Swipe om te navigeren naar een ander artikel
A study was conducted to test the effect of two different forms of real-time visual feedback on expressive percussion performance. Conservatory percussion students performed imitations of recorded teacher performances while receiving either high-level feedback on the expressive style of their performances, low-level feedback on the timing and dynamics of the performed notes, or no feedback. The high-level feedback was based on a Bayesian analysis of the performances, while the low-level feedback was based on the raw participant timing and dynamics data. Results indicated that neither form of feedback led to significantly smaller timing and dynamics errors. However, high-level feedback did lead to a higher proficiency in imitating the expressive style of the target performances, as indicated by a probabilistic measure of expressive style. We conclude that, while potentially disruptive to timing processes involved in music performance due to extraneous cognitive load, high-level visual feedback can improve participant imitations of expressive performance features.
Annett, J. (1969). Feedback and human behavior. Penguin Education.
Cemgil, A. T., Desain, P., & Kappen, B. (2000). Rhythm quantization for transcription. Computer Music Journal, 24(2), 60–76. CrossRef
Chandler, P., & Sweller, J. (1991). Cognitive load theory and the format of instruction. Cognition and Instruction, 8(4), 293–332. CrossRef
Cheung, K.-W., Yeung, D.-Y., & Chin, R. (1998). A bayesian framework for deformable pattern recognition with application to handwriten character recognition. IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, 20(12), 1382–1388. CrossRef
Clark, E. F. (1987). Categorical rhythm perception: an ecological perspective. In A. Gabrielsson (Ed.), Action and perception in rhythm and music. Royal Swedish Academy of Music.
Clark, E. F. (1993). Imitating and evaluating real and transformed musical performances. Music Perception, 10(3), 317–341.
Corbetta, M., Miezin, F. M., Dobmeyer, S., Shulman, G. L., & Petersen, S. E. (1991). Selective and divided attention during visual discriminations of shape, color, and speed: functional anatomy by positron emission tomography. Journal of Neuroscience, 11(8), 2383–2402. PubMed
Craik, F. I. M., Govoni, R., Naveh-Benjamin, M., & Anderson, N. D. (1996). The effects of divided attention on encoding and retrieval processes in human memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 125(2), 159–180. PubMed
Dahl, S. (2000). The playing of an accent—preliminary observations from temporal and kinematic analysis of percussionists. Journal of New Music Research, 29(3), 225–233. CrossRef
Engle, R. W. (2002). Working memory capacity as executive attention. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 11(1), 19–23. CrossRef
Escartí, A., & Guzmán, J. F. (1999). Effects of feedback on self-efficacy, performance and choice in an athletic task. Journal of Applied Sport Psychology, 11(1), 83–96. CrossRef
Evans, J. (1960). An investigation of teaching machine variables using learning programs in symbolic logic. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Pittsburgh.
Hoffren, J. (1964). A test of musical expression. Council for Research in Music Education, 2, 32–35.
Hoppe, D., Sadakata, M., & Desain, P. (2006). Development of real-time visual feedback assistance in singing training: a review. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 22, 308–316. CrossRef
Juslin, P., Friberg, A., Schoonderwaldt, E., & Karlsson, J. (2004). Feedback learning of musical expressivity. In A.Williamon (Ed.), Musical excellence. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
Kent, R. D. (1974). Auditory-motor formant tracking: a study of speech imitation. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 17, 203–222. PubMed
Knill, D. C., Kerstern, D., & Yuille, A. (1996). Introduction: a Bayesian formulation of visual perception. In D.C. Knill & W. Richards (Eds.), Perception as Bayesian inference (pp. 1–21). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
McPherson, G. E., & Schubert, E. (2004). Measuring performance enhancement in music. In A. Williamon (Ed.), Musical excellence. Oxford University Press.
Paas, F., Renkl, A., & Sweller, J. (2003). Cognitive load theory and instructional design: recent developments. Educational Psychologist, 38(1), 1–4. CrossRef
Pennington, M. C. (1999). Computer-aided pronunciation pedagogy: promise, limitations, directions. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 12(5), 427–440. CrossRef
Person, R. S. (1993). The subjectivity of musical performance: an exploratory music-psychological real world enquiry into the determinants and education of musical reality. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Huddersfield, Huddersfield, UK.
Repp, B. H. (2000). Pattern typicality and dimensional interactions in pianists’ imitation of expressive timing and dynamics. Music Perception, 18(2), 173–211.
Repp, B. H., & Williams, D. R. (1985). Categorical trends in vowel imitation: preliminary observations from a replication experiment. Speech Communication, 4, 105–120. CrossRef
Repp, B. H., & Williams, D. R. (1987). Categorical tendencies in imitating self-produced isolated vowels. Speech Communication, 6, 1–14. CrossRef
Rosch, E. (2002). Principles of categorization. In Levitin, D. J. (Ed.), Cognitive psychology. MIT Press.
Rossiter, D., Howard, D. M., & DeCosta, M. (1996). Voice development under training with and without the influence of real-time visually presented feedback. Journal Acoustical Society of America, 99(5), 3253–3256. CrossRef
Sadakata, M., Hoppe, D., Brandmeyer, A., Timmers, R., & Desain, P. (2008). Real-time visual feedback for learning to perform short rhythms with expressive variations in timing and loudness. Journal of New Music Research, 37(3), 207–220. CrossRef
Semjen, A., & Garcia-Colera, A. (1986). Planning and timing of finger tapping sequences with a stressed element. Journal of Motor Behavior, 18, 287–322. PubMed
Sweller, J. (1988). Cognitive load during problem solving: Effects on learning. Cognitive Science, 12(2), 257–285. CrossRef
Sweller, J. (1994). Cognitive load theory, learning difficulty, and instructional design. Learning and Instruction, 4(4), 295–312. CrossRef
Tait, M. (1992). Teaching strategies and styles. In R. Cowell (Ed.), Handbook of research on music teaching and learning (p. 525–534). New York:Schirmer.
Temperley, D. (2007). Music and probability. MIT Press.
Thorpe, C. W., Callaghan, J., & van Doorn, J. (1999). Visual feedback of acoustic voice features: New tools for the teaching of singing. Australian Voice, 1(5), 32–39.
Walker, R. (1987). The effects of culture, environment, age, and musical training on choices of visual metaphors for sound. Percetpion and Psychophysics, 42, 491–502. CrossRef
Welch, G. F. (1985). A schema theory of how children learn to sing in tune. Psychology of Music, 13, 3–18. CrossRef
Welch, G. F., Himonides, E., Howard, D. M., & Brereton, J. (2004). Voxed: Technology as a meaningful teaching aid in the singing studio. In Proceedings of the conference on interdisciplinary musicology (cim04).
Welch, G. F., Howard, D. M., & Rush, C. (1989). Real-time visual feedback in the development of vocal pitch accuracy in singing. Psychology of Music, 17, 146–157. CrossRef
Wickens, T. D. (2002). Elementary signal detection theory. Oxford University Press.
Wilson, P. H., Lee, Callaghan, J., & Thorpe, C. W. (2008). Learning to sing in tune: does real-time visual feedback help? Journal of Interdisciplinary Music Studies, 2(1–2), 157–172.
- Learning expressive percussion performance under different visual feedback conditions