New Issue: Orbital Catastrophe Ahead? Read Now

Background Music Jams Memory in Older Adults

People of all ages find background sound distracting, but noise appears to impede memory formation in older people. Erika Beras reports

Illustration of a Bohr atom model spinning around the words Science Quickly with various science and medicine related icons around the text

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


If you’re a senior citizen, music in the background may be distracting. But for younger people—experts at multitasking—it’s apparently no big deal. That’s according to a study in the journal Gerontologist. [Sarah Reaves et al, Turn Off the Music! Music Impairs Visual Associative Memory Performance in Older Adults]

Researchers recruited 103 people—half between the ages of 18 and 30, the others between 60 and 75. The volunteers then took part in memorization exercises and a drill where they had to quickly match a photo of a face with the same face in an array of unfamiliar faces.  Some participants did the exercises in silence. Others performed the tasks while listening to white noise or instrumental jazz, blues, classical and electronic music.  

Across age groups, the consensus was that the background sound was distracting – but only older people’s performance suffered when the noise was present.  

For example, older folks who did the face-matching with music playing remembered 10 percent fewer faces. The result matches up with the theory that the elderly are less able to filter out what’s called “distracting task-irrelevant information.” In this case the distracting info might have interfered with them storing the facial image in the first place—much less impeding their ability to remember it a short while later.

—Erika Beras 

[The above text is a transcript of this podcast.]

Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism

Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.

When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.

Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber

Thank you,

Jeanna Bryner, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe