Neuroscientists reveal how jazz improvisation shifts brain activity

Recent findings in neuroscience provide new evidence that musical creativity is not a static trait but a dynamic process involving the rapid reconfiguration of brain networks. By monitoring the brain activity of skilled jazz pianists, an international research team discovered that high levels of improvisational freedom rely less on introspection and more on sensory and motor engagement. The study suggests that the brain shifts its processing strategy depending on how much creative liberty a musician exerts. These findings were published in the Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences.

Creativity is a complex human ability often defined as the capacity to produce ideas that are both novel and appropriate for a given context. One scientific view proposes that creativity emerges from a balance between constraints and freedom, or between what is predictable and what is surprising. Musical improvisation offers an ideal setting to study this balance because it requires musicians to generate new material spontaneously while adhering to specific structural rules.

Previous neuroimaging studies have identified various brain regions associated with improvisation. These include areas linked to motor planning, emotional processing, and the monitoring of one’s own performance. However, most of these studies have looked at brain activity as a static average over time. This approach can miss the rapid fluctuations in neural connectivity that characterize real-time creative performance. The authors of the current study sought to map these fleeting changes to understand how the brain adapts to different levels of improvisational constraints.

“My main motivation for the study was a long-standing scientific challenge about how to study creativity in real time,” said study author Peter Vuust, the director of the Center for Music in the Brain and professor at Aarhus University and the Royal Academy of Music Aarhus.

“Much research looks at finished products or abstract tasks, but fewer studies capture the process of creating something new as it unfolds in the brain. Musical jazz improvisation offers a rare opportunity because it is spontaneous yet structured—musicians create novel material moment-to-moment while still following certain rules relating to harmony, rhythm and structure.”

“So the gap was twofold: 1) A need for ecologically valid models of creativity (real behavior, not artificial lab tasks). 2) Limited knowledge about how whole-brain networks dynamically reconfigure during different levels of creative freedom.”

“In the Center for Music in the Brain we have the unique capability of studying brain activity as it unfolds in real time, using state-of-the-art brain imaging combined with whole-brain modelling methods which allow for understanding the shifting brain network activity over time,” Vuust explained.

The study included 16 male jazz pianists with significant experience in the genre. All participants were right-handed and had no history of neurological disease. On average, the musicians had over ten years of dedicated jazz practice. The researchers utilized functional magnetic resonance imaging to record brain activity. This imaging technique measures changes in blood flow to infer which areas of the brain are most active.

To allow the musicians to play while inside the MRI scanner, the team used a custom-designed, non-magnetic fiber optic keyboard. This 25-key instrument was positioned on the participants’ laps. This setup allowed the musicians to play with their right hand while listening to audio through noise-canceling headphones.

The experimental procedure involved playing along with a backing track of the jazz standard “Days of Wine and Roses.” The backing track provided the bass and drums to create a realistic musical context. The participants performed under four specific conditions. First, they played the melody of the song from memory. Second, they played an alternate melody from a score sheet they had briefly studied.

The third and fourth conditions introduced improvisation. In the third task, musicians improvised variations based on the melody. In the fourth and final task, they improvised freely based solely on the song’s chord progression. This design created a gradient of creative freedom, ranging from strict memorization to unconstrained expression. Each condition lasted for 45 seconds and was repeated multiple times.

The researchers analyzed the musical output using digital tools to assess complexity. They measured the number of notes played and calculated the “entropy” of the melodies. In this context, entropy refers to the unpredictability of the musical choices. Higher entropy indicates a performance that is less repetitive and harder to predict.

The behavioral results showed the expected relationship between freedom and musical complexity. As the task became less constrained, the musicians played significantly more notes. The condition involving free improvisation on the chord changes resulted in the highest number of notes and the highest level of entropy. The analysis also revealed that during free improvisation, the musicians tended to use smaller intervals between notes. This suggests a dense and rapidly moving musical style.

To analyze the brain imaging data, the researchers employed a method known as Leading Eigenvector Dynamics Analysis. This advanced analytical technique focuses on the phase-locking of blood oxygenation level-dependent signals. It allows scientists to detect recurrent patterns of functional connectivity that may only last for short periods. This is distinct from traditional methods that assume brain connectivity remains constant throughout a task.

The imaging results revealed five distinct brain states, or “substates,” that appeared with varying frequency across the conditions. One of these states was associated with the brain’s reward system. It included the orbitofrontal cortex, a region involved in sensory integration and pleasure. This reward-related state was more active during all playing conditions compared to when the musicians were resting. This finding aligns with the idea that playing music is inherently rewarding, regardless of whether one is improvising or playing from memory.

