Passage 1 openly condemns a controversial phenomenon that Passage 2 views as scientifically inaccurate but harmless.

Passage 1 questions the reasoning behind a popular practice that Passage 2 earnestly advocates.

Passage 1 expresses doubts about the validity of the results of an influential experiment that Passage 2 views with some legitimacy.

Passage 1 criticizes the public's acceptance of a widespread viewpoint while Passage 2 examines the rationale behind the viewpoint.

Because the brain is plastic and changing, it is likely that music would enhance intellectual ability.

The Mozart Effect is based on unsubstantiated and unproven assumptions about cognitive functions.

Although the Mozart Effect may have some accuracy, research on the phenomenon is incomplete.

The Mozart Effect can be expanded on to include musical genres besides classical that have cognitive benefits.

had manipulated data to make it appear that classical music was responsible for improved intelligence.

was based on incomplete and unreliable research that used outdated technology to record its results.

yielded results that were only dependent on specific circumstances determined by the experiment.

was inaccurate since it did not take factors like age and long-term cognitive change into consideration.

Lines 12-14 ("Scores ... composition")

Lines 15-18 ("The study ... ability")

Lines 19-21 ("While ... imagination")

Lines 26-29 ("The Mozart ... newborns")

basic.

humble.

insignificant.

limited.

compare the results of a spatial reasoning test after listening to pop music and to classical music.

introduce the author's hypothesis that listening to other genres of music could also have benefits.

point out the absurdity of improving cognitive ability through listening to music.

provide a lighthearted digression in an otherwise pessimistic discussion.