Self-regulation and music learning: A systematic review
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
Recent research into how individuals achieve their musical goals has been enriched by studies investigating music practice through the lens of self-regulation, or the goal-orientated planning, cyclical adaptation, and reflection of an individual’s thoughts, feelings and actions. The article aims to review the available empirical evidence in order to identify the relationship between processes contained within Zimmerman’s (2000) model of self-regulation and specific music learning variables. It also attempts to discover how self-regulatory behavior relates to both general music instruction and interventions designed to enhance self-regulation. Findings indicate weak, positive relationships with the variables of interest, but suggest self-regulation instruction is the most strongly related variable. The discussion proposes that future research may benefit from investigations of self-regulation within a broader spectrum of musicians and an exploration of participant-driven understandings of self-regulation theory.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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