While researching a topic, a student has taken the following notes:
* A 1995 study on cognitive performance after listening to music suggested a “Mozart effect,” a temporary increase in spatial-temporal reasoning scores.
* The study’s results were widely publicized, leading to a popular belief that listening to Mozart makes one more intelligent.
* A 2010 meta-analysis reviewed over 40 subsequent studies on the topic.
* The meta-analysis found no statistically significant “Mozart effect.”
* It concluded that any temporary cognitive enhancement was likely due to “enjoyment arousal”—a state of heightened mood and alertness—not Mozart’s music specifically. This effect could be replicated by listening to other enjoyable music or even by reading a captivating story.
The student wants to write a sentence that challenges the popular interpretation of the original “Mozart effect” study. Which choice most effectively uses relevant information from the notes to accomplish this goal?
-
A
The popular idea of a "Mozart effect" is questionable, as a major 2010 meta-analysis concluded that the observed cognitive boost is not specific to Mozart's music but is attributable to the general effect of enjoyment arousal.
-
B
A 1995 study first identified what is known as the "Mozart effect," a temporary increase in scores on spatial-temporal reasoning tasks after listening to Mozart.
-
C
The "Mozart effect," popularized after a 1995 study, is a phenomenon where subjects show improved intelligence after listening to classical music.
-
D
While a 1995 study was widely publicized, a 2010 meta-analysis later reviewed 40 different studies to further investigate the so-called "Mozart effect."