學券計劃 孩子與音樂 電子書
報紙的消亡 環(huán)境保護 帶薪請假制度
英語的消亡
The phrase Mozart Effect conjures an image of a pregnant woman who, putting headphones conspicuously over her belly, is convinced that playing classical music to her unborn child will improve the kids' intelligence. But is there science to back up this idea, which has brought about a cottage industry of books, CDs and videos？
A short paper published in Nature in 1993 unwittingly introduced the supposed Mozart effect to the masses. Psychologist Frances Rauscher's study involved 36 college kids who listened to either 10 minutes of a Mozart sonata, a relaxation track or silence before performing several spatial reasoning tasks. In one test——determining what a paper folded several times over and then cut might look like when unfolded——students who listened to Mozart seemed to show significant improvement in their performance (by about eight to nine spatial IQ points).
In addition to a flood of commercial products in the wake of the finding, in 1998 then——Georgia governor Zell Miller mandated that mothers of newborns in the state be given classical music CDs. And in Florida, day care centers were required to broadcast symphonies through their sound systems.
Earlier this year, the Federal Ministry of Education and Research in Germany published a second review study from a cross-disciplinary team of musically inclined scientists who declared the phenomenon nonexistent. I would simply say that there is no compelling evidence that children who listen to classical music are going to have any improvement in cognitive abilities, adds Rauscher, now an associate professor of psychology at the University of Wisconsin-Oshkosh. It's really a myth, in my humble opinion.
Rather than passively listening to music, Rauscher advocates putting an instrument into the hands of a youngster to raise intelligence. She cites a 1997 University of California, Los Angels, study that found that, among 25,000 students, those who had spent time involved in a musical pursuit tested higher on SATs and reading proficiency exams than those with no instruction in music.
Despite its rejection by the scientific community, companies like Baby Genius continue to peddle classical music to parents of children who can supposedly listen their way to greater smarts.
Chabris says the real danger isn't in this questionable marketing, but in parents shirking roles they are evolutionarily meant to serve. It takes away from other kinds of interaction that might be beneficial for children, such as playing with them and keeping them engaged via social activity. That is the key to a truly intelligent child, not the symphonies of a long-dead Austrian composer.——《Times》
“莫扎特效應”這個詞讓人想到這樣的畫面：一位孕婦把耳機顯眼地放在肚子上，深信給未出世的孩子播放古典音樂會提高寶寶的智力。這個觀點催生了一大批粗制濫造的書籍、CD和視頻節(jié)目，但它是否有科學依據呢？
1993年發(fā)表于《自然》雜志的一篇簡短的論文無意中把所謂的莫扎特效應介紹給了大眾。心理學家費朗西絲勞舍爾的這項研究是讓36名大學生在10分鐘內，或聽一段令人放松的莫扎特奏鳴曲，或呆在靜默環(huán)境里，之后再去完成幾道空間推理作業(yè)題。在一項測試中——判斷一張折疊多次再剪過的紙張在展開時會變成什么樣子——聽過莫扎特音樂學生的成績似乎有顯著提高(空間IQ得分提高了8到9分)。
這一研究成果不僅帶來了大量的相關產品，1998年，當時的佐治亞州州長Zell Miller還下令給本州的新生兒媽媽派發(fā)古音樂CD，而佛里里達州則要求托兒所利用它們的音響系統(tǒng)播放交響樂。
今年早些時候，德國聯(lián)邦教育與研究部發(fā)表了一份由懂音樂的科學家組成的跨學科小組完成的復審報告，聲明這樣的觀點并不存在?！拔抑幌胝f，沒有令人信服的證據證明聽古典音樂的孩子在認知能力方面會有什么提高，”現(xiàn)任威斯康星大學奧什科什分校心理學副教授的勞舍爾補充說，“依拙見，這純屬虛構?！?BR> 勞舍爾主張讓孩子親手演奏樂器來提高智力，而不是被動地聽音樂。她引用了1997年在洛杉磯的加州大學進行的一項研究來作為例證。該研究發(fā)現(xiàn)，在2萬5千名學生中，與沒有學習過演奏樂器的學生相比，那些付出時間學習演奏一種樂器的人在學業(yè)能力傾向測試和閱讀能力測試中取得了更好的成績。
盡管受到科學界的否定，像“神童”這樣的公司仍繼續(xù)向家長們兜售古典樂，宣稱孩子聽了古典音樂就能增長聰明才智。
查伯里斯說，真正的危險不在于這種令人置疑的營銷活動，而在于父母親逃避天職?！斑@貶低了對孩子可能有利的其它互動形式，”如陪孩子一起玩耍和讓他們參與社交活動。對一個真正聰明的孩子來說，這才是關鍵，而不是一位早已作古的奧地利作曲家的交響樂?！稌r代》
報紙的消亡 環(huán)境保護 帶薪請假制度
英語的消亡
The phrase Mozart Effect conjures an image of a pregnant woman who, putting headphones conspicuously over her belly, is convinced that playing classical music to her unborn child will improve the kids' intelligence. But is there science to back up this idea, which has brought about a cottage industry of books, CDs and videos？
A short paper published in Nature in 1993 unwittingly introduced the supposed Mozart effect to the masses. Psychologist Frances Rauscher's study involved 36 college kids who listened to either 10 minutes of a Mozart sonata, a relaxation track or silence before performing several spatial reasoning tasks. In one test——determining what a paper folded several times over and then cut might look like when unfolded——students who listened to Mozart seemed to show significant improvement in their performance (by about eight to nine spatial IQ points).
