Does Singing Enhance Memory?

By Juergen A. Riedelsheimer

 

There is no shortage of tips on how to boost memory performance these days. However, what if singing could help us remember better for school or everyday situations? You can almost picture students transforming Taylor Swift tunes with lyrics serving as study aids and singing their way through exam prep. It is not as far-fetched as it sounds; early studies suggested that singing might improve memory and recollection compared to reading aloud or studying silently. However, more recent findings, including large meta-analyses, have started to challenge this idea.

 

Production Effect

Quinlan and Taylor (2013) use the distinctiveness account theory to describe the production effect relevant to their study, suggesting that individual items stand out from a set due to their sensorimotor features, creating a distinct memory trace, while this trace is absent when reading silently (Withridge et al., 2024); therefore, they are easier to retrieve. The Sensorimotor Scaling Hypothesis confirms these, suggesting that increased sensorimotor processes support enhanced encoding, resulting in more robust memory traces (Forrin et al., 2012). Activities like reading items aloud compared to silently added a more distinct element to support better memory retention and subsequent retrieval during a testing period. The foundation for this phenomenon was a study by (MacLeod et al., 2017; Conway & Gatherole, 1987; Hopkins & Edwards, 1972), where participants read items aloud through vocal production or silently. Compared to reading silently, the difference in performance for produced reading aloud is known as the production effect. Another form of vocalization is singing, which features rhythm, pitch, and melody and is, according to Withridge et al., a more elaborate form of vocal production known as the Singing Superiority Effect (SSE). However, early research (Quinlan & Taylor, 2013) suggested that singing was supposed to yield even more robust memory benefits than reading items aloud; more recent studies, including meta-analyses, started to challenge these results by suggesting that those results may depend heavily on contextual factors and environmental cues, such as color matching during encoding and retrieval (Withridge et al., 2024), thereby shedding light on the intricate nature of memory processes.

 

Recent Empirical and Meta-analytic Findings

Moreover, in an empirical meta-analysis, Withridge et al. (2024) focused on the production effect by trying to replicate the SSE across different experiments and reviews of previous research. Their study conducted four experiments, including replicating Quinlan & Taylor, that demonstrated a production effect for items read aloud; however, they only found an SSE when items tested had the same color of words during encoding and retrieval during the test phase, including foils randomized to color, and challenged previous SSE findings. These inconsistent findings prompt the question of what could have contributed to the variability in results, underscoring the urgent need for further research. The distinctiveness theory should explain why singing leads to better memory benefits. MacLeod and Bodner (2017) describe the production effect as a consequence of saying the words aloud and then silently. The added distinctiveness from involving sensory-motor features leads to an increase in memory traces and benefits recall. One explanation might be that singing enhances familiarity or recognition more than recollection. Withridge et al. differentiate that singing may improve a general sense of familiarity without improving memory recall. In their study, participants consistently recognized items in the singing condition as more familiar without improving their overall recall ability compared to the reading-aloud group.

In an ongoing debate, empirical studies with insufficient power to identify minor effects have failed to replicate, otherwise known as the replication crisis in Psychology, particularly for older empirical research studies. Small participant studies, like Quinlan and Taylor's, often inflate effect sizes, making it difficult to understand the magnitude of their effect sizes. Furthermore, they claimed that increased distinctiveness between stimuli arises from singing being a more unusual activity, which could serve as a cue for later retrieval. This suggests that not the mere addition of sensory features enhances memory traces but rather how uncommon the nature of the task is. Hence, singing is a less familiar task when compared with reading aloud, and reading silently is even less common, resulting in a hierarchical decrease in improved memory recall enhancement.

