Does Practice Make Perfect2

7/29/2019 Does Practice Make Perfect2

1/19

Does practicemake perfect?Curuent theory and researeh oninstrumental music practice

Edited byHarald Jorgensen and Andreas C. LehmannNorges musikkhogskole NMH-publikasjoner 1997:1


2/19

The effects of individual differences inmotivation, volition, and maturationalprocesses on practice behavior of younginstrumentalistsChristian HarnischmacherUniversitY of Cologne'CologneIntroductionpracticing is a fundamental activity of musicians. It is known that this activity hasto start at an early age fa careerofprofessionalnstrumentalists s supposedo be,riti*ut"ty "o.."".f.ri Increase of quality of instrumental playing is not only basedon an early start, but also on the quality of practice. Experts generally agre-ehatmotivation, starting age, prior "*p"ti"t'", supervision' and metaknowledgeofp"u"tl"" influence h" qirrtiiy of practice,of ub-expertse.g',Lehmann, n press, oran overview;Harnischma.hlr, 1993).The presentstudy will show to what extentthe influence of variables related to motivation and volition have on the practicing ofsub-experts, includingchildrenandadolescents'Tomyknowledge'therearenostudies on volitional influenceson the practicing of music students during childhoodand adolescence.t will also be investigated if the explanation of individualdifferences n practicebehavior is more accuratelypredicted through motivation andvolition or influences of maturational changes. Therefore, I will discussinstrumental practice and its relation to maturational processes,motivation' andvolition. The present study continuesthe dxplorative approachof a previous studyon instrumental practi.irrg b"ha.'ior of chilJren and adolescents Harnischmacherlggb). This study analyzeJwritten essayson the topic "My fractice" of 100 Germanstudents from private music studios'similarly, the present study attempts to describe nstrumental practice as aneveryday action t".g. Hulu*, iggs, H-arnischmacher,1993). From a theoreticalperspective, he categoryof action describesonly one aspectof human behavior (e.g.'Ribke, 1985).under normal circumstances,nstrumentalists do not only use a singlep"u*i." method, but a whole complex epertoire of practice methods' The structureof the practice methods can be described n larger interplay of individual methods'Expe*s distinguish different phasesof practice,of which the first phasecorrespondsto the maintenance of performance evel (warm-up, scales,

echnical exercises,7L


3/19

72 Harnischmacheretudes, repetition of repertoire pieces), while the second phase is focused on skill-building and the acquisition of concert repertoire (acquiring new literature, newinterpretation of learned repertoire pieces; see Harnischmacher, 1993). The presentstudy tries to explain the use of corresponding methods, and it investigates morecomplex connections among those different aspects of children's and adolescents'practice.

One important explanation for differences in the practice behavior relies onmaturational processes (Manturzeweska, 1990). Musicians tend to develop usefulpractice strategies relatively late, and the length of practice time varies at differentstages of life (Harnischmacher, 1993; Sloboda, Davidson, Howe, & Moore, 1996).Harnischmacher (1994a, 1995) found. four developmental stages in the practice ofchildren and adolescents. During the first stage, the "Activity Phase" , whenstudents are approximately 8 to 10 years old, practice is characterized by the playfulcomponent as a self-generated form of action. In the stage of "Adoption" (age 11 to12 years), the child adopts an externally imposed work ethic. Also, it starts to thinkabout the causality and goal-orientation of practice. During the stage of"Assimilation" (age 13 to 14 years) practice becomes a chore that is integrated intothe daily schedule. Here, the playful component of practice serves as relaxation. Inthe stage of "Identification" (age 15 to 18 years), the student reflects on the self-orientation of practice, and the increased quality and economy of practice plays amore important role. In the coulse of the stages, the initial and only playfulcomponent vanishes, yet it remains in the "social game" of playing with others.

It remains open to rvhat extent these stages describe a qualitativecharacteristic of the development of practice specifically, or rather if these changesare the result of more general maturational processes.Therefore, the present studyinvestigates the possible contribution of age and starting age (age at whichinstrumental training began) on instrumental playing (e.g., Ericsson et al. 1993,Sloboda et a1., 1996, Lehmann, in press). Only those practice procedures will beconsidered that were previously found to be relevant for the practice behavior ofchildren and adolescents(Harnischmacher 1994a, 1995).

Motivational and volitional processesare likely to predict and explain practicebehavior to some degree. Motivation in a narrow sense describes the reflection onand choice of a goal for action based on an "expectancy-value" model (e.g.,Heckhausen, 1939). Different motivational settings will be described below in thecontext of practice, distinguishing a real situation (performance preparation), aperceived situation (goal orientation, external action distraction), and a disposition(self-concept abilities of instrumental playing). Finally, I will outline dispositionalaspects of volition pertaining to instrumental music practice.

