Music Performance Anxiety and Perceived Benefits of Musical Participation Among Older Adults in Community Bands
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of the current study was to examine music performance anxiety and self-reported reasons for participation among members of older adult community bands. We asked 35 New Horizons Band members aged 65+ questions about their musical experience in face-to-face interviews, after which we administered two questionnaires: the Performance Anxiety Inventory for Musicians and the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory. We found a statistically significant difference in performance anxiety between participants suffering from trait anxiety (also called general anxiety) and those who did not. Utilizing the Novelty, Unpredictability, Threat to the Ego, and Sense of low control recipe (NUTS) for stress as a framework, we performed interview and questionnaire analyses that revealed that participants were concerned with issues associated with novelty, unpredictability, and lack of control in contexts of public performances (e.g., new pieces, lack of preparation, or challenging repertoire selected by the conductor). Participants perceived threats to their ego (such as feeling exposed, judged) as a major contributing factor of music performance anxiety. Participants reported the perceived benefits of musical involvement outweighed their negative (i.e., stressful) aspects.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".