparisons and matrix analyses. The results for methodological quality were at a quite good level (quantitative articles: mean = 0.737, SD = 0.084; qualitative articles: mean = 0.677, SD = 0.144), following a moderate but statistically significant level of agreement between the raters (W = 0.44, χ 2 = 117.249, p = 0.020). We conclude that the standards for implementation and reporting are of high quality; however, certain improvements are needed to reach the stringent levels presumed for such an influential interdisciplinary scientific field.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%