MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2608879535

Music Therapy Handbook

2016· article· en· W2608879535 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Ruth Marchant James

Bibliographic record

Venue˜The œAustralian journal of music therapy · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicMusic Therapy and Health
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMusic therapyPsychologyPublishingMusicologyScope (computer science)PsychotherapistArtPedagogyComputer scienceLiterature
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Wheeler, B. L. (Ed.). (2016) Music therapy handbook. New York, NY: The Guilford Press.I was excited to be approached about writing this review, as I thought it would be a good way to refresh my knowledge and understanding of music therapy.I had high expectations for this handbook when I discovered that it was edited by Barbara Wheeler, as I valued the Clinical training guide for the student music therapist (Wheeler, Shultis, & Polen, 2005).The Music therapy handbook, however, is different from the Clinical training guide. I view the Clinical training guide as a simple and practical book that can guide students and beginning music therapists in the way they plan and deliver music therapy. In contrast, I think this handbook would be better treated as a reference book. It is over 500 pages long, with 37 chapters. There are 53 contributors, and I was pleased to see that there were contributors from a range of countries including the United States, Canada, Australia, Denmark, Norway, and Sweden. The book is divided into three parts: overview and issues, orientations and and clinical applications.Part I comprises 10 chapters covering the history and foundations of music therapy, how music is processed in the brain, music therapy methods, and consideration of important issues such as cultural diversity, ethics, developing rigorous assessments, growing the body of research, and providing evidence-based treatment. I was a little disappointed that the first chapter, focusing on music therapy as a profession, only includes two paragraphs on the international scope of music therapy. Additionally, some of the information focuses on United States legislation, while survey data on work settings and client groups is also limited to music therapists from the United States.Some of the highlights from this part of the book include diagrams to show brain processes involved in perceiving music, and a table identifying a range of different assessment tools drawn from music therapy literature. There is also a table that identifies systematic reviews and meta-analyses published up to 2012. I am aware that there have been some important systematic reviews published since then, such as an updated Cochrane review on music therapy for people with autism spectrum disorder (Geretsegger, Elefant, Mossler, & Gold, 2014). Nevertheless, I think this table could be a useful resource to quickly identify sources of research evidence for music therapy for various clinical populations.Part II of the handbook, Orientations and approaches, also has 10 chapters. The first four are concerned with theoretical orientations, including psychodynamic humanistic cognitive-behavioural and developmental approaches. They discuss the history of these theoretical tenets, and their applications in music therapy. The rest of Part II is concerned with specific music therapy models and including NordoffRobbins Music Therapy, the Bonny Method of Guided Imagery and Music, Analytical Music Therapy, Neurologic Music Therapy, Community Music Therapy, and Music Therapy in Expressive Arts. Many of these chapters feature short clinical case examples, which are an engaging way to demonstrate each approach in action. The chapter on NordoffRobbins Music Therapy refers to specific musical excerpts, which are available as an audio download.I was disappointed that there was not a chapter on the Benenzon model of music therapy (Wheeler et al., 2012), even though it was acknowledged that this is an influential model in Latin America and parts of southern Europe. I felt that the inclusion of this approach could have helped to increase the scope and relevance of this handbook for music therapists outside of North America. …

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.663
Threshold uncertainty score0.966

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0350.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.111
GPT teacher head0.344
Teacher spread0.233 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue˜The œAustralian journal of music therapySame topicMusic Therapy and HealthFrench-language works237,207