Visions of Research in Music Education

Visions of Research in Music Education Visions of Research in Music Education

Volume 16 Special Volume: Historical Reprint of The Quarterly Journal for Music Teaching and Learning

Article 8

2021

An Exploratory Study of Individuall Difference Variables in Piano An Exploratory Study of Individuall Difference Variables in Piano

Sight-Reading Achievement Sight-Reading Achievement

Eloise Kornicke Presbyterian Church

Follow this and additional works at: https://opencommons.uconn.edu/vrme

Recommended Citation Recommended Citation Kornicke, Eloise (2021) "An Exploratory Study of Individuall Difference Variables in Piano Sight-Reading Achievement," Visions of Research in Music Education: Vol. 16 , Article 8. Available at: https://opencommons.uconn.edu/vrme/vol16/iss6/8

http://lib.uconn.edu/

http://lib.uconn.edu/

https://opencommons.uconn.edu/vrme

https://opencommons.uconn.edu/vrme/vol16



https://opencommons.uconn.edu/vrme/vol16/iss6/8

https://opencommons.uconn.edu/vrme?utm_source=opencommons.uconn.edu%2Fvrme%2Fvol16%2Fiss6%2F8&utm_medium=PDF&utm_campaign=PDFCoverPages

https://opencommons.uconn.edu/vrme/vol16/iss6/8?utm_source=opencommons.uconn.edu%2Fvrme%2Fvol16%2Fiss6%2F8&utm_medium=PDF&utm_campaign=PDFCoverPages

Title: An Exploratory Study of Individual Difference Variables in Piano Sight-‐Reading Achievement Author(s): Eloise Kornicke Source: Kornicke, E. (1995, Spring). An exploratory study of individual difference variables in piano sight-‐reading achievement. The Quarterly, 6(1), pp. 56-‐79. (Reprinted with permission in Visions of Research in Music Education, 16(6), Autumn, 2010). Retrieved from http://www-usr.rider.edu/~vrme/

Visions of Research in Music Education is a fully refereed critical journal appearing

exclusively on the Internet. Its publication is offered as a public service to the profession

by the New Jersey Music Educators Association, the state affiliate of MENC: The National

Association for Music Education. The publication of VRME is made possible through the

facilities of Westminster Choir College of Rider University Princeton, New Jersey. Frank

Abrahams is the senior editor. Jason D. Vodicka is editor of the Quarterly historical reprint

series. Chad Keilman is the production coordinator. The Quarterly Journal of Music

Teaching and Learning is reprinted with permission of Richard Colwell, who was senior

consulting editor of the original series.

1

Kornicke: An Exploratory Study

Published by OpenCommons@UConn, 2021

An Exploratory Study ofIndividual DifferenceVariables in Piano

Sight-Reading Achievetnent

By Eloise KornickeDirector of Music" Presbyterian Church"

New Providence" NewJersey

Sight-reading skill is a valuable asset formusicians in a variety of musical situa-tions. Researchers and

pedagogues alike have ex-amined both the nature ofthe sight-reading task andmethods for teaching the skillto students. The majority ofempirical studies (e.g., Bean.1938; Weaver, 1943a, 1943b;Ortmann, 1937;Young, 1971;Sloboda, 1974, 1976, 1978,1981; Sloboda & Gregory,1980; Wolf, 1976; Halpern &Bower, 1982;Salis, 1977;Beal,1985) have focused on thetask of sight-reading and/orthe interaction of the taskwith subject characteristics(e.g., eye-hand span, patternrecognition). Few studieshave examined individual dif-ference variables (i.e., char-acteristics of subjects, such asintelligence, reading level,cognitive style that affect per-formance on a given task) asthey relate to keyboard sight-reading achieve-ment. Cognitive styles, i.e. individual variations

in methods of perceiving, remembering, andthinking (Saracho, 1984; Schmidt, 1984) have

been related to Jung's psy-chological types (Barger &Hoover, 1984), and to differ-ences in individual learningstyle preferences (aural, vi-sual, or kinesthetic) (Hyman& Rosoff, 1984).