Motivation depends primarily on the concrete situation (e.g., Kuhl &Beckmann, 1994). The distinction between practicing as performance preparation asopposed o practicing without performance preparation is a goodpredictor of practicetimes. Music students increase their practice times when practicing for an upcomingperformance (Harnischmacher, 1993,p. 168). Thus, an upcoming performance seemsto have an extrinsically motivating effect.

In addition to objective characteristics of the situation, subjective perception ofsituational aspects play an important role (Eckes, 1990; Forgas, 1983). This wasinvestigated in the previous study (I{arnischmacher, 1995). The cross-sectionalanalysis of 100 student essays showed affective-evaluative aspects and particularly


4/19

Effects of individual differences T3action promoting or action inhibiting aspects of practice, which is consistent withthe general claims by King and Sorrentino (1983) for goal-oriented situations. In theaction promoting category of goal orientation, students listed their short- and. ong-term goals of practice. In order of frequency of occurrence, practice is mainlyoriented towards ensemble playing (60%), followed by the musical pieces (26%), t]neinstrumental teacher (10%) and rarely directed toward the instrum.ent (4%). Thecategory of external action distraction captures negative influences on practicewhich are attributed to certain environmental conditions. The students did not seethemselves as being responsible, but rather as falling "victim" to externalinfluences. In this category of external action distractions, students named closerelatives (47%), followed by (disliked) musical pieces (2To/o),competing leisureactivities (20%), and finally the weather (10%) as influences that impinge on theirpractice. I suggest to view goal orientation and external action distraction ashabitual perceptions of the practice situation.Practicing in the presence of listeners imposes a specific motivational problem.Children and adolescents report that the "supervision" of practice (mainly by themother) can be perceived as either stimulating or irritating (e.g., Brokaw, 1988;Slobodaet al., 1991; Barry & McArthur,1994; Harnischmacher, 1995).According toHeckhausen (1989) the extrinsic motivation of an affirmative feedback may possiblycorrupt the extrinsic motivation in these children. Furthermore, it must beconsidered whether or not listening actually reaches the criterion for supervision(e.g.,Barry,7992) or of a "live-in-teacher" (e.g.,Lehmann, in press). This presentstudy asks if the total number of practice days with listeners influence thesituational cognition and the practice at all.

In addition to being dependent on the real or perceived situation, motivation isalso likely to be influences by dispositional attributions (Heckhausen, 1989).According to Gollwitzer (1988), the motivational mental state includes the decisionbetween alternative actions and unterminated motivational tendencies (e.g.,Atkinson & Birch, 1970) which are due to individually perceived competencies andensuing expectations. A motivationally relevant construct is the self-concept ofabilities (cf. Krampen, 1987). The domain-specifi.c self-concept of instrumentalplaying abilities, defrned as "cognitively and aflective-evaluatively impartedreflection regarding one's individual competence for playing an instrument"(Harnischmacher, 1993, p. 52; also Svengalis, 1978; Austin, 1g88). Among otherthings, it was shown that music students have differently shaped self-concepts ofmusical abilities which are in agreement with their identity goals (e.g., becoming asoloist, an instrumental teacher, or a music educator). Instrumentalists with a morepositive self concept practiced more intEnsely than instrumentalists with a lesspositive self-concept; and after a few days of rest instrumentalists with a morepositive self-concept already realized their decreasing playing skills(Harnischmacher, 1993).Motivational processesdo not imply that the action is indeed followed throughto the intended goal (Heckhausen, 1989). According to Kuhl & Beckmann (1gg4), theinitiation of an action, the persistence and overcoming of inner action obstacles canbe explained through volitional processes.The authors distinguish the disposition ofaction from that of state orientation. Simplified, action-oriented subjects have iteasy considering and choosingbetween different action tendencies and initiating anaction until the intended goal is reached. Conversely, state oriented subjects are


5/19

74 Harnischmacher

excessively hesitant, ponder when considering different action tendencies, and areself-centered. In connection with instrumental practice, action-oriented musicstudents, tend to plan more and possessa well-structured method of practice. Also,they tend to use more of their time for practice and practice more regularly thanstate oriented students (Harnischmachet, 1993).Action vs. state orientation and the self-concept of instrumental playingabilities can not only be related to volition and motivation, but these variables canalso be understood as personality-related (e.g. Harnischmacher, 1994b, KuhI &Beckmann, 1994). By this, I do not mean flobal, stable dimensions of personality,but specific constructions which to a large extent are based on fundamental learningprocesses.

