Performance Preparation, Anxiety, and the Teacher. Experiences of Adolescent Pianists
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to examine the experiences of adolescent pianists in their private lessons and solo performances in regard to concert preparation and music performance anxiety ( mpa ). A particular focus was placed on the student-teacher relationship and the potential role of teachers in students’ preparation, experience, and anxiety in performance situations. 62 piano students completed questionnaires pertaining to their private lessons, teacher, and performance experiences, as well as two inventories—one pertaining to self-esteem and the other on music performance anxiety. Results indicate that self-esteem and practice are significant predictors of mpa , with self-esteem having the most notable effect. Almost half of the participants reported feeling nervous in their lessons at least some of the time. Most students noted that their teachers encourage them to perform; however, only half reported that their teachers address performance preparation issues. Less than half were reported to discuss memorization strategies or management of mpa with students, or to hold practice-performance classes. Implications for music educators and future research directions are discussed.
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) | 0.002 | 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".