The cognitive style, fielddependence/independence(FDI) , has been investi-gated in relation to musicalbehavior (e.g., Heitland,1983; Schmidt, 1984;Schmidt & Lewis, 1987;Osborne, 1988; Ellis &McCoy, 1990; Schmidt &Stephans, 1991). As far ascan be determined, FDI isthe only individual differ-ence variable that has beenexamined in relation tosight-reading achievement(King, 1983; Ciepluch,1988). Although limited towind instrumentalists, re-

sults in both studies indicated that FI stu-dents scored higher on music reading tasksregardless of instructional approach.

While empirical evidence for other rela-tionships between sight-reading achievementand individual difference variables is scarce,there is evidence in studies outside the fieldof music that link these two areas. For ex-

Ferw studies haveexamined .-

individual differ-ence variables

C ... such asintelligence,

reading level,cognitive style thataffect performance

on a given task)as they relate tokeyboard sight-

readingachievement.

Eloise Korniclee is Director of Music at the Pres-byterian Church at New Providence, Nell) Jer-sey. She received her PbD.from Indiana Uni-versity in Piano Pedagogy/Music Education.Herresearcb interests include sight-reading andphysiology.

56 The Quarterly journal of'Music Teaching and Learning 2

Visions of Research in Music Education, Vol. 16 [2021], Art. 8


ample, FDI has been investigated in relationto other musical tasks (Schmidt & Lewis,1987; Osborne, 1988), to gender differences(e.g., Fiebert, 1967; Bone & Eysenck, 1972;Doyle, 1975; McGee, 1979; Riding &Boardman, 1983), and to its interactions withinstruction (Kardish, Ludoski, & Bentman,1988; Frank, 1984; Kiewra & Frank, 1988;Strawitz, 1984; MacGregor, Shapiro, &Niemiec, 1988).

Another individual difference variablewhich may be related to sight-readingachievement is locus of control (LOC), whichis a generalized expectancy to perceive rein-forcement either as contingent upon one'sown behaviors Cinternal control) or as theresult of forces beyond one's control and dueto chance, fate, or powerful others (externalcontro!) (Levenson, 1981, p. 15). LOC re-search suggests that when individuals per-ceive rewards and punishments as contingentupon personal actions Cinternallocus of con-trol), behavior is different from when rein-forcements seem to occur from fate or luck(external locus of control) (Phares, 1976).

Locus of control has been examined in re-lation to academic achievement (e.g.,McGhee & Crandall, 1968; Solomon,Houlihan, Busse, & Parelius, 1971; Phares,1976; Bar-Tal & Bar-Zohar, 1977), and in re-lation to stress or anxiety (Feather &Volkmer, 1988; Parkes, 1984; Richert, 1981;Duke & Nowicke, 1973). It is possible thatsight-reading may be viewed by some pia-nists as a "high risk" performance situation,thereby causing anxiety for them (Hamann &Sobaje, 1983; Dews & Williams, 1989; Abel &Larkin, 1990; Steptoe, 1989; Nagel, Himle, &Papsforf, 1989). While these studies are notrelated to LOC, they do support the view thataspects of musical performance may bestressful to musicians.

Locus of control may also be related tosituational aspects of the sight-reading task.In particular, ensemble situations may in-clude aspects that favor externals, such ashigh structure, explicit directions, and visualfeedback (Bourgeois, Levenson, & Wagner,1980; Parent, Forward, Canter, & Mohling,1975). Interactions between gender, LOC,and achievement were also noted in chanceversus skill activities. Karabenick and Addy

Volume VI, Number Z

(979) found that males were more willing totake risks in chance situations and that maleswith an external LOC orientation demon-strated more realistic choices in chance situa-tions than females. Sight-reading seems toinvolve elements of chance, as individualsare being asked to read a piece of musicwhich they have not played before. Subjects,therefore, may evaluate the task of playing aparticular piece in relation to the situation,rather than in relation to their technical andsight-reading abilities.

