↓ Skip to main content

An historical commentary on the physiological effects of music: Tomatis, Mozart and neuropsychology

Overview of attention for article published in Integrative Psychological and Behavioral Science, July 2000
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

wikipedia
3 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
42 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
101 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
Title
An historical commentary on the physiological effects of music: Tomatis, Mozart and neuropsychology
Published in
Integrative Psychological and Behavioral Science, July 2000
DOI 10.1007/bf02688778
Pubmed ID
Authors

Billie M. Thompson, Susan R. Andrews

Abstract

This article provides an overview of the theoretical underpinnings of the Tomatis Method, along with a commentary on other forms of sound/music training and the need for research. A public debate was sparked over the "Mozart Effect." This debate has turned out to be unfortunate because the real story is being missed. The real story starts with Alfred Tomatis, M.D., scientist and innovator. Dr. Tomatis was the first to develop a technique using modified music to stimulate the rich interconnections between the ear and the nervous system to integrate aspects of human development and behavior. The originating theories behind the Tomatis Method are reviewed to describe the ear's clear connection to the brain and the nervous system. The "neuropsychology of sound training" describes how and what the Tomatis Method effects. Since Dr. Tomatis opened this field in the mid 20th century, no fewer than a dozen offshoot and related systems of training have been developed. Though each new system of treatment makes claims of effectiveness, no research exists to substantiate their claims. Rather, each simplified system bases its "right to exist and advertise" on the claimed relationship to Tomatis and his complex Method. Research is desperately needed in this area. The 50 years of clinical experience and anecdotal evidence amassed by Tomatis show that sound stimulation can provide a valuable remediation and developmental training tool for people of all ages. Offshoot systems have watered down the Tomatis Method without research to guide the decisions of simplifying the techniques and equipment.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 101 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Croatia 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
France 1 <1%
Unknown 97 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 19 19%
Researcher 14 14%
Student > Bachelor 13 13%
Professor > Associate Professor 7 7%
Lecturer 6 6%
Other 20 20%
Unknown 22 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 30 30%
Neuroscience 11 11%
Medicine and Dentistry 9 9%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 6%
Arts and Humanities 5 5%
Other 14 14%
Unknown 26 26%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 03 December 2020.
All research outputs
#8,534,528
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Integrative Psychological and Behavioral Science
#219
of 416 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#13,225
of 39,276 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Integrative Psychological and Behavioral Science
#1
of 2 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 416 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.1. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 39,276 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 9th percentile – i.e., 9% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 2 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them