| Literature DB >> 24550856 |
Aaron Williamon1, Lisa Aufegger1, Hubert Eiholzer2.
Abstract
Musicians typically rehearse far away from their audiences and in practice rooms that differ significantly from the concert venues in which they aspire to perform. Due to the high costs and inaccessibility of such venues, much current international music training lacks repeated exposure to realistic performance situations, with students learning all too late (or not at all) how to manage performance stress and the demands of their audiences. Virtual environments have been shown to be an effective training tool in the fields of medicine and sport, offering practitioners access to real-life performance scenarios but with lower risk of negative evaluation and outcomes. The aim of this research was to design and test the efficacy of simulated performance environments in which conditions of "real" performance could be recreated. Advanced violin students (n = 11) were recruited to perform in two simulations: a solo recital with a small virtual audience and an audition situation with three "expert" virtual judges. Each simulation contained back-stage and on-stage areas, life-sized interactive virtual observers, and pre- and post-performance protocols designed to match those found at leading international performance venues. Participants completed a questionnaire on their experiences of using the simulations. Results show that both simulated environments offered realistic experience of performance contexts and were rated particularly useful for developing performance skills. For a subset of 7 violinists, state anxiety and electrocardiographic data were collected during the simulated audition and an actual audition with real judges. Results display comparable levels of reported state anxiety and patterns of heart rate variability in both situations, suggesting that responses to the simulated audition closely approximate those of a real audition. The findings are discussed in relation to their implications, both generalizable and individual-specific, for performance training.Entities:
Keywords: distributed simulation; music education; performance anxiety; performance science; virtual reality
Year: 2014 PMID: 24550856 PMCID: PMC3912881 DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00025
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Psychol ISSN: 1664-1078
Figure 1The performance simulator, showing backstage (right) and stage (left) areas. Backstage, CCTV footage of the virtual audience or audition panel is shown on a wall-mounted flat-screen monitor, and controls for operating the audience and audition panel are located on a nearby computer. On stage, a ceiling-mounted beamer projects the life-sized audience or audition panel onto a wall, with spot-lights and loudspeakers on both sides. Stage curtains (not shown) frame the projected image.
Figure 2(A) A still from the CCTV footage displayed in the backstage area of the recital simulation. (B) A still of the virtual audience projected in the stage area, framed by spot-lights, loudspeakers, and (not shown) stage curtains.
Figure 3Stills of the virtual audition panel (A) responding positively, (B) showing displeasure, and (C) stopping the audition.
Descriptive statistics for questions in the Simulation Evaluation Questionnaire completed after performing in the recital and audition simulations.
| 1. The simulation (including backstage, the audience, spot-lights, etc.) provided a realistic experience | 4.0 | 3.42 | 1.08 | ns | 4.0 | 3.67 | 0.50 | 0.005 |
| 2. The steps involved in the simulation (i.e., waiting backstage, walking on stage, etc.) closely approximated a real performance situation | 4.0 | 3.75 | 0.75 | 0.013 | 3.5 | 3.50 | 1.00 | ns |
| 3. I behaved and presented myself in the same way as I do in a real performance | 4.0 | 3.42 | 1.24 | ns | 4.0 | 3.67 | 0.98 | 0.046 |
| 4. The interaction with the backstage manager was realistic | 4.5 | 4.00 | 1.20 | 0.018 | 4.0 | 3.92 | 1.24 | 0.029 |
| 5. The CCTV footage in the backstage area was realistic | 3.0 | 2.83 | 1.40 | ns | 4.0 | 3.58 | 1.56 | ns |
| 6. The sounds heard in the backstage area were realistic | 3.5 | 3.42 | 1.08 | ns | 4.0 | 4.00 | 1.12 | 0.028 |
| 7. The decor of the backstage area (including signage and lighting) was realistic | 4.0 | 3.67 | 0.49 | 0.005 | 3.5 | 3.42 | 1.08 | ns |
| 8. The transition from backstage on to stage was realistic | 4.0 | 4.08 | 0.90 | 0.008 | 4.0 | 3.67 | 0.98 | 0.046 |
| 9. The interaction with the audience in the performance space was realistic | 3.5 | 3.42 | 1.08 | ns | 3.5 | 3.42 | 1.08 | ns |
| 10. The spot-lights in the performance space were realistic | 4.5 | 4.08 | 1.08 | 0.012 | 3.5 | 3.42 | 1.37 | ns |
| 11. The curtains in the performance space were realistic | 3.0 | 3.33 | 0.98 | ns | 3.0 | 3.17 | 0.93 | ns |
| 12. The simulation could be used to enhance my musical skills | 4.0 | 4.25 | 0.86 | 0.005 | 4.0 | 4.25 | 0.75 | 0.004 |
| 13. The simulation could be used to enhance my technical skills | 5.0 | 4.33 | 0.98 | 0.005 | 4.5 | 4.33 | 0.77 | 0.004 |
| 14. The simulation could be used to enhance my communicative/presentational skills | 3.0 | 3.58 | 1.31 | ns | 4.0 | 4.17 | 0.83 | 0.006 |
| 15. The simulation could be used to help me manage performance anxiety and/or other performance problems | 4.0 | 4.17 | 0.93 | 0.007 | 4.0 | 4.33 | 0.77 | 0.003 |
| 16. The simulation could be used to highlight strengths in my performance | 4.5 | 4.33 | 0.88 | 0.004 | 4.0 | 4.17 | 0.71 | 0.004 |
| 17. The simulation could be used to highlight weaknesses in my performance | 4.5 | 4.25 | 0.88 | 0.006 | 4.5 | 4.42 | 0.66 | 0.003 |
| 18. I would recommend the simulation to people who are interested in developing/refining their performance skills | 5.0 | 4.33 | 1.10 | 0.005 | 4.5 | 4.42 | 0.66 | 0.003 |
| 19. I would recommend the simulation to people who are interested in teaching performance skills | 5.0 | 4.42 | 1.16 | 0.004 | 4.5 | 4.33 | 0.77 | 0.004 |
Ratings for each statement were given from 1 = “strongly disagree” to 5 = “strongly agree.” The significance level p is shown for comparisons of the median rating for each question against a hypothesized median of 3, the scale mid-point, using the Wilcoxon signed-rank test.
Figure 4The mean LF/HF ratio (with .