Additionally, the relationship between FDIand LOC has been examined in achievementliterature. While LOC and FDI do not appearto be linearly related, Lefcourt (982) sug-gests that "locus of control and differentiation[FDI] can be used conjointly to afford betterpredictions than either variable might doalone in certain circumstances" (p, 72). Inseveral studies, significant interactions havebeen found between LOC and FDI regardingquestions related to achievement (e.g.,Deever, 1968; Lefcourt & Telgadi, 1971;Schmidt & Stephans, 1991).

Personality characteristics are another setof individual difference variables that may berelated to sight-reading achievement. Per-sonality variables have been linked to LOC(Duke & Nowicke, 1973), to FDI (Schmidtand McCutcheon, 1988), and in music, topersonality traits of musicians (Kemp, 1981a,1981b, 1981c; Bell & Cresswell, 1984). Spe-cifically, the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator(MBTI) has been used to examine musicteaching behavior (Schmidt, 1989a), listeners'response to music (Lewis & Schmidt, 1991),and applied music teaching feedback(Schmidt, 1989b). Since the MBTI is de-signed to measure normal variations in hu-man behavior, the measure is well suited foruse in educational settings. The MBTI hasbeen used extensively in psychological andeducational research (see Myers &McCaulley, 1985; McCaulley & Natter, 1980).

The MBTI is designed to measure the fourbasic preferences of extraversion/introversion(EO, sensing/intuitive (SN), thinking/feeling(TF), and judgment/perception OP). Thepreferences, although they may be examinedindependently of one another, are designedto identify an individual's psychological type

57 3



based on the interactions of the scales. The16 possible combinations, or types, identifiedby Myers and McCaulley (985) measureboth what people attend to in any given situ-ation, and to how individuals draw conclu-sions about their perceptions.

Research regarding type differences inachievement in reading and math (Guttinger,1974; Myers & Myers, 1980; McCaulley &Natter, 1980) and problem solving(Yokomoto & Ware, 1980) has found that thetranslation of sound-symbols was easiest forindividuals having a combination of introver-sion/intuition, and most difficult for individu-als having a combination of extraversion/sensing. Since certain studies have linkedlanguage with music reading by investigatingsimilarities between the two disciplines (e.g.,Restle & Brown, 1970a, 1970b; Stern, 1975;Hahn, 1987), it follows that these findingsand those for the MBTI may be related tosight-reading achievement. Other traitswhich may be related to sight-readingachievement include the introverts' tendencyto concentrate better and to grasp conceptsmore easily (McCaulley & Natter, 1980), thethinking types' analytical skills, the judgingtypes' quick decision-making ability and, fi-nally, the openness and curiosity of the per-ceptive types which may contribute to theirdesire to sight-read new pieces.

While systematic study of the relationshipbetween personality and sight-readingachievement is necessary, the possible linkbetween the two seems to be supported bydata collected during interviews with pianistsconducted by this researcher (Kornicke,1989). These pianists mentioned certain per-sonality characteristics that they believedwere necessary for successful sight-reading:boldness, curiosity, love of sight-reading, andwillingness to make mistakes as opposed toperfectionism.

Differences in aural imagery may be an-other individual difference factor contributingto sight-reading achievement. In the afore-mentioned interviews (Kornicke, 1989), pia-nists spoke of "hearing the music" beforethey played it and attributed success insight-reading to that ability. Auditory imag-ery has been defined by Gordon (1989) as"taking place when one hears and compre-

hends music for which the sound is notpresent" (p. 3). It is one facet of "notationalaudiation," which is "the basis of musiclearning theory, and [therefore] fundamentalto music achievement" (Gordon, 1989, p. 7).In addition, cognitive aspects of aural imag-ery have been examined by several research-ers (e.g., Weber & Brown, 1986; Idson andMassaro, 1976; Gates & Bradshaw 1974).