In addition to a flood of commercial products in the wake of the finding, in 1998 then——Georgia governor Zell Miller mandated that mothers of newborns in the state be given classical music CDs. And in Florida, day care centers were required to broadcast symphonies through their sound systems.
Earlier this year, the Federal Ministry of Education and Research in Germany published a second review study from a cross-disciplinary team of musically inclined scientists who declared the phenomenon nonexistent. I would simply say that there is no compelling evidence that children who listen to classical music are going to have any improvement in cognitive abilities, adds Rauscher, now an associate professor of psychology at the University of Wisconsin-Oshkosh. It's really a myth, in my humble opinion.
Rather than passively listening to music, Rauscher advocates putting an instrument into the hands of a youngster to raise intelligence. She cites a 1997 University of California, Los Angels, study that found that, among 25,000 students, those who had spent time involved in a musical pursuit tested higher on SATs and reading proficiency exams than those with no instruction in music.
Despite its rejection by the scientific community, companies like Baby Genius continue to peddle classical music to parents of children who can supposedly listen their way to greater smarts.
Chabris says the real danger isn't in this questionable marketing, but in parents shirking roles they are evolutionarily meant to serve. It takes away from other kinds of interaction that might be beneficial for children, such as playing with them and keeping them engaged via social activity. That is the key to a truly intelligent child, not the symphonies of a long-dead Austrian composer.——《Times》
“莫扎特效應”這個詞讓人想到這樣的畫面：一位孕婦把耳機顯眼地放在肚子上，深信給未出世的孩子播放古典音樂會提高寶寶的智力。這個觀點催生了一大批粗制濫造的書籍、CD和視頻節(jié)目，但它是否有科學依據呢？
1993年發(fā)表于《自然》雜志的一篇簡短的論文無意中把所謂的莫扎特效應介紹給了大眾。心理學家費朗西絲勞舍爾的這項研究是讓36名大學生在10分鐘內，或聽一段令人放松的莫扎特奏鳴曲，或呆在靜默環(huán)境里，之后再去完成幾道空間推理作業(yè)題。在一項測試中——判斷一張折疊多次再剪過的紙張在展開時會變成什么樣子——聽過莫扎特音樂學生的成績似乎有顯著提高(空間IQ得分提高了8到9分)。
這一研究成果不僅帶來了大量的相關產品，1998年，當時的佐治亞州州長Zell Miller還下令給本州的新生兒媽媽派發(fā)古音樂CD，而佛里里達州則要求托兒所利用它們的音響系統(tǒng)播放交響樂。
今年早些時候，德國聯(lián)邦教育與研究部發(fā)表了一份由懂音樂的科學家組成的跨學科小組完成的復審報告，聲明這樣的觀點并不存在?！拔抑幌胝f，沒有令人信服的證據證明聽古典音樂的孩子在認知能力方面會有什么提高，”現(xiàn)任威斯康星大學奧什科什分校心理學副教授的勞舍爾補充說，“依拙見，這純屬虛構?！?BR> 勞舍爾主張讓孩子親手演奏樂器來提高智力，而不是被動地聽音樂。她引用了1997年在洛杉磯的加州大學進行的一項研究來作為例證。該研究發(fā)現(xiàn)，在2萬5千名學生中，與沒有學習過演奏樂器的學生相比，那些付出時間學習演奏一種樂器的人在學業(yè)能力傾向測試和閱讀能力測試中取得了更好的成績。
盡管受到科學界的否定，像“神童”這樣的公司仍繼續(xù)向家長們兜售古典樂，宣稱孩子聽了古典音樂就能增長聰明才智。
查伯里斯說，真正的危險不在于這種令人置疑的營銷活動，而在于父母親逃避天職?！斑@貶低了對孩子可能有利的其它互動形式，”如陪孩子一起玩耍和讓他們參與社交活動。對一個真正聰明的孩子來說，這才是關鍵，而不是一位早已作古的奧地利作曲家的交響樂?！稌r代》