Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Thought Control Game Helps Musicians

Posted by simoniker on from the insert-spooky-theremin-effects-here dept.

Thanks to Ananova for their article discussing a videogame controlled by brainwaves that helps musicians play better. According to the piece, "Scientists have improved the performance of musicians by up to 17% by teaching them to control their thoughts... Sensors were attached to their heads that filtered out specific brainwaves. These influenced a video game displayed on a screen, which the students learned to control by altering particular thought patterns." At the end of all this, "a panel of expert judges" proclaimed the 'deep relaxation' neurofeedback as having a significantly positive effect on the musicians' playing.

36 comments

  1. Lara Croft by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    This should lead the way to a Tomb Raider game in which Lara Croft acts out your innermost unspoken fantasies.

    1. Re:Lara Croft by AvitarX · · Score: 1

      This should lead the way to a Tomb Raider game in which Lara Croft acts out your innermost unspoken fantasies.

      Unspoken?

      --
      Wow, sent an e-mail as suggested when clicking on "use classic" banner, and got a fast response that addressed my msg
    2. Re:Lara Croft by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      unspoken = not verbalized

  2. How scientific. by ForteTuba · · Score: 1

    Exactly 17%, hm? Not 19.5, or 12, but a 17 percent improvement in musical performance? Their measuring scale, according to the article: "the equivalent of one grade". At least that part is in terms the people IMing in the back of the concert hall to each other will understand, but the 17% part is just ridiculous.

    1. Re:How scientific. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just like the time I became 17% more French when I tawlked luike theese.

    2. Re:How scientific. by fleafan · · Score: 2, Interesting
      The scale of improvement among Royal College of Music students taking part in the study was equivalent to one grade.

      I'll take a wild guess and say that the Royal College of Music has six grades, where one grade ~17% of the total skills you are supposed to learn.

      Aside from that, being a musician myself, I know from personal experience that being relaxed and focused really helps your playing, not only technically but very much creatively. This mental state is what musicians refer to as being in the mood, and it slightly resembles the kind of trance that you achieve when you meditate.
      Consider why so many musicians use drugs. Being drunk makes you unfocused and most musicians play like shit when they're drunk. Weed (for some) on the other hand often narrows your focus. This is also very much the case for amphetamine and cocaine.
      The ability to consciously put yourself in the mood is a very important one for musicians, so this is not as far-fetched as it might seem. I wish the article went into more detail.

    3. Re:How scientific. by LudditeMind · · Score: 1

      From the Article: "Their improvement ranged between 13.5% and 17%."

      Where does it say exactly?

    4. Re:How scientific. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, there are eight. But then, there could be some bizarre stuff about music theory not being involved...

    5. Re:How scientific. by Daetrin · · Score: 1
      Yeah, it doesn't say exactly, but one still has to wonder how exactly they measured that. It's not like musical ability is something you can pick up and place on a scale.

      Were they given ratings by judges of some kind and difference in ratings before and after measured out? Or is there some more quantitative measurement they were able to make? Or maybe they just had all the musicians compete at DDR or some other rythem game before and after and compared the scores =P

      --
      This Space Intentionally Left Blank
    6. Re:How scientific. by PainKilleR-CE · · Score: 1

      The article states that they were assessed on two pieces of music both before and after the experiment by a panel of judges.

      I'd assume they were known pieces of music. At that point, it'd be quite easy to judge on at least the accuracy of the performance, though they also judged on imagination and communication with the audience (the latter would be pretty hard to judge imo, but the former should be easy if the pieces have some portion in which the student could experiment a bit).

      Most long-time students can make at least simple judgments of a musician's skill based on their performance of a couple of pieces that the students are familiar with, although in every case it would be extremely biased by outside influences (the performance would be, not neccessarily the judgment). The idea of the musicians learning to put their mind into a certain state should lead to reducing those outside influences, and therefore a better performance. They won't become better musicians just through this technique, but it should help them become better musicians by making it easier for them to perform, practice, and learn.

      Almost anyone that's played an instrument (and perhaps even a singer, though I wouldn't know on that part) has experienced times at which their mind was in the correct state and their performance (even if it was not in front of others) benefitted accordingly. Being able to put your mind in (or even near) that state at will would truly be a great help to any musician.

      --
      -PainKilleR-[CE]
    7. Re:How scientific. by FrEaK7782 · · Score: 1

      I actually knew a guy that only played(piano) when he was drunk. And he was damn good. He had to have someone help him to the piano, but once he got sat down, he played like a professional...

      Offtopic, I know. But an example that maybe most musicians don't play worse when drunk...

    8. Re:How scientific. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      was the guy's name Griffin? Peter Griffin?

  3. Did the results vary by instrument? by JRootabega · · Score: 1

    Cause I bet the Holophonor would be right at the top.

  4. Yikes! by Decaffeinated+Jedi · · Score: 5, Funny
    Sensors were attached to their heads that filtered out specific brainwaves...
    You can read more about this fascinating new study in this month's New England Journal of Evil.

    DecafJedi

    --
    DecafJedi
    my weblog: apropos of something
  5. Sign me up by truffle · · Score: 2, Funny

    When is the playstation 2 version coming out?