A correlation between experience andsight-reading achievement was noted in tworesearch studies (Bean, 1938; Eaton, 1978).Speculation as to the role of experience insight-reading is also found in various peda-gogical sources (Maier, 1963; Bishop, 1964;Last, 1972). None of these sources, however,employed the use of a detailed questionnairein order to determine the type and range ofsubjects' sight-reading experience. There-fore, the aforementioned series of interviewsof 14 pianists (Kornicke, 1989) were de-signed to obtain preliminary information re-garding the role of experience in sight-read-ing. Factors that emerged from these inter-views included the length and frequency oftime spent sight-reading and the consistencyof sight-reading experiences over a long pe-riod of time. In addition, experience relevantto sight-reading may include aural awarenesscoupled with stylistic knowledge. Thisknowledge may be acquired by a broad ex-posure to the works of various composers indifferent genres and from different historicalperiods. Systematic research is necessary inorder to determine whether these factors ofexperience are indeed related to sight-read-ing achievement.

The purpose of this study was to examineseveral primary and secondary relationshipsbetween and among selected individual dif-ference variables and sight-reading achieve-ment. The primary research questions wereas follows:

1. What is the best linear combination ofthe predictor variables and sight-readingachievement?

2. What is the best combination of predic-tor variables distinguishing between the ex-treme groups of high and low sight-readingachievers?

The secondary research questions were asfollows:

58 The Quarterly Journal of Music Teaching and Learning 4



1. What are the relationships between indi-vidual difference variables and sight-readingachievement controlling for gender?

2. What are the interrelationships amongthe sight-reading scores among the individualsight -reading selections?

3. What are the relationships between andamong the individual predictor variables andindividual items on the sight-reading achieve-ment measure?

4. What are the relationships between theindividual items on the Sight-Reading Experi-ence Questionnaire and overall sight-readingexperience?

5. What are the relationships among thepredictor variables?

MethodSubjects

The sample for the main study was com-prised of 73 volunteer subjects from fourstate universities located in Indiana and Illi-nois. The sample represented a cross sectionof college-level pianists and ranged in perfor-mance experience from 15 years to 51 years.The minimum level of college experiencewas one year of applied lessons. Due to theparticipation of several piano faculty mem-bers, subjects' ages ranged from 19 to 60(M=28.41). Criteria for inclusion in the studyconsisted of the subjects' enrollment in orcompletion of an undergraduate or graduateapplied piano degree program.Measure of the Dependent Variable

The researcher-constructed Sight-ReadingAchievement Test (SRAT) consisted of fivemusical examples chosen from urtext edi-tions of extant literature. The two-page ex-amples, from which the title and composerwere deleted, were arranged in the followingorder: Scriabin, Prelude Op. 13, No.6 in bminor; Bach, Capriccio in B-Flat major; LajosPapp, Bagatelle No.5; Beethoven, TwelveVariations in A major; and George Perle,Etude NO.1. The criteria for selection of thepieces included the following:

• obscurity;• a relatively fast tempo;• inclusion of some atonal works;• notational complexity including clef

changes, multiple accidentals, and unusualpedal markings; and

Volume VI, Number 1

• rhythmic complexity including irregular orunusual metrical groupings, and rhythmsusing two against three note patterns.

In order to adjudicate the taped perfor-mances of the SRAT, a 32-item Sight-ReadingPerformance Scale (SRPS) was developed,piloted, and revised. The purpose of usingthe SRAT was to increase the validity of thecriterion measure by examining aspects ofsight-reading that have not typically been ad-dressed in research, such as subjects' use ofdynamics, rubato, pedaling, and artistic inter-pretation. The importance of these aspectsin sight-reading achievement is evident whenone considers the typical definition of sight-reading as the ability to read and performmusic at first sight without preparatory studyof the piece (e.g., Wolf, 1976; Eaton, 1978;Sloboda, 1978b). In preliminary interviewsconducted by this researcher (Kornicke,1989), good sight-readers referred to a suc-cessful sight-reading performance as a Ge-stalt in which notes may be deliberately sac-rificed in order to preserve the rhythmic con-tinuity and style of the piece. Both dynamicsand rubato were considered by these indi-viduals to be important in order to capturethe essential character of the piece. Thetypical scoring criteria for the keyboard sight-reading tests used in research (e.g., Fjerstad,1969; Lowder, 1974; Eaton, 1978), however,were numbers of note and rhythm errors. Inthis scoring system, a sight-reading perfor-mance could be rated lower when the indi-vidual retained the essential character of thepiece at the expense of omitting certainnotes than when the individual sacrificed theessential character to maintain correct pitchesand metronomic rhythmic precision. Therewas no provision for examining additionalelements of sight-reading achievement.

Items for the SRPS were divided into highinference and low inference categories. Highinference items referred to questions aboutinterpretation, dynamic nuance, phrasing,appropriate pedaling, and so forth. Low in-ference items dealt with those aspects whichcan be scored as either correct or incorrect,such as note and rhythm errors. In addition,both high and low inference items were sub-divided into general and specific categories."General" was defined as relating to the per-

59 5



Table 1

Questions for the Sight-Reading Performance Scale According to Category

High inference: GeneralQuestion #

8. Appropriate tempo chosen10. Pedaling appropriate to style of piece12. Phrases appropriate to style14. Appropriate use of rhythmic nuance for style of piece16. Articulation stylistically appropriate17. Interpretation stylistically accurate19. Appropriate use of dynamics20. Theme or melody was clearly articulated in appropriate style

High inference: Specific1. Appropriate shaping of melodic line2. Appropriate dynamic nuance in phrases3. Appropriate rhythmic nuance in phrases4. Notes improperly accented within melodic line5. Appropriate vertical balance to style of piece6. Appropriate dynamics for phrase endings7. Appropriate durational values in phrase endings

24. Polyphonic voices articulated appropriately

Low inference: General9. Notes omitted from right hand

11. Notes omitted from left hand13. Notes altered in right hand15. Notes altered in left hand18. Performance demonstrated high degree of pitch accuracy21. Accurate performance of rhythmic notation22. Tempo maintained throughout piece23. Notes properly coordinated between right and left hands

Low inference: SpecificExample 125. Rhythmic errors at clef changes26. Note errors at clef changes27. Rhythm errors at accidentals28. Note errors at accidentals29. Rhythm errors at wide leaps30. Note errors at wide leaps3l. Staccato notes played evenly32. Widely contrasted dynamic markings observed properly

Example 225. Rhythmic errors due to visual arrangement of notation26. Note errors due to visual arrangement of notation27. Rhythm errors at wide gaps in pitch28. Note errors at wide gaps in pitch29. Rhythm errors at textural changes30. Note errors at textural changes31. Durational evenness maintained32. Note errors at accidentals




Table 1 (continued)

Example 325. Note errors at clef changes26. Note errors at accidentals27. Rhythm errors due to change in rhythmic groupings28. Note errors due to change in rhythmic groupings29. Rhythm errors due to visual arrangement of notation30. Note errors due to visual arrangement of notation31. Note errors at wide leaps32. Pedal markings observed properly

Example 410. Staccato markings correctly observed for style of piece25. Rhythm errors at irregular metrical groupings26. Note errors at irregular metrical groupings27. Note errors at wide intervallic leaps28. Durational evenness of staccato maintained29. Staccato notes inappropriately slurred30 Tempo irregularities occurred in short sections of piece3l. Off-beat notes improperly accented32. Clear articulation of left hand melody

Example 510. Staccato markings correctly observed for style of piece24. Unevenness of dyads due to alternation of hands25. Note errors due to multiple sharps/flats in a chord26. Note errors at changes in rhythmic groupings27. Widely contrasted dynamic markings correctly observed28. Durational evenness of staccato maintained29. Note errors due to alternation of hands on chords30. Rhythm errors due to alternation31. Note errors at wide gaps in pitch32. Note errors due to changing chord size

formance as a whole, and "specific" was de-fined as relating to a specific section of thepiece or a specific characteristic, such as noteerrors at clef changes. Eight questions weredevised for each of the categories and sub-categories. Across the five examples, sub-jects could receive a composite score rangingfrom 160 to 800 points. Table 1 outlines thecategories and their respective questions.

The judges for the SRAT were doctorallevel students who had a completed Mastersdegree in piano performance. Judges weregiven a copy of the SRPS in advance andwere given a training session using pilottapes. Among three judges, the inter-judgereliability for the main study was determinedto be .99 using the Cronbach's Alpha for-

Volume VI, Number 1

mula. The high inter-judge reliability contrib-uted to the validity of the measure and sup-ports the view of Abeles (1975) that musicalaspects, in addition to note and rhythm er-rors, can be assessed with a high degree ofreliability. Such an examination offers an un-derstanding of the components of sight-read-ing that is not possible when only note andrhythm errors are scored (e.g., Eaton, 1978;Fjerstad, 1969; Lowder, 1973; Salis, 1977).

ProcedureTwo-hour appointments were made for

each of the 73 volunteer subjects who partici-pated in the main study. The tests were ad-ministered individually in the following or-der: SRAT, Sight-Reading Experience Ques-

617



Table 2

Pearson Correlations Among Aural Imagery. Locus of Control, MBT!. FDI. and Sight-ReadingExperience (SR-EXP)

SR-EXP AUR LOC EI S TF JP

AUR .2S'

LOC -.07 -.03

EI -.13 .07 -.38**

SN .15 .06 .23' -.06

TF -.01 -.14 .26':" .01 .05

JP .26' -.07 -.02 -.OS .45** .27**

FDI OS .18 -.05 -.06 .20 -.32*' -.03

.!:'{=73

* Significant beyond the .05 levelSignificant beyond the .01 level

Key to abbreviations used in Table 2:

AURLOCEISNTFJPFDISR-EXP

Aural Imagery Test composite scoreLocus of ControlExtraversion/IntroversionSensing/IntuitionThinking/FeelingJudging/PerceptionField Dependence/IndependenceSight-Reading Experience

tionnaire (SREQ), Aural Imagery Test (AIT),Locus of Control (LOC), Myers-Briggs TypeIndicator (MBT!) and Hidden Figures (FDI).

The Sight-Reading Experience Question-naire (SREQ), generated from informationobtained in the preliminary interviews(Kornicke, 1989) was divided into three sec-tions: pre-college experience, college experi-ence, and knowledge of musical style. Thequestions pertaining to musical style askedsubjects to estimate how many cumulativepieces they had sight-read and how manypieces they had performed for each of 53composers. Each question from the SREQwas initially examined as a discrete variable.On the basis of a significanr correlations be-tween the SREQ and SRAT, the discrete vari-

62

abIes relating to sight-reading experiencewere collapsed into a single variable, sight-reading experience.

The Aural Imagery Test (AIT) (Pagan,1970) was originally designed to presentchords visually and aurally by use of slidesand a sound projector. Greater consistencyof administration was achieved in the presentstudy by using a audio-visual tape of thechords. The sounds were aurally generatedusing an acoustic piano rather then a chordorgan as originally specified, since the sub-jects in the present study were piano majors.Except for these alterations, the directionsspecified by Pagan (970) were followed.

The 46-item Locus of Control Test (LaC)was adapted by Schmidt and Stephans (991)

The Quarterlyjournal of Music Teaching and Learning 8



Table 3

Stepwise Multiple Regression Summary with Sight-reading Achievement Scores as the CriterionVariable

ChangeVariable MR r r2 in r2 f p

AUR .39 .42 .15 12.01 <.001SR-EXP .48 .41 .23 .08 10.29 <.001FDI 57 .34 .33 .10 10.91 <.001

t:{=71

Note. MR=multiple R; r2=cumulative 1:; j=simple correlation

from two locus of control scales: the RotterInternal-External Control Scale (Phares,1976), and the James Internal-External Locusof Control Scale (cited in Lefcourt 1982).Possible scores ranged from a low of 46, in-dicating a relatively external locus of control,to a high of 230, indicating a relatively inter-nal locus of control.

Personality variables were measured usingForm F (166 items) of the Myers-Briggs TypeIndicator (MBTI) (Myers & McCaulley, 1985).The test was administered and scored ac-cording to published directions.

The cognitive style of field dependence/independence (FDI) was measured throughuse of the Hidden Figures Test (HFT)(French, Eckstrom, & Price, 1962). The