The rhythmic mind: how music tempo shapes creative self-efficacy through cognitive flexibility

Background Creative self-efficacy (CSE) is a critical predictor of creative achievement. While background music is ubiquitous in contemporary work and learning environments, the psychological mechanisms through which music tempo influences CSE remain poorly understood, and empirical findings have been inconsistent. Methods A three-group between-subjects experimental design was employed. A total of 402 undergraduate students were randomly assigned to fast-tempo music, slow-tempo music, or no-music control conditions. Participants completed the Alternative Uses Task (AUT) while listening to their assigned auditory condition. Cognitive flexibility and CSE were measured immediately following the task. The moderated mediation model was tested using PROCESS Macro (Model 14) with 5,000 bootstrap resamples. Results Fast-tempo music significantly enhanced cognitive flexibility compared to the silent control condition, whereas slow-tempo music did not. Cognitive flexibility significantly predicted CSE. The indirect effect of fast-tempo music on CSE through cognitive flexibility was significant. More importantly, prior creative experience moderated the flexibility-to-CSE pathway. The indirect effect was statistically significant for individuals with high prior creative experience, but not for those with low prior experience. In the supplementary AUT analyses, fast-tempo music was associated with higher fluency but not with higher originality. Conclusion These findings reveal that fast-tempo music was associated with enhanced CSE indirectly through cognitive flexibility among individuals with a rich history of creative mastery. This dissociation suggests that fast tempo may be linked primarily to the quantity or speed of idea generation rather than to the novelty of the ideas produced. For those with low prior creative experience, the same auditory environment did not yield a statistically significant indirect effect; this should not be interpreted as evidence that the pathway is absent.