PerceptualandMotor Skzllc, 2007, 104, 153-154.

O Perceptual and Motor Sk~lls2007

DEMAND CHARACTERISTICS OF MUSIC AFFECT PERFORMANCE

ON THE WONDERLIC PERSONNEL TEST OF INTELLIGENCE '

CELISSA C. VERPAELST AND LIONEL G. STANDING

Bishop's University

Summary.-This study examined whether demand characteristics concerning mu-

sic can change subjects' performance on the Wonderlic Personnel Test of intelligence.
Participants ( N = 60) were randomly assigned and informed either that Mozart's music
typically enhances cognitive performance or diminishes it. They then completed the
Wonderlic Personnel Test while listening to a Mozart ~ i a n osonata. The subiects with
a positive set answered significantly more items correctly on the test (14%) than those
with a negative set (p=.O3). This result may hold implications for the study of the
'Mozart effect'.

The Wonderlic Personnel Test is a brief paper-and-pencil test of general intelligence,

based on verbal and arithmetical items (Wonderlic, 19831, which has shown good split-half reli-
ability (.87) and significant predictive validity (McKelvie, 1989). Since demand characteristics or
suggestive cues in the experimental setting substantially influence many forms of behavior
(Orne & Evans, 19651, the prediction that they may be sufficient to affect performance in this
test, possibly mediated by the subject's mood, was tested. Classical music was employcd as the
feature of the task situation intended to evoke demand characteristics and was described to
subjects as typically either helping or hindering performance.
Method.-Sixty students (32 men, 28 women) were randomly assigned to positive or
negative set conditions, receiving instructions in the consent form which suggested either that
hearing Mozart has improved cognitive performance or reduced it.
The instructions were given in printed form and were also read aloud by the cxperi-
menter: "If you agree to take part in this research project, you urill be given 12 min. to
complete as many of the items on the Wonderlic Personnel Test, Form F, as you can, while lis-
tening to Mozart music. W e are interested in the beneficial [non-beneficial] effects of listening
to Mozart on cognitivc performance. Your responses and scores are completely confidential
and will be combined with those of other participants for data analysis." [Boldface in original.]
The participants then completed as many items as possible in 12 min. of the 50 items in
thc Wonderlic test, while listening to a recording of Mozart's Sonata for Two Pianos (K. 4481,
played at moderate intensity. Finally, they rated their mood on a scale using anchors of 1 (very
relaxed) and 5 (very anxious). They were also asked an open-ended question, "What do you
think the hypothesis of the experimenter is?"
Results.-The subjects in the positive set condition correctly answered 14% more items
on the Wonderlic test (1Z/I=25.2,.CD=4.8) than those given the negative set ( M =22.0, SD=5.8).
This increase was significant (~,,=2.34,p = ,031. Men and women scored equally well (t,, = 1.2,
p > .05), and there was no age difference betwcen the positive and negative set groups to act as
a possible confounding variable (t,,= 0.5, p > ,051. The two conditions did not differ in self-
rated mood, 3.1 versus 3.3, both with standard deviation equal to 1.0 (t,, =0.8, p > .05). No
subject correctly identified the hypothesis.

'Address correspondence to Celissa C. Verpaelst and Lionel G. Standing, Department of Psy-

chology, Bishop's University, Sherbrooke Q C , Canada J I M 0C8 or e-mail (Istandin@ubishops.
ca). W e thank Stuart McKelvie for his help with test materials.

DO1 10.2466/PMS.104.1.153-154
 C. C. VERPAELST & L. G. STANDING

One may conclude subjects' expectations, influenced by the instructions, can enhance
cogniti\re performance appreciably. The magnitude of the performance increase obtained here
approximates that of the 'Mozart effect' reported by Rauscher, Shaw, and Ky (1993) in com-
paring IQ performance after music with that after silence, and the present findings may have
implications for the study of this disputed topic (Steele, Bass, & Crook, 1999). When music (or
any stimulus) appears to enhance cognitive performance, this may simply reflect the subject's
belief that it will be beneficial.
The present experiment differs from published studies of the Mozart effect in several
ways, e.g., that a nonspatial TQ test was used, the music was played during the cognitive test
rather than before it, and a positive or negative set \?as established quite explicitly. It should
also be noted that the experiment was not conducted under double-blind conditions, so experi-
menter effects (Rosenthal, 1976) may have been present in addition to the explicit cues given in
the instructions or demand characteristics of the task. However, the general point remains that,
if subjects infer that the music they hear is expected to raise their intelligence test scores, then
they may respond to it with improved performance. Control over the expectations of partici-
writs is thus needed.
At the least this might involve. for example, questioning participants after they have been
tested and performing an internal analysis to compare the intelligence scores of the subjects
holding, or not holding, positive expectations concerning the music. Typically it appears that
this is not done, since a search of the PsycINFO database does not yield any human study
which refers both to Mozart and to 'demand', 'expectation', or 'expectancy'.

REFERENCES
MCKELVIE,S. J. (1989) The K'onderlic Personnel Test: reliability and validity in an academic
setting. P~ychologlcalReports, 65, 161-162.
OKNE,M. T., &EVANS,F. J. (1965) Social control in the psychological experiment: antisocial
behavior and hypnosis. journal of Pervonality and Soczal P ~ y c h o l o ~1~, ,189-200.
,
RAUSCHLR,F. H., SHAW,G. L., &KY, K. N. (1993) Music and spatial task performance. Nature,
363, 611.
ROSENTHAI., R. (1976) Experzincntev effrctr in behavioral re.\eavch. New York: Trvington.
STEELO,K. M., BASS,K.E.,&CROOK,M. D. (1999) The mystery of the Mozart effect: failure to
replicate. P~ycholo~zcalScience, 10, 366-369.
WONDERLIC, I:.. F. (1983) Wonderlic Personnel ? i , ~ nzanunl.
t Libertyville, IL: Wonderlic, Inc.

Accepted ]anuaty 9, 2007