    --

    ---
    I support spreading santorum
    1. Re:Sign me up by Lord_Dweomer · · Score: 1
      You may be joking, but I truly feel the next big 'killer app' of gaming will come in the form of thought control. It is an input device with which you are both intimately familiar, and completely mystified by. How cool would it be to have a fighting game that made your character more powerful (DBZ style) based on how focused you were? Or a music generation game that made music and visuals based on thought patterns? Not only would this be incredibly cool to play, but the 'home science experiment' aspect of it would rock. And this isn't a joke, but imagine if a game could sense your level of arousal and change the game accordingly? You may laugh, but just think of the possibilities of making pr0n more interactive.

      Brain-controlled games are the way of the future.

      --
      Buy Steampunk Clothing Online!
  6. Cool by GigsVT · · Score: 1

    These influenced a video game displayed on a screen, which the students learned to control by altering particular thought patterns.

    Does anyone else think it would look badass to go to an arcade, put a helmet on, and use your brainwaves to kick someone's ass at a fighting game?

    We are one step closer to using the force!

    --
    I've had enough abrasive sigs. Kittens are cute and fuzzy.
  7. More research by slusich · · Score: 1

    It will be interesting to see if they can apply this same type of technology to help increase other types of brainwave activity. Perhaps this could be used to improve overall concentration. I could see this being applied to vital professions to reduce accidents.

    --

    DeviantArt Page

    NSFW
    1. Re:More research by gmaestro · · Score: 2, Interesting
      It will be interesting to see if they can apply this same type of technology to help increase other types of brainwave activity.

      They do use this kind of thing (biofeedback) for certain mental conditions, like ADD. When the learner has "focused" brain waves, s/he does better at the game.

      This article reminds me of the "Mozart effect." Fellow musicians proclaimed it to be the reason we teach music . . . until the "effect" was proven quite temporary. But hopefully this will turn out to have some long term effects, as the learner takes an active role in the process, whereas subjects in the the Mozart experiments were entirely passive.

  8. Placebo? by kmak · · Score: 1

    Sure if you tell them they'll play better...

    --

    I'm not the devil.. just his advocate.
  9. Dopamine by Oriumpor · · Score: 1

    Greaaaat... this is exactly what we don't need. If this ever takes off on a large scale, people will start developing more advanced techniques for neuralfeedback. Once this happens, and people are able (if at all possible) to control their neural responses well enough, we will see senseless mental masturbation. Just setting up thought patterns in the correct way to cause absolute ecstacy. If this becomes possible, I fear for humanity.

    1. Re:Dopamine by Lowtekium · · Score: 1

      You know I think people said the same thing about internet porn when it started to get big. What's wrong with mental masturbation?

      At least with this contraption we don't have to unzip our pants.

    2. Re:Dopamine by Oriumpor · · Score: 1

      because a brief moment of limited ecstacy is different than being able to stimulate your entire pleasure center for an indefinite ammount of time. (minutes, hours,.... days)

  10. During the experiment, a researcher once said by FrankoBoy · · Score: 1

    All your brain are belong to us.

    Really, someone did.

    OK OK, no-one did.

    --

    United States of America, good ol' backers of world peace.
  11. Geniuses at work.... by engineerdude · · Score: 0

    You mean that musicians can actually play better (17%) if they actually use their brains to concentrate on what they're doing?????

  12. Excellent! by ZombieFrog · · Score: 1

    So when does the mind control rock and roll shootout mod come out for Half Life?

    --
    Z. http://www.play.net Your games, my job. C'est la vie!
  13. However... by GypC · · Score: 5, Funny

    The scientists conducting the experiment neglected to mention that spending the same amount of time rehearsing improved their skills by 25%.

  14. Other Areas? by Saige · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I can't help wonder what other types of activities would get enhancement from these biofeedback techniques. Could I use the attention-focusing biofeedback system for a while, and find my ability to focus attention to one thing improved overall? And similarly with learning to relax better when I need to?

    I would love to see such things made more widely available if there are benefits for the rest of us.

    --
    "You know your god is man-made when he hates all the same people you do."
  15. I dunno.... by IIRCAFAIKIANAL · · Score: 2, Insightful

    They don't mention if the study was double blind, they don't mention how the judges evaluated the performances...

    It sounds compelling, but they certainly don't give me reason to believe it from the article. Of course, just like every other news story like this (such as the mozart effect), we won't see a follow up article if it proves to be bullsh!t and people are going to be repeating this "fact" for many years to come.

    Why yes, I am in a bad mood today :)

    --
    Robots are everywhere, and they eat old people's medicine for fuel.
  16. Whoa... Thought control!!!! by Picass0 · · Score: 1

    If we now have thought control I have some ideas for Britney Spears!!!

  17. More details from BBC by FrEaK7782 · · Score: 2, Informative

    The BBC article has more details. Also, the BBC article says they improved by an AVERAGE of 17% and some improved as much as 50%.

  18. 17% eh? by dacarr · · Score: 1

    Let's also keep in mind that 17 is the least random number.

    --
    This sig no verb.
  19. 17 percent? by blackcoot · · Score: 1

    <rant>

    17% of what? measuring qualitative data with quantitative measures makes very little sense. think about it: can a pizza be "17% more cheesy" than another pizza?

    </rant>

    this is probably why i'm not a social scientist ;-)

    1. Re:17 percent? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Can one pizza have 17% more cheese than another pizza, i.e it's cheese quantity is 117% of the amount on the base pizza? Yes, what's your point again?

    2. Re:17 percent? by know_gnus · · Score: 1

      I'm sure that it has occured to many of you that a pizza could be rated x% more cheesy than another, but this joke couldn't possibly be rated the same way...