“A simple takeaway is: Creativity in music is not located in a single ‘creative center’ of the brain,” Vuust told PsyPost. “Instead, it emerges from rapid shifts between multiple brain networks—including those involved in movement, hearing, reward, attention, and self-reflection, depending on the improvisational taks: whether you are trying to improvise on the melody or the chord changes.”

A distinct pattern emerged when the researchers compared the improvisation tasks to the memory tasks. Both the melodic and free improvisation conditions significantly increased the probability of engaging a brain state dominated by auditory and sensorimotor networks, as well as the posterior salience network. These regions are critical for processing sound, coordinating complex movements, and integrating sensory information.

The increased activity in auditory and sensorimotor areas suggests that improvisation places a heavy demand on the brain’s ability to predict and execute sound. Jazz musicians often report “hearing” lines in their head immediately before playing them. The data supports the notion that improvisation is a highly embodied activity. It relies on a tight coupling between the auditory cortex and the motor system to navigate the musical landscape in real time.

Perhaps the most distinct finding appeared in the condition with the highest level of creative freedom. When musicians improvised freely on the chords, the researchers observed a decrease in the occurrence of a brain state involving the default mode network and the executive control network. The default mode network is typically active during introspection, mind-wandering, and self-referential thought. The executive control network is usually involved in planning and goal-directed behavior.

The reduced presence of these networks during free improvisation implies a shift in cognitive strategy. To generate novel ideas rapidly without getting stuck in evaluation or planning, the brain may need to suppress these introspective systems. This aligns with the concept of “flow,” where an individual becomes fully immersed in an activity and self-consciousness recedes. The musicians appeared to rely less on internal planning and more on external sensory feedback.

“Another key message is that greater freedom in improvisation changes how the brain is organized in the moment,” Vuust said. “When musicians improvise more freely, their brains rely more on auditory–motor and salience systems (listening, acting, reacting), and less on heavily controlled, evaluative networks. In everyday terms: creativity often involves letting go of over-analysis while staying highly engaged and responsive.”

The study indicates that creativity involves a flexible reconfiguration of neural resources. Moderate improvisation may require a balance of structure and freedom. However, highly unconstrained improvisation appears to demand a surrender of executive control in favor of sensory-motor processes.

“The effects are not about small local activations but about system-level reconfigurations—which networks are more or less likely to appear over time,” Vuust explained. “Practically, this means the significance lies in patterns and probabilities, not single brain spots lighting up.”

“For musicians and educators, the implication is that training creativity may involve balancing structure and freedom, rather than maximizing one or the other. For neuroscience, it shows that dynamic brain-state analysis can reveal meaningful differences even within subtle variations of the same task.”

As with all research, there are limitations to consider. The sample consisted exclusively of male jazz pianists. This homogeneity limits the ability to generalize the results to female musicians or those from other musical traditions. The creative demands of jazz are specific and may differ from those in other arts, such as painting or writing.

Another consideration is the nature of the “novelty” observed. While the free improvisation condition produced the most unpredictable music, the study did not assess the aesthetic quality of these performances. Higher entropy does not necessarily equate to better music. Previous research suggests that listeners often prefer a balance of complexity and familiarity. The most unconstrained performances might be the most cognitively demanding but not necessarily the most pleasing to an audience.

“Another possible misinterpretation is to assume that more novelty automatically equals more enjoyment or value,” Vuust noted. “The study notes that pleasure and complexity often follow an inverted-U relationship—too much unpredictability can reduce perceived enjoyment.”

Future research could address these gaps by recruiting a more diverse group of participants. Comparing jazz improvisation with other forms of real-time creativity could reveal which brain dynamics are universal and which are specific to music. The authors also suggest that future studies could investigate how these brain states relate to subjective feelings of inspiration or enjoyment. Understanding the link between neural dynamics and the quality of the creative product remains a key goal for the field.

The study, “Creativity in Music: The Brain Dynamics of Jazz Improvisation,” was authored by Patricia Alves Da Mota, Henrique Miguel Fernandes, Ana Teresa Lourenço Queiroga, Eloise Stark, Jakub Vohryzek, Joana Cabral, Ole Adrian Heggli, Nuno Sousa, Gustavo Deco, Morten Kringelbach, and Peter Vuust.