Concluding, the present study suggests that motivation and volition have aninfluence on practice behavior of children and adolescents in addition tomaturational processes.Maturational processesare implied in age and starting ageof instrumental playing. Here, motivation is considered situational (performancepreparation vs. no performance preparation) as well as dispositional (self-conceptofmusical abilities), while volition includes a disposition towards action or stateorientation.

Note that the claim is not that motivational or volitional influences practicebehavior as a while (Harnischmacher, 1993), but only relevant behavior patterns ofpractice (e.g.,Forgas, 1976). The influence of motivational and volitional variables isprobably more obvious the less familiar, mote restructured, or more stressful thepractice situation is for the student (e.g., Krampen, 1987, for a general frndingoutside music; Land, 1979; Dews & Williams, 1989, for music students).

MethodInuentoriesIn order to understand instrumental practice as an everyday behavior, an extensivesurvey study was conducted. The inventories concerned practice methods, amountsof practice, and socio-demographicvariables. Items regarding practice methods wereformulated based on the findings of a recent qualitative study (Harnischmacher,1995). The other questionnaires consisted ofa short form ofthe Self-Concept Scale ofInstrumental Abilities (Harnischmacher, 1993), adapted for children andadolescents. Also, scales for Goal Orientation of Practice, External ActionDistraction, and Action Control scale (ACS 90/ Hakemp 90) by Kuhl and Beckmann(1994)were administered.The questionnaires were pilot tested with music students in order to test face-validity, the students' understanding ofthe questions and their readiness to answer.As a result, some questions were rephrased. The final form of the questionnaire wasadministered in a pre-test involving 44 students from different music studiosbetween the ages of 9 and 14. Since instrument-specifrc selection effects and effectsof confounding variables had to be expected (Harnischmacher, 1995), only woodwinclplayers were allowed to participate. The observations from this pilot study(Harnischmacher, 1995), namely that children and adolescents are willing to reportabout their practice very candidly, were generally confirmed.


6/19

Effects of individual differences 75

Subjects

One hundred and fifty-one woodwind students (main instrument) from five Germanmusic studios participated in the main survey. The questionnaire asked thestudents to give information regarding their practice behavior during the previousweek. The return rate for the questionnaires was 657o(N = 142). With 87Vo emalesand only 13Vomales, the gender distribution was problematic. In order to excludepossible selection biases and third variable effects, an arbitrary sample of 111females (N=111) between I to 20 years with an average age of about 14 years (13.62)was examined. All other questionnaires were discarded. On average, the subjectshad their first music lessons on their main instrument at an age of 1,0.1years, withan age range from 6 to 77 years. As regards the distribution of instruments played,82 of the young musicians were learning the flute, 16 the clarinet, 8 the recorder,and 5 were playrng the oboe.ResultsReliability and discriminant ualidity of the nstrumentsThe tests of reliability and discriminant validity yielded first results for the scaleforSelf-Concept f Instrumental Ability (SCI),External Action Distraction (EAD),GoalOrientation of Practice(GOP),and subscales f the ACS 90 (1. action orientationafter failure [AOF], 2. action orientation in planning actions [AOP], 3. actionorientation n centeredactivity IAOC]).SeeTable3.1.

Table 3. 1Reliability scores (internal consistency)r meansr and standard deviationsfor unselected and selected (*) Items for selfconcept of instrumentalabilities (SCI), goal-orientation of practice (GOP)' exterrral actiondistraction (EAD), and action control scales (AOF' AOP, AOC).

Subscale SCI GOP EAD AOF AOP AOC

Items 13 10 10x 12 12Mean 22.8 l7.5 10 4'2 5Standarddeviation 4.86 4.81 3.91 3.26 2.82Crontraehsloha 0.86 0.76 0.71 - 0.81 0.7

8t r6.270.880.71

Despite the shortnessof the scales,acceptable eliability values, with Cronbach'salpha between0.70 and 0.86, were found.The selectedtem pool of EAD and AOCscales ontainedonly items with coefficients f more han 1.75.The next secaionwill demonstrate the discriminant validity of person-orientedscales scl, AoF, AOP, AOC) through the use of correlations,seeTable 3.2.. Thecorrelations confrrmed the expected connectionbetween SCI and action controlscales AOF,AOP,AOC).


7/19

Harnischmacher76Table 3'2

Correlat ionsoftheself-conceptscaleofinstrumentalabil i t ies(SCI)withaction control scales (AOF' AOP' AOC)'SCI AOF AOP

Theposit ivecorrelat ionbetweenAoFandAoPscalesisalsomentionedbyKuhland Beckmann (rgsa). ii " ,rusutilr" correlation between AOC and the other ActionControl scales i* ,.-u"kubl". Jitt"u the AOC

scale also functions as control variableforexcessiveactivism,i tcannotbeexcludedthattheAoPandAoFvaluesinthepresent case describ"^;;;i;-a"L""" ot rrolatility (activism) (cf. KuhI & Beckmann,1gg4). The low correlations suggests u g"rr.ru11y ,uii.fu.to"y discriminant validity oftheindiv idualscales. Itwasfurtherexaminedtowhatextent thevariablesofsituational perception (EAD, GOP) were related to aspectsof the real situati'on (e'g''numberofpracticedays,sib l ings) 'Therewasanalmostzerocorrelat ionbetweenthenumber of practice days with listeners-and the external action distraction (r = -'09'n.s.) ,andbetweenrr, r* t " tofpract icedayswi thl is tenersandgoalor ientation(r=-.004). External action distracfion did not significantly correlate with the number ofsiblings (living t"g"th;;t1;-= -.22, n.s.). NsJ, separate correlations of relevant items(Nos. 1, 4, 7, g)of tfre daD scale (see Appendix') with the nu1-ber of davs practicedwith listeners did not show signifrcant correlations (r < 0.162, n.s')' There was asigni.ficant correlation betwgen item no. 1 ('other people disturb me duringpractice") and the number of siblings living together (r = '32'-p < 0'001)' In general'the low correlations confirm the theoret"i.ui u.,o-ption that the two variables(GoP,EAD)du,""ib"ahabitual izedsituationalperceptionandsubjectivecomponents,whichareonlypart ial lyrelatedto^..objective, 's i tuationalcharacteristics (e.g.,p,*"ti"" days with listeners' number of siblings at home)'

Releuant pr actice activitiesThef i rs ts tepexaminedwhichpract icemethod'swererelevantforthepresentproblem.I tshouldberememberedthatthesupposed. inf luencesdonotaf fectpracticebehaviorasawhole(Harnischmacher, lggs).Kruskal-Wall is 'snon-parametric analyses of variance were used to test for significant (p < '05) differencesin the distributions of the answer categories (always, freqrleltly, rarely, never) ofthe scores rom scl, cop, Bao, and action control scales(AoF, AoP, AOC)'Table 3.8 shows significant difierences of situational perception (SP) andpersonality dispositions (Pp) for the. difi;;;;t practice methods (see discussion ofTable 6 for the "ri;;i duestiopnalre statem^ents that correspond

to the shortdescriptions). of the 15 questionndire items on practice methods' 9 practice methodsdiffered significantly (p


8/19


succession; c) I practice etudes; (d) At first, I practice everything slowly; (e ) I closelyIook at the music before practicing; (f ) I practice forte and piano in a piece right fromthe beginning.

Table 3.3Differences among personality dispositions (PD) and situationalperception (SP) for individual practice methodsPracticemethods SP PD corr:chi2 p vaiueAOClaying famil. piecesScalesNew piecesWarming upMetronomeRaising tempoRaising tempoCorrecting errorsCorrecting errorsImprovisingImprovisingDividing in sections

EADGOPEADGOPGOPGOPGOPEAD

AOCSCISCI

7.954972.77288.35348.797410.95789.16839.35209.21338.86769.90918.9894

.o47.005.039.042.012.027.025

.026.031.019.029

15.3634 .001

Dividine n sections SCI 9.6627 .021

Practice timesNext, the practice times were analyzed separately, depending on whether or not theyoung musicians were preparing fo r a performance at the time of the survey. Inaddition, the various aspects of practice time are examined, determining whetherpractice was more influenced by age or by motivation and volition.

Compared to the group not preparing a performance, the group preparing fo rperformance shows slightly more average practice time (seeTable 3.4). With regardto the number of practice days during the pievious weeks the two groups did notdiffer. However, the differences in practice times between those students withperformance preparation and those without were no t signifrcant. Previous resultssuggestedthat the practice situation (performance preparation) has to be taken intoaccount (e.g., Harnischmache r, 1993). In order to exclude possible third variableeffects (e.g., influence of teacher or parents in connection with the performancesituation), the practice times in the present case were analyzed by separating thestudents who were preparing and those who were not preparing a performance. Thegroup "no jrerformance preparation" was on average age 13.6 years old, the group"performance preparation" 13.7 years (F = 1.23, n.s.), and there was no reliabledifferences in starting ages of music training (both around 10.1years).


9/19

78 HarnischmacherTable 3.4

Mean practice times with and without performance (concert) preparationConcert No concert

Maximum time** 32-:77Minimum time** 14.44Practi:cedays*n* 4.69

29.33TL.4I4.69Days with listeners**" 1.08 1'37Note: *Minutes per day in one wedk, **Minutes of one dayin the last week, ***related to the last week'

Tables 3.bA and B.bB shows the influence of personality dispositions (PD), ofsituational perceptions (sP), and of age, examined in separate, stepwise regressionanalyses fo" "uch of the variables relating to practice time: ideal time, maximumand minimum amount of practice per day, and also the number of practice days perweek.The results of the stepwise regression analyses (PIN < .05) witl allow to showwhether practice times are more influenced by age or by PD/SP variables' Age andPD/SP variables did not correlate significantly (r < '11)'

Table 3.5AInfluence of age, personality dispositions (PD), and situational perceptions(sP) on practice times in the group without performance (concert)preparation. Results of stepwise regression analyses for practice tims'

TAool f imo I R2 F' Sis. F lBeta T 1.;AgeEADMaximumtimeEAD*Ase

,-0_q?....1,9-6_9'.i-q,_o_g_o. j.:9,-2_L0_'._--?,?_qq....i.q.9_q_0-'I i0.984 iI .478 i0.143-_!--- . . . . . . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . t rMinimum

timeEAD*Ase

0.qq,8-81.9.-5_-*9'-Q-0-9-......j:9.,-2-9p-........i--?'-6-9-9-q'-0-99-"--"--'-i'--'-'--"'---"--'r'-'-'i i io.gs+ iL,z\.!..........i.p.,?_?.,p..PracticedavsAOP*Ase

0.116 9.582 0.003 i0.340 3.096 0.0020.994 0.094 0.925Note:*Variablesn the equation PIN


10/19


Table 3.58Influence of age, personality dispositions (PD), and situational perceptions(SP) on practice times in the group with perfonnance (concert)

preparation. Results of stepwise regtession analyses fo r practice times.Trlaql t imo D2 Er Sio Ir lRof o T lSirr .TAge*SCI*

0.316 i TS.ZOS O.OOO iO.SOS i3.369 i0,000o.aso iiq.-s1s_,._o_,q_0_q..i_--q.?7.7......i:2.,.?._0-1....i-q.q-0-9MaximumtimeAge*SCI

0.244 irO.SOOO.OOZ i0,494 i3.312 i0,002i-_________"-""iir_q'oz+.q,ep_lMinimumtimeEADXAse*

o.srr irs.soz io.ooo i-o.osr t-4.802 _q.qp,QPracticedavsAOF*Ase

0.406 232.69 0.000 !0.637 4.824 i0.0,0qi0.926 0.144 :0.886Note: *Variables n the equation PIN < '05)

The contributions of the individual variables (see Table 3.5) showed the expectedresults: the lower the self-concept of abilities (SCI) in the performance situation, thehigher the estimate of daily ideal amount of practice time. In general' an increase ofpr"actice time correlated with a lower tendency to external action distraction (EAD).hh" turrd"rrcy toward goal and action orientation (GOP, AOP, AOF) was associatedwith longer practice times. under conditions of performance preparation theinfluence of age is noticeable.The amount explained variance (Rz) for the group preparing for performancediffered significantly from that of the group not preparing for performance' In thegro,rp pr"f*ing for performance, the amount of variance explained is ovet 40Vo,*ftif" ii.t..iu. between 57o andll%o in the group not preparing for performance'D men s onal ity of Prac ticeDuring everyday practice behavior of musicians, practice method.s are not used inisolation, but in complex methodical combinations. Hence, practice behavior is notcharacterized by a few ideal typified methods, but consists rather of a complex set ofpractice methodologies (Harnischmacher, 1993). The following ^explorative factoranalysis will demonstrate if such connections exist for a set of relevant practicevariables (see Table 3.3), and whether or not resulting factors can be meaningfullyinterpreted as basic dimensions describing the practice behavior of music students.i principal Components factor analysis (see Table 3.6) extracted four factorswith an eigenvalue greater than one (Kaiser criterion). Combined, the four factorsexplained -about 63Voof the total variance in practice methods, while the remaining


