What music to listen to while you work

There is a vast amount of advice online about what music to listen to while you work. The advice is mostly wrong, or at least mostly more confident than the research supports. The research is interesting, more useful than most of the advice, and worth knowing.

Three findings to start with. Lyrics distract more than instrumental music does, especially for verbal tasks. Familiar music distracts less than unfamiliar music. Silence beats most music for tasks that require complex verbal reasoning. Each of these is worth a closer look.

Lyrics versus instrumentals

The cleanest piece of work here is a 2011 paper by Nick Perham and Joanne Vizard in Applied Cognitive Psychology, titled “Can preference for background music mediate the irrelevant sound effect?” The finding, in short, is no. Participants who reported loving the music they were listening to performed roughly the same as participants who hated it. What predicted performance was whether the music had lyrics.

The mechanism is straightforward. Verbal working memory has limited capacity. Lyrics enter that workspace whether you invite them or not. If your task also requires verbal working memory, you now have two streams of language competing for the same space, and your performance drops.

This is why people often describe loving a song while working but finding their actual work slower. Both things can be true. The brain is genuinely enjoying the music. The brain is also losing capacity it needs for the work.

Implication, observational rather than prescriptive. If your work involves writing, reading, problem-solving in words, or following verbal instructions, instrumental music tends to interfere less than music with lyrics. This holds even if the lyrics are in a language you do not speak fluently, though the effect is smaller.

Familiar versus unfamiliar

A 2002 paper by Adrian Furnham and Lisa Strbac found that introverts and extraverts respond differently to background music in cognitive tasks, but a finding that holds across temperaments is that familiar music interferes less than unfamiliar music. The brain has, in effect, already done the work of predicting where familiar music will go. Unfamiliar music demands ongoing prediction. Prediction is cognitive work.

This is the empirical case for listening to the same album on repeat for a focused work session. The album you have heard a hundred times will fade into the background more efficiently than the new release you have been meaning to check out. Save the new release for a walk.

Elizabeth Margulis, in her 2014 book On Repeat: How Music Plays the Mind, makes a related observation. Repetition is what makes music music. The brain treats a heard-many-times piece very differently from a new piece, and the difference is exactly the cognitive load the repetition has lifted.

When silence wins

For tasks that demand complex verbal reasoning (drafting a long argument, untangling a logical proof, reading and integrating a difficult text), silence consistently beats music in the literature. A 2017 review by Jennifer Lehmann and Tina Seufert, looking specifically at music in learning contexts, concluded that the strongest predictor of music interfering with learning was the complexity of the learning task. Easier task, more room for music. Harder task, less.

This may sound discouraging if you are someone who has always associated quiet music with deep thinking. The research is not saying you cannot do that. The research is saying that on average, for cognitively demanding verbal work, the trade is real and tilts toward silence.

A caveat. Repetitive, predictable, well-known instrumental music can still support attention by reducing the salience of environmental distraction. The relevant trade-off is between two different costs. Choose the one you are paying more carefully.

A note about lo-fi beats

Lo-fi hip-hop, the YouTube genre that runs on twenty-four-hour livestreams of softly looping instrumentals over rain sounds, has become a study soundtrack for a generation. The claim that lo-fi is scientifically optimal for focus is not supported by any specific research. There is no Perham-style paper showing that lo-fi outperforms other instrumental options.

What lo-fi does have going for it is that it tends to be instrumental, repetitive, predictable, and at a moderate tempo. The genre accidentally satisfies most of what the research supports for background music for non-verbal tasks. The genre is not magic. It is broadly well-designed for the use case.

The same conditions are met by classical piano, ambient electronic music, instrumental jazz, film scores you have heard before, and a number of other options. The relevant variable is predictable, lyric-free, mid-tempo instrumental music. Any genre that fits those parameters works similarly. Lo-fi happens to fit them well.

A short practical summary

If your task is verbal and demanding, try silence first, then quiet instrumental as a fallback. If your task is repetitive, easy, or mostly manual, music with or without lyrics is fine and may help. If you are going to listen to music while doing serious cognitive work, pick something you have heard a hundred times. Save the new releases for the parts of the day when discovery is the point.

None of this is mysterious. None of it requires a special playlist or a paid subscription. It does, however, require taking the research more seriously than most focus-music advice does.

If you’d like a few of these letters delivered each month, you can subscribe here.