 

Motor and Auditory Integration

Quinlan and Taylor (2013) argued that singing involves more distinct sensorimotor elements when trying to explain the relative distinctiveness of their explanation of production effect without manipulating or measuring these elements in their work. The authors may have based their assertion on the Sensorimotor Scaling Hypothesis, which supports their explanation, asserting that the more auditory and sensorimotor elements will lead to a more distinctive memory trace. However, they arrived at their assessment merely by intuitively understanding how these elements might explain the difference in verbal production. The process of singing and reading aloud involves similar sensory-motor features. Nevertheless, Withridge et al. (2024) implied that no prior theoretical basis suggests that SSE should outperform reading aloud compared to singing. Moreover, the benefits of singing may have resulted from using retrieval heuristics that are atypical to standard production paradigms, such as mentally recreating the sensory and motor aspects of singing during recall. While Quinlan and Taylor found benefits from context-based cues like rhythm and timbre during singing or environmental consistency of singing during the encoding and retrieval phase, which might have aided memory recall, these heuristics are not always present, which may also explain the inconsistency in SSE findings.

 

Methodology Differences 

Whitridge et al. (2024) demonstrated how methodological factors such as color matching during the encoding and retrieval phase were the most critical factors for SSE in previous studies, as confirmed by Quinlan and Taylor (2013). Such a methodological practice might have allowed participants to use atypical retrieval strategies. At the same time, the absence of such color matching resulted in inconsistent replication of SSE and diminished superiority of singing to reading-allowed items. Witridge et al. not only replicated Quinlan and Taylor but also conducted a meta-analysis of the current body of work on this topic to provide a more robust empirical test of this phenomenon. They observed an SSE, smaller than initially believed and primarily driven by studies that incorporated color-matching. When color-matching was absent, the SSE did not provide additional benefits for memory performance, indicating the study designs' pivotal role in ensuring this effect emerges. 

Fortin et al. (2012) suggested that additional sensory-motor features increase stimuli distinctiveness, subsequently enhancing memory traces and improving recollection and recognition, considered a marker of episodic memory.Whitridge et al. examined the relationship between recollection and familiarity and, more importantly, their relationship for enhancing SSE. They found that singing and reading aloud have a symbiotic relationship with familiarity. However, their findings produced no convincing evidence to support previous research that singing demonstrated any advantage in recollection over reading aloud. Furthermore, these findings challenge Fortin et al.'s hypothesis that additional sensorimotor features such as pitch and rhythm quintessentially lead to enhancing memory traces and memory during singing production.

However, if the Sensorimotor Scaling Hypothesis, driven by the added sensory inputs, would be universally applicable, Whitridge et al. should have been able to demonstrate such an advantage of singing over reading aloud in their data.

 

Conclusion

While singing can enhance memory in specific contexts—such as when paired with color-matching or other retrieval cues, its superiority over reading aloud remains inconsistent. The Sensorimotor Scaling Hypothesis predicts improved memory from increased sensory input but does not fully explain the Singing Superiority Effect (SSE) variability.

So, wait before you start soundproofing your apartment or dormitory in preparation for your next exam. Based on the latest meta-analytical review, the jury is still out on whether singing boosts memory more than reading aloud or studying silently. The benefits depend more on the context in which you study. While singing could help in some situations, it likely depends on how we encode information rather than just adding a melody.

 

References

 

1) Conway, M. A., & Gathercole, S. E. (1987). Modality and long-term memory. Journal of Memory and Language, 26(3), 341–361.https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-596X(87)90118-5\

 

2) Forrin, N. D., MacLeod, C. M., & Ozubko, J. D. (2012). Widening the boundaries of the production effect. Memory & Cognition, 40(1), 1046–1055. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13421-012-0210-8

 

3) Hopkins, R. H., & Edwards, R. E. (1972). Pronunciation effects in recognition memory. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 11(4), 534–537. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-5371(72)80036-7

 

4) MacLeod, C. M., & Bodner, G. E. (2017). The Production Effect in Memory. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 26(4), 390-395. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963721417691356

 

5) Quinlan, C. K., & Taylor, T. L. (2013). Enhancing the production effect in memory. Memory (Hove, England), 21(8), 904–915. https://doi.org/10.1080/09658211.2013.766754

 

6) Whitridge, J. W., Huff, M. J., Ozubko, J. D., Bürkner, P. C., Lahey, C. D., & Fawcett, J. M. (2024). Singing Does Not Necessarily Improve Memory More Than Reading Aloud. Experimental psychology, 71(1), 33–50. https://doi.org/10.1027/1618-3169/a000614