11/19

80 Harnischmacher

Table 3.6Principal component factor analysis for selected practice variables

123,l

564,89

2.013891.40000I.228001.013590.857t70.816570.7L2L40.536170.42247

22.415.613.611.39.59.17.96.0Ar y

22.437.951.662.872.48L.489.395.3100.0

37Voof the variance were not explained by the factor model.For the interpretation of the orthogonal rotated matrix (see Table B.Z), onlyloadings greater than ,5 and their signs were considered. As a further interpretativlhelp, a previous factor analysis on practice behavior of music students wasconsidered (Harnischmacher, 1996, p. 1690. In the earlier study, 14 practicevariables similar to those in the present analysis revealed 5 practice factors. In thepresent factor analysis (see table B.Z), the first factor consisted of the followingitems: (a) 1' Iplay scales" (no. 2), and (b) 'At first, I warm up during practicing', (no.4)' It was very similar to the first practice factor already shown for older musicstudents at colleges (Harnischmacher, 1998, p. 169). In both, the present and thepreceding study, the first factor describes a practice behavior that presumablyprimarily seryes for maintenance of perfonnance level. Factor 1 was interpreted as apractice complex that primarily facilitates build-up and maintenance offundamental technical skills, and it was accordingly referred to as Basic practice.The marker variables of the secondfactor were: (a) "I play new pieces that I do notknow yet" (no. 3), (b) " I practice with a metronome (measure counter)" (no. b), and(c) "I play until I make a mistake which I then correct" (no. ?). Factor 2 was alsosimilar to the secondfactor of the collegestudent sample (Harnischmacher, 19g3, p.169). This factor implies some aspects of analysis of music- or instrument-related.technical problems, as well as the mediating control by metronome. This secondfactor was called Analytical practice. The marker variables of the third factor were:(a) "I gxadually increase the tempo of the pieces (parts)" (no. 6), and (b) "I first splitthe piece in segments that .I want to practice" (no. 9). This factor *." .l"ointerpreted as a type of analytic practice, emphasizing the planned, stepwise, andc_onstructiveprocedure. The planning aspect plays a role for tempo choice and thedetermination of the parts to be practiced. Therefore, this third factor is calledconstructiue practice. The marker variables of the fourth factor were: (a) ,,I playpieces that I play well" (no. 1), and (b) "I also improvise (invent) music,, (no. g). sincefactor four emphasizes the musical, creative component of practice, it is labeledCreatiuepractice.


12/19


Table 3.7varimax-rotated factor matrix of practice variables (components of

practice behavior)Factors

lltems Basic Analytical Constructive Creative.l.Playing known pieces.2.Scales.3.Newpieces.4.Warmingup.5.Metronome.6.Raisingempo.T.Correcting rrors.8.Improvising.g.Dividine in sections

-0.120.860.390.80-0.42-0.04-0.020.140.15

-0.11,0.090.500.110.630.400.760.11-0.09

-0.200.040.060.060.200.69-0.080.200.86

0.740.10-0.09-0.04-0.170.r70.230.69-0.11

In summary, the practice factors corresponded to a sequence of practice phasedwhich is in agreement with a study on soloists (Harnischmacher, 1993, p. 103). Theexperts' practice was characterized by a division of practice into the sequence of*u"*-rrp, quality maintenance, and build-up. The present factor 1 can be seen ascorresponding to the phases of warm-up and quality maintenance. Factor 2 and 3somewhat correspond to a phase of build-up. Factor 4 seems to be typical for thepractice of children and adolescents. The creative factor is consistent with the ideaihat ,,music" in the practice of adolescents is seen as a reward after the work is done(Harnischmacher, 1995).Effects of situational perception and. personality d.ispositions on the d'imensions ofpracticeIn the following section, it will be shown to what extent the more complexdimensions of practice (four factors) cln be explained by situational anddispositional variables of motivation and volition. The four practice factors were notinfluenced by the variable preparing/not preparing for performance (F


13/19

82 HarnischmacherPossible effects of variables of motivation or volition were thus examined only afterextracting the influences of age, starting age,and number of days with listeners. Forthe six factor levels of the motivation and volition variable, the significance levelwas first set to |Vo and then corrected according to Bonferoni. The strength of theinfluences was tested in a Multiple Classification Analysis using SPSS.Table 3.8 shows factor /.The covariate "number of days with listeners" and theexternal action distraction (EAD) had a significant effect on practice factor 1 (BasicPractice).The variable "days of practice with listeners" and EAD explained aboutL4Voof the variance in practice factor 1. The mean value for factor 1 of the EADgroup below the median is higher 1114 .27) than the average of the group above themedian (M = -.19). The group with little inclination to EAD tended to practiceconsistent with factor 1. The number of days with listeners had a positive influenceon factor L.

