How is music processed? Tentative answers from cognitive neuroscience

ABSTRACT

Introduction: Music therapists have turned to neuroscience for an explanation of the therapeutic effect of music. Following this interest, the present author conducted a narrative review of this emerging topic.

Method: The author searched PubMed, PsycInfo, Web of Science, Google Scholar and a university database with “music” and “neuroscience” as search terms, for publications between 2000 and 2015, including only those relevant to music processing. A full-text review was performed, and thematic summaries were compiled.

Results: Findings indicate that music is a complex, generative, and recursive phenomenon that uses similar neural networks as other sounds. It generates emotional responses processed sequentially and simultaneously by cortical and subcortical areas (vmPFC, insula, amygdala, thalamus, hippocampus and parahippocampus, hypothalamus, NAc, caudate nucleus, and OFC). Music generates activity in motor areas (premotor, primary motor, basal ganglia, and cerebellum) and also engages higher-order processing.

Discussion: Music perception is probably the result of the Gestalt at all levels. Extraneous variables, such as expertise, attitude, mood, environment, and interpersonal relationships can also modify music processing. Further, this literature only pertains to receptive experiences, and not the active involvement common in music therapy. Recommendations for music interventions should consider the complexity of music processing and the limitations of our current technology.

KEYWORDS:

• Music
• cognitive neuroscience
• music therapy
• music processing

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author.

Acknowledgments

The author would like to thank Dr. Christopher M. Johnson, Dr. Cynthia Colwell, Dr. Deanna Hanson-Abromeit, Dr. Jim Daugherty, and Dr. Michael Roberts, at the University of Kansas for their support and feedback.

Supplementary material

Supplemental data for this article can be accessed here.

Notes

¹ Words with definitions in the Glossary are italicized. The Glossary can be found in the online supplement.

² The use of acronyms for brain regions and imaging techniques is customary in neuroscience literature. An acronym guide is included at the end of this document for quick reference.

³ Paradigm, in cognitive neuroscience, refers to the group of procedures to examine a research question. It is akin to research design, in music therapy research. It does not have philosophical implications in this context.

⁴ The reader is invited to visit Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory’s website (http://www.g2conline.org/) for a 3-D interactive app with brain images to support this reading.

⁵ See also Patel’s (2003) Shared Syntactic Integration Resources Hypothesis, on which Slevc and Okada (2015) based their argumentation.

⁶ In addition to this literature, the reader is invited to explore Bowling, Sundararajan, Han, and Purves (2012) for a fascinating comparison of emotion representation in music and language in two different cultures.

⁷ See also Maes (2016) for the theory of Musical Embodiment, an excellent discussion on the effect of both stimulus-dependent and learned concepts on music perception.

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Eugenia Hernandez-Ruiz

Eugenia Hernandez-Ruiz is Assistant Professor of Music Therapy, at Arizona State University. She holds a PhD in Music Therapy, with concentration in neuroscience and special education, from the University of Kansas. Her clinical expertise is in the area of Naturalistic Developmental Behavioral Interventions (NDBI) and music interventions for children, teenagers, and young adults with Autism Spectrum Disorder, and their families; as well as women and children survivors of domestic violence. Her current research relates to parent coaching of music interventions in ASD, music neuroscience, mindfulness and music interventions, and course-based undergraduate research experiences.