The phantoms of the opera—Stress offstage and stress onstage
Bibliographic record
Abstract
During opera performance singers deliver vocally demanding roles, follow a conductor, portray emotions of a musical work, act, dance, and engage with costumes, sets and props before an audience. Hence, opera performance is a stressful experience. This study examined different types of stress experiences by measuring the trajectories of 10 opera trainees’ heart rate variability (HRV) during two performances, covering onstage and offstage periods. We explored connections between HRV, self-reported stress measures, and expert-rated difficulty of the performed roles. We discovered that opera trainees had lower HRV and thus experienced greater physiological stress, while onstage compared to offstage periods. In contrast, when asked about performance specific stress, opera trainees self-reported that they felt more nervous when they were offstage. This disconnect between physiological measurement and psychological self-assessment suggests that there are two relevant types of stress for opera performance: psychological stress, which is felt more keenly offstage, and physiological stress, which is greater onstage. Patterns of association between HRV and self-reported measures suggest that HRV is linked to general (not performance-specific) stress. Patterns between self-reported measures suggest that music performance anxiety relates to trait anxiety. Our results indicate specific targets for possible interventions for stress management in opera singers.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".