Assignment 3: The Mozart Effect
In this assignment, you will read an article about
the Mozart effect and identify various parts of the research process. This
exercise will help you learn how to read a research article and to understand
the research process.
Read the following article:
Rauscher, F. H., Shaw, G. L., & Ky, K. N.
(1993). Music and spatial task performance. Nature, 365. 6447:
611. (October 14, 1993). (ProQuest Document ID 76004658).In your article summary, respond to the following
the research hypothesis in your own words. Identify the independent and
dependent variables. What
were some variables the researchers controlled in their study? Why was
this necessary? What
evidence do the researchers offer as a test of their hypothesis? Is this
evidence empirical (observable)? Is it valid? What
explanation do the researchers offer for their findings? Does the evidence
justify this explanation? Read the following article:
Jenkins, J.S. (2001). The
Mozart effect. Journal of the Royal Society of
Medicine, 94, 170-172.
Based on your readings, respond to the following:
you think there is any merit in the study (Rauscher, Shaw, & Ky,
1993)? Give three reasons for your position. Does
the study take individual differences in spatial ability into account?
Explain your answer. What
are two ways in which the experiment could be modified to make the results
more generalizable? Write a 5–6-page paper in Word format. Apply APA
standards to citation of sources. Use the following file naming convention:
By Wednesday, July 31, 2013, deliver your
assignment to the M1: Assignment 3 Dropbox.
Assignment 3 Grading Criteria
Accurately identified and described the research hypothesis
and variables studied in the research article. Identified any control
variables, and explained the necessity of controlling them.
Evaluated validity of the evidence presented as a
test of the hypothesis in the research article.
Evaluated interpretation of results in the
Critically assessed the merit of the research
study providing at least three reasons.
Evaluated whether the test took into account
individual differences in spatial ability giving reasons.
Suggested at least two ways to modify the
experiment to make the results more generalizable.
Wrote in a clear, concise, and organized manner;
demonstrated ethical scholarship in accurate representation and attribution
of sources; displayed accurate spelling, grammar, and punctuation.