Effects of Performer Attractiveness, Stage Behavior, and Dress on Evaluation of Children's Piano Performances
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to determine whether selected nonmusical attributes of sixth-grade pianists would affect ratings of their performances. Twenty pianists (10 girl and 10 boys) were videotaped. They and their performances were rated by 123 musically trained evaluators. Members of the visual group viewed a videotape with the sound turned off. They rated pianists on appropriateness of dress, stage behavior, and physical attractiveness. These ratings were the basis for grouping students as being high or low on each of these three attributes. Audiovisual and audio group members rated musical performance on five test items. Results revealed support for the existence of a bias: although high pianists were rated higher than low pianists under the audio condition for all three attributes, the differences between them often were significantly greater under the audiovisual condition than under the audio-only condition. In addition, and unlike finding of earlier studies, videotaped performances were not rated higher than audiotaped performances. Also, female judges were more lenient than male judges. Finally, male and female pianists were affected differently by nonmusical attributes for about half of the test items.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it