Table 3.8Results of ANCOVA for first factor ("Basic practice")

Source Sum ofsquares df F Eta Beta* R'?CovariatesAgeStarting ageListener presentGOPEADAOCAOPAOFSCI

2.766 0.0460.219 0.6410.738 0.3935.639 0.0200.219 0.641 0.046.807 0.011 0.290.632 0.429 0.042.836 0.096 0.227.482 0.227 0.742.667 0,106 0.23

0.05 0.100.27 0.140.09 0.r00.17 0.100.13 0.100.L7 0.10

7.3150.1930.6504.9720.2176.0020.6162.6431.3852.450

3I11111L11

Note:*Adjusted for independent variables and covariates

Table 3.9 show factor 2. Goal orientation of practice (GOP) had a significanteffect on factor 2 (Analytical practice); it also explained abort I4Vo of the variabilityof this factor (see table 3.9). However, the volition variable (AOC) did not reach thecorrected significance level. The GOP group above the median tended to practicemore with the methods of factor 2 (M = .42) than the group below the median (M = -.2$.For factor 3, see Table 3.10. For this factor, only the covariate age was asignifrcant influence, which accounted for about t}Vo of the variance on this factor(see table 3.10). The effects of EAD and AOC did not reach the required level ofsignifrcance.


14/19


Table 3.9Results of ANCOVA for second factor ("Analytical practice")Sum ofSource scruares df F p Eta Betax R2

CovariatesAgeStarting ageListeners presentGOPEADAOCAOPAOFSCI

3 0.563 0.5921 0.348 0.557r. 1.084 0.3017 0.271 0.604111111

8.t221.6684.8860.0000.0143.67r

0.005 0.29 0.280.200 0.06 0.140.030 0.25 0.240,987 0.01 0.000.905 0.00 0.010.058 0.16 0.20

1.6880.3060.9530.2387.8481.6934.2970.0000.0153.674

0.L40.050.070.050.050.08Note: *Adjusted for independent variables and covariates

Table 3.10Results of ANCOVA for third factor ("Constructive practice")

Sum ofSource squares df F p Eta Beta* R2CovariatesAgeStarting ageListeners presentGOPEADAOCAOPAOFSCI

3.071 0.0326.011 0.0160.074 0.7860.265 p.608L.r47 0.287 0.094.009 0.048 0.135.540 0.021 0.300.505 0.479 0.053.118 0.081 0.12L.982 0.163 0.t7

0.11 0.100.27 0.120.25 0.140.07 0.100.18 0.130.14 0.10

7.9275.L720.0640.228L.0473.5314.7670.4392i.9721.807

3111111I11

Note: *Adjusted for independent variables and covariates

Table 3.11 shows factor 4. For this factor (Creatiue practice), a significant effect ofGOP (goal orientation during practice) explained about L2Vo of the variance. Thegroup above the median tended to practice more creatively (M = .36) than the group


15/19


16/19

Effects of individual differences gb

distinction of performance preparation with level of performance. Albeit, this is notthe case, because all music students in this sample have to perform regularly,regardless of their level ofperformance.The positive influence of practice days with listeners on Basic practice (factor 1)could imply that other persons involved may help young instrumentalists structuretheir practice by reminding them of technical exercises or warm-ups. Withexperience, scales and warm-ups may quickly turn into a routine and become moresensitive to disturbances and are therefore susceptible to distraction or perseveringcogaition. In this context, the observation that young instrumentalists with aninclination toward external action distraction practice less scales and warm-ups,makes sense. Analytical practice (factor 2) implies the defrnition of goals and goalorientation, which explains the influence of GOP. Constructive practice (factor 3) issubject to a positive maturational effect (age), while Creative practice (factor 4) isinfluenced by GOP. The assumed influence of starting age has not been confirmedfor the four dimensions of practice behavior, a result which may in the present studybe caused by the relatively homogeneous sample of music studio students. Aconnection between starting age and practice methods may be more likely in moreheterogeneous groups such as adult beginners.In sum, complex aspects of practice methods of children and adolescentsweremore influenced by motivation-relevant aspects of situational perception (GOP,EAD) and less by maturational processes. t is still possible, however, that olderinstrumentalists have more knowledge about different practice methods. Thepresent results are consistent with the findings of Karmiloff-Schmith (1988), inwhich the use of knowledge was shown to be an age independent achievement.Further studies are necessary to clarify the relation of habitualized situationalcognition and motivation and volition. Maturational processes were assessed withregard to age and starting age, not with regard to the stages of development orpractice that individuals had attained. Finally, there are still questions concerningthe efficiency of practice (see Lehmann, in press). Future longitudinal studies willdetermine to what extent the efficiency of practice of young instrumentalists isinfluenced by the different developmental stages of practice and by motivational andvolitional aspects.

Author notesI am gratefirl to Harald Jiirgensenand all participantsof the Oslo conferenceor the intenseexchange f experiencend the numeroussuggestionsn responseo the presentation f my paper.Special hanks to AndreasLehmann orhis valuablesupportduring the final write-up and o MonikaHennemann or her competentelpwith the translationof this article.

ReferencesAtkinson, J. W. , & Rirch, D. A. (1970) A d.ynamic theory of action.New York: Wiley.Austin, J. R. (1988). The effect of musical contest format on self concept, motivation,achievement and attitude of elementary band students. Journal of_Research nMusic Education, 36,95 - 107.Barry, N. H. (1992). The effects of practice strategies, individual differences in

cognitive style, and gender upon technical accuracy and musicality of studentinstrumental performance. Psychology of Music, 20, Lt2-I23.


17/19


18/19

Kuhl, J. , & Beckmann,J. (Eds. . (rgg4). volition and,personality:Action and. stateOrientation Toronto/Giittingen:Hogrefe.Land, M' S. (1979).The role of conselling n the careerd,euelopmentf musicians.Acasestudy. Dissertation. New York: ColumbiaUniversity.Lehmann, A. c. (in press). The acquisition of expertise in music: efficiencyofdeliberate practice as a moderating variable in accounting for sub-expertperformance.In I. Deliege & J A. sloboda (Eds. ), perceptionand cagnitiin ofMusic (pp. 165-191).Hove,UK: Erlbaum, Taylor & Francis.Manturzeweska,M. (1990).A biographicalstudy of the life - span developmentofprofessionalmusicians.Psychology f Music, 1g,172 - LBg.Ribke, w. (1985).Lernvorgdngebeim Instrumentalspiel. n H. Bruhn, R. oerter &H. Riising (Eds. ), Musihpsychologie.(pp. 227 - 2SE).Miinchen, Germany:Urban und Schwarzenberg.sloboda, J. A. , & Howe, M. J. A. (1991). Biographical precursors of musicalexcellence:an interview study. Psychologyof Music and,Music Ed,ucation,rg,3-2r.Sloboda, .A. , Davidson, .W. , Howe,M. J. A. , & Moore,D. G. (1996).practice in the development of performing musicians. BritishPsychology,87, 287 309.Svengalis, J. (1978). MusicAbstracts International,

Appendixself-concept scale of Instrumental playing Abilities(SCI)(Adapted for children and adolescents;o be answeredby indicating agreementto agiven statement; possibleanswer categorieswere alwaJrs, requentiy, tergly, never.Thenegative tems no.2, 3, 5,7 9,10, 11, 12were e-codedor the analysis. My instrumental performance s rather good.. I really have to work on my expression.-. I think that my abilities for playing an instrument are not sufficient.. I have a talent for instrumental music' Many people have difficulties with music making, but my problems areparticularly obvious.. I learn rather quickly on my instrument.' I experience nstrumental musicplayrngas an effort that I cannotcopewell with.. compared to others (who havebeenplaying equally long), I am rather good.. My performance evel is still far away from how I want to play in the future.' The progress am making on my instrument leavesa lot to bedesired.. When I play my instrument, I noticethat I am not very talented.. Playing an instrument causesme problems.

The role ofJournal ofattitude and the preadolescent male. Dissertation39,4800A UniversityMicrofilmsNo. Z9 - 029b8).


19/19

88 Harnischmacher

Scale or GoalOrientation of Practice(GOP)(For children and adolescents; to be answered by indicating agreementstatement; possible answer categories were always, frequentl]t, rarely,negative items no. 3,6,7 were re-coded or the analysis. )

to a givennever. The

o I mostly like to practice or aperformance.. I pick nicepieces would like to play.. I do not feel like makingmusicwith others.. I prefer o practicepieces hatI will alsoplay togetherwith others.r lf I wereasked, wouldparticipaten concerts'r I do not like to practicepiecesmuch thatafterwards only canplay by myself.r I mostly hate o practice or aperformance.r I like practicing bestwhen I like to perform thepiece ater for others'. I am looking forwardto makingmusicwith others.o Whether or notI like the pieces practice s not important or my perseverance uringpractice.

Scale or External Action Distraction (EADI(For children and adolescents; to be answered by indicating agreement to a givenstatement; possible answer categories were alwavs, frequently, rarely, never. Thenegative item no. 9 was re-coded or the analysis' ). Whenpracticing, amdisturbedby others.. I find it totally aggravatingwhen have o practicepieces hat donot like.o TV keepsme from practicing.r I would practicemore f I were not disturbedby others.r I do not practiceeverything shouldbecause do not like thepieces'r My otherhobbies ake up so muchtime thatI do not get a chanceo practice.o I cannotpractice nough ecauseomeonentelTupts e.r IfI do not like thepiece, soonstoppracticing.r I can almostalwayspractice n peaceandquiet.

Documents

Does Practice Make Perfect2