Performance anixety among dancers and associations with perfectionism
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The present study investigated performance anxiety among ballet and modern dancers and associations with two types of perfectionistic tendencies. Sixty-four (n = 64) dancers from Iceland, The United States, The United Kingdom, Canada, Germany, Belgium, Sweden, Denmark, Norway, The Netherlands and Switzerland originally participated. The majority of participants were female (71%). The mean for performance anxiety (M = 11.9, SD = 5.16) was similar to the diagnostic criteria value of The Mazzarolo Music Performance Anxiety Scale that is estimated at 11.0. A functional analysis of variance revealed that maladaptive perfectionism (evaluative concerns) predicted performance anxiety F(15) = 2.38, p = 0.01 while adaptive perfectionism (strivings) was unrelated to performance anxiety. Additionally, the background variables gender and age were not related to performance anxiety while an increase in dancing experience positively predicted performance anxiety F(1) = 4.87, p = 0.033. Results indicated that performance anxiety had a moderate positive correlation with the maladaptive type of perfectionism r (59) = .39, p = .002. Study limitations and the potential of Acceptance and Commitment Therapy based interventions are discussed. \n\tKeywords: dance, performance, state anxiety, perfectionism, sport
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 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 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".