The efficacy of rhythmic training for enhancing language and reading skills in children: a systematic review

The human brain has the inherent ability to extract temporal regularities from sensory input and to synchronize with them. Language production and comprehension rely heavily on this fundamental ability. Rhythm-based training programs designed to boost language functions, especially across childhood, aim to facilitate the brain's capacity to capture regular patterns in verbal streams. This systematic review critically evaluates the evidence on the efficacy of rhythmic training in improving linguistic skills in typically developing children as well as in children with language or reading difficulties.

Following PRISMA guidelines, 21 studies published between 2009 and 2024 were selected, which assessed performance in linguistic tasks after training, in comparison with a control group or condition.

Twenty studies reported improved linguistic performance, mainly in phonological awareness and reading fluency (speed and accuracy). In particular, music-based rhythmic programs, which included activities such as producing movements synchronized to instruments, yielded effects comparable to validated phonological or reading training, with some studies also reporting gains in language-related cognitive and perceptual domains. Similarly, language-based rhythmic protocols, which provided verbal materials synchronized with instruments and primarily focused on children with dyslexia, reported improved reading skills. Furthermore, rhythmic priming studies demonstrated that even brief (17-second) exposures to regular rhythms enhanced subsequent syntactic processing compared to irregular rhythms. Interestingly, the effects emerged even in the absence of melodic or motor components.

Overall, the findings of the reviewed studies highlight the potential of rhythmic training as a versatile tool for supporting language and reading development in children, including those with developmental language disorder or dyslexia. However, several methodological issues limit their interpretability. Before well-founded conclusions can be drawn, there is a substantial need to improve methodological rigor. Future studies should refine control conditions, standardize the range and types of outcome measures, and examine long-term effects.