In summary, without exception, mean scores for the three personality scales, trait anxiety, neuroticism and extraversion in the present st udy, exceeded the norm scores for males and females. The only score that was not significantly higher than the norm score w as the m ale neuroticism score. Neuroticism and trait-anxiety were correlated. Overall, higher trait-anxiety and neuroticism, and lower extraversion, were associated with a more negative view of M PA and its effects on performing. I n the prese nt study, neuroticism was the only personality variable where scores between males and females, and classical and j azz participants were significantly different, with fem ale scores and classical scores being higher. Thus, the high level of neuroticism, and the high level of trait- anxiety demonstrated in the classical fem ales, may mean that classical females in the present study were p articularly vulnerable to M P A. There was no interaction between gender and m usic genre for any personality v ariable.
S tudy 1 : Results and Discussion
Rema in ing EPQ-R Short Scale, scales (Psychotic ism, Lie)
A p sychoticism scale was included as part of the standard EPQ-R Short Scale used in the present study. However, there are no reported theoretical links between psychoticism and MPA or any other variables investigated in the present study. Thus, no systematic analysis of p sychoticism was conducted. No p articipants scored above 2/12 on the lie scale. Therefore no participants were excluded from the study on the basis of their lie score.
Experience: Prepar ation and p erforming h i story
Experience is the second group of factors influencing MPA. This section and the following section on situational variables should be read together, as there is considerable overlap in the content. For example, it would be expected that the le uel of preparation would impact differently on performance in different types of situation.
Prep a rat ion
This section analyses results to investigate the following four questions:
1 . I s technical preparation (i. e . , skill-mastery) related to cognitive-affective factors and age?
2. Is non-technical p rep aration (e .g., relaxing p nor to performing) related to cognitive- affective factors and age?
3 . I s the level of technical and/or non-technical p reparation related to MPA?
Tech n ical preparation 1 refers to practising and developing skills that are required to perform the piece. The mean score for technical preparation for important
perform ances was 3 . 79 (SD = 0.92). The level of technical preparation was correlated with: p ositive self talk during the p erformance (r = . 549, p < . 0 1) ; enjoyment in solo lessons (r = . 449, p < . 0 1) ; enjoyme nt in group lessons (r = . 446, p < . 0 1) ; and the belief that important situations produced the best p erformances (r = . 568, p < .00 1).
1 Technical preparation w a s measured by asking p articipants to rate their level o f p reparation for
However, technical preparation was not correlated with percep tions of previous performance standards (1' = . 1 76, ns) . Nor was technical preparation correlated with age (r = - . 080, p = . 634, ns). The leve l of technical preparation was not
significantly correlated with M -PAS scores (r = -. 1 14, ns) . Overall, higher levels of
technical p reparation were associated with positive, rather than negative cognitive affective factors.
Non-technical preparation refers to anything p articipants did in preparation for
important performances, apart from practising. Almost a quarter of the participants (23%) s aid they did not do any non-technical prep aration; 38% s aid they relaxed (which included listening to m usic and reading) ; and 20% said they exercised. The remainder of participants ( 19%) did not respond to this question. The time spent on these activities w as not indicated, and nor did participants report on any perceived benefits the activities might have had for them.
There was a significant negative correlation between non-technical preparation for important performances and the belief that anxiety has negative e ffects on performing (r = -. 400, p. = . 0 1 6) . There w as no correlation between non-tech nical preparation and the belief that anxiety has p ositiue effects on performing. Non technical p reparation was significantly correlated with enjoyment when p erforming solo for friends (r = . 368, p = . 021), and when playing solo for peers (r = . 3 1 8, p = . 048) . There were no significant correlations between non-technical preparation and: the presence of positive or negative self-talk; beliefs regarding situations where best performances occurred; or p erceptions of own performance standards . A negative correlation was revealed between non-technical preparation and age (r = - . 322, p = .049) . The level of non-technical p reparation was negatively correlated with M-PAS scores (r = -.32 6, p = . 043). Results generally indicate that lower levels of non-technical preparation are associated with negative beliefs about p erforming and MPA, and with higher M-PAS scores.
Perform ing h istory
This section analyses results to investigate the following two questions:
1 . Is p erforming experience (measured by length time a s a performer), related to
S tu dy 1 : Results and Discussion
2. Is the length of time as a performer related to MP A levels, as measured by the M -PAS scale?
For the purposes of the p resent study, 'length of time as a p erformer' is defined as the year of study at the conservatorium. This definition w as selected as there is considerable variety among the learning backgrounds of the students by the time they arrive at the conservatorium. However, the conservatorium programme requires stude nts to perform on a regular basis, and thus learning to perform can be quantified by using p articipants' year of study at the conservatorium. While this may be a somewhat imprecise definition of length of time as a performer, it appears to be the most appropriate method of quantifying p erformance experience in the circumstances.
Instinctively, it may appear that longer periods of training as a musician should result in more highly develope d skills that enable coping w ith public performance . The participants' year of study at the conservatorium w as correlated with: the number of years learning to play or sing (r = . 4 1 2 , p < . 0 1) ; total performance experience (r = .365, p < . 05); e xperience as a soloist (r = . 349, p < . 05) ; and highest music pass (r = . 326, p < . 05). However, not one of the variables mentioned above (including the year of s tu dy at the conservatorium) was significantly related to anxiety levels in any of the 1 2 solo or group situations investigated in the present study. Although mean M -PAS scores consistently reduced from the first year of study (M = 73. 75, SD = 2 1 . 20) , to the second year (M = 67. 13, SD = 1 7 . 72), to the third year (M = 58.65; SD = 1 5 . 53), a one-way between-groups ANOVA test did not reveal a significant difference for year of study.
Gender and m usic genre
Two-way between-groups ANOVAs were conducted for technical preparation for important performances, and for non-technical preparation for important p erformances, by gender and music genre. There was a significant main effect for technical preparation for m usic genre [F ( 1 , 35) = 4 . 7 9 1 , p . < .035, T]2 = . 1 2] , with higher mean scores reported by classical participants. There were no other main or interaction effects for gender or music genre .
Summary of experience factors
I n summary, higher levels of technical preparation were associated with positive self-talk during the p erformance and a belief that best performances could be p roduced in important situations. Higher levels of non-technical preparation were
associated with lower MP A. There was a trend toward lower MPA as p erformance
e xposure increased in relation to years of study at the conservatorium.
S ituational variables
Situational variables is the third group of factors i nfluencing MPA.
This section analyses results to investigate the following four questions:
1 . Does anxiety vary from solo to group performing?
2 . D oes anxiety vary according to the type of p erform ance-situation (i.e., level of audience scrutiny)?
3 . Does enjoyment vary from solo to group performing?
4. Does enjoyment v ary according to the type of performance-situation (i. e . , level
of audience scrutiny)?
Anxiety associated with group and solo perfo rmances in different types of situations
A two-way ANOVA test w as conducted to investigate the variation in anxiety levels, dependent on the type of performance (i.e., solo/group), and the type of situation (i.e. , practising, lesson, performing for peers, for friends, any non-judged p erformance, any j udged performance. Any non-judged performance could be a concert, for example; any judged performance could be an audition, examination or competition.) For this question, 39 participants were e ach asked 12 questions, p rovi ding up to 468 separate answers if all participants p rovided answers for all q uestions. Thus, SPSS required a restructured data set to carry out this analysis . A statistically significant main effect was revealed for the type of performance (i. e . , solo o r group) [ F ( 1 , 4 5 3) = 3 5 . 897, P = . 00 1 , partial 11 2 = 0. 073] . Except for practice situations, participants experienced higher levels of anxiety in solo performances, compared with performi n g as part of a group (see Figure 4. 4 below).
Study 1 : Results and Discussion
There was also a statistically significant main effect on anxiety for performing in different types of situations [F (5, 453) = 45.462, p < .001, 1']2 = 0.334] . Post-hoc comparisons using the Tukey HSD test to compare overall mean anxiety scores for the type of situation, revealed significant differences from practice situations
(M = 1.43, SD = .818) to a sub-set of three situations, specifically: performing for friends (M = 2 . 15, SD = 1 . 1 27)] ; playing during lessons (M = 2.44, SD = 1. 123); and performing in non-judged situations (M = 2.48, SD = 1 . 147)] . There was a significant difference from this subset to performing for peers (M = 3. 15,
SD = 1.239), and a significant difference from performing for peers to performing in a judged situation (M = 3.82, SD = 1 . 197). There was a significant interaction effect for the type of performance (solo/group) and the type of situation
[F (5, 453) = 2.911, p. < .01, 1']2 = 0.031] .
In summary, participants experienced the highest levels of anxiety in performance contexts that potentially exposed them to the highest levels of scrutiny and judgement. The relationship between anxiety and the level of exposure is demonstrated in Figure 4.4: anxiety is higher for solo versus group performances in all situations except for group practice, where there is exposure to the scrutiny of others in the group, compared with the solo practice situation.
� 0 u en c ro ID � Figure 4.4: 4.5 4.0 3.5 3.0 2.5 2.0 1 .5 o Solo 1 .0 o Group Judged Practice Friends Lesson Non-judged Peers
Performance situation
Mean anxiety scores by performance situation and type of performance (i.e. group/solo). Scale: l(low) -5 ( high).
Anxiety by gender and music genre
A series of two-way between-groups ANOVA tests were conducted to explore the impact of gender and music genre on anxiety levels for solo and group performances in the six different types of situations. There were no main effects
for gender. There was a significant main effect for music genre for non-judged solo
performances only [F ( 1 , 35) = 9.071, P = . 005, p artial 112 = . 206] , with lower mean
scores reported for jazz participants.
Two-way between-groups ANOVA tests were conducted to investigate the impact of gender and music genre on perceptions of how important the occasion should be for best performances to occur, and on beliefs about the optimal level of anxiety that might facilitate best performances. There were no significant main or interaction effects.
Enjoyme n t assoc iated with group and solo performances in d ifferen t types of situations
A two-way between-groups ANOVA test w as conducted to investigate the variation in enjoyment levels, dependent on the type of performance (i. e . , solo/group) and the type of situation (e. g. , judged, non-j udged, for friends, for peers). There was no significant interaction between the type of performance and the type of situation, for e njoyment.
A statistically significant mam effect w as revealed for the type of performance [F ( 1 , 446) = 16.930, p < . 00 1 , p artial 112 = 0.037] . Without exception, participants
experienced higher levels of enjoyment in group situations than in solo situations (see Figure 4 . 5 below).
There was also a statistically significant m ain e ffect on e njoyment for the type of
situation [F (5, 446) = 1 5 . 338, p < .001, partial 112 = 0. 1 47] . Post-hoc comparisons
using the Tukey HSD test indicated that mean scores for e njoyment by type of
situation, fell into two bands: Ca) performing in a j udged situation (M = 3. 1 7,
SD = 1 . 1 74) and performing for peers (M = 3 . 3 9, SD = 1 . 1 3 7), and Cb) all other
situations: lessons CM = 3 . 86, SD = 1 . 0 1 8) ; practice CM = 4.14, SD = . 899) ;
performing for friends CM = 4 . 08, SD = . 997) ; and p erforming in non-j udged
Study 1: Results and Discussion
In summary, with one exception, participants experienced the greatest enjoyment in performance contexts that potentially exposed them to the lowest levels of scrutiny and judgement. The exception to this pattern was the enjoyment level compared with anxiety level, for performing in any non-judged situation (e.g. , an informal concert). In this situation, participants demonstrated a certain tolerance of anxiety. Enjoyment was always higher when playing in a group, compared with a solo situation.
Overall, mean scores for enjoyment were slightly higher for males than females, and slightly higher for classical participants than for jazz participants. However, differences were not statistically significant for gender or for music genre.
(J'J � 0 U (J'J C CIJ Cl> � 5.0 4.5 4.0 3.5 3.0 o Solo 2.5 g Group Judged
Non-judged Practice Friends Lesson Peers Type of perform ance situation
Figure 4.5: Mean enjoyment scores by performance situation and type of
performance (i.e. group / solo). Scale: 1 00w) -5 (high).