MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2886126392

The Benefits of Musical Creation: Improving Education and Encouraging Innovation

2014· article· en· W2886126392 on OpenAlexaffabout
Martin Guerpin, Jonathan Goldman

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicDiverse Music Education Insights
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCreativityVocabularyPsychologyMusicalMusicalityRealmValue (mathematics)Music educationActive listeningPedagogyMathematics educationVisual artsComputer scienceLinguisticsSocial psychologyPolitical scienceArtCommunication
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Led by Tim Brady, the Digital Content Initiative (DCI) recently commissioned a research document in order to give academic and scientific support to their arguments as to the value of specialized music. This document includes an analysis and bibliography of a wide range of studies that have been published on the importance and benefits of music and creativity. CNMN members are welcome to freely use this document, and these arguments, when helping to support the cause of creative new music in Canada. Discussion A number of recent studies (see Bibliography below) have demonstrated the value and benefits which can be generated by initiatives supporting musical creation. These positive effects can be perceived in at least three domains: cognitive, social and ethical. For each of these, the contributions of musical creativity extend far beyond the realm of music. 1. The benefits of musical creativity in the cognitive domain: an adjuvant to the development of knowledge and skills A number of studies conducted in the field of cognitive musicology have brought to light the role of learning and practising music in the acquisition of spatial-temporal skills (Hetland 2000). More generally, a number of studies have demonstrated that students who are regularly exposed to creative music, through listening or playing, attained higher-than-average results in all spheres of activity (Johnson and Memmot 2006). Other papers revealed a higher level of aptitude for learning foreign languages or a more effective acquisition of vocabulary in foreign languages (Bygrave 1995) in students who practise music regularly. At the primary, secondary and post-secondary levels, this routine practice also encourages the capacity for concentration and memorization (Schellenberg 2004). In the fields of education and scientific research and in the working world, listening, studying and practising music also promotes inventiveness and creativity (Boulez and Connes 2011). Such findings can be explained by the different types of skills required by listening exercises (particularly through the linking of our faculties of imagination and reason) and by musical practice (coordination, listening to others). In short, exposure to creative music allows individuals to learn how to learn. A number of studies have reported on this function of creative music, which is capable of nurturing in turn the imagination and creativity of those either listening to it or practising it

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.013
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.021
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.070

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0130.021
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.007
Scholarly communication0.0100.009
Open science0.0010.011
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.029
GPT teacher head0.236
Teacher spread0.207 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicDiverse Music Education InsightsFrench-language works237,207