MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4413781726 · doi:10.7202/1119022ar

Analyse des facteurs prédictifs de l’anxiété de performance musicale perçue d’élèves de 9 à 12 ans

2025· article· fr· W4413781726 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Catherine Tardif, Hélène Boucher, Valérie Thomas, Julie Lane

Bibliographic record

VenueRevue musicale OICRM · 2025
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicDiverse Music Education Insights
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cette recherche vise à identifier les facteurs qui pourraient le mieux prédire la fréquence des manifestations d’anxiété de performance musicale (APM) déclarées par des élèves du primaire inscrits à un projet pédagogique particulier en musique-études. Pour ce faire, 164 élèves d’une école primaire spécialisée en musique ont participé à l’étude. Les participants ont rempli des questionnaires mesurant l’appréciation de leur expérience d’apprentissage de la musique (MLSS et QESPP) et leur APM (MPAI-A). L’analyse de régression multiple révèle que l’échelle du sentiment d’efficacité personnelle (SEP) et le genre sont des prédicteurs significatifs de l’APM. De plus, un SEP élevé est associé à une moins grande manifestation d’APM chez les garçons, suggérant un effet protecteur du SEP plus fort chez eux que chez les filles. Enfin, l’étude met en évidence l’importance de considérer un ensemble de facteurs pour mieux comprendre l’apparition des manifestations d’APM chez les jeunes musiciens.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.216 · 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 designObservational
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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevue musicale OICRM→Same topicDiverse Music Education Insights→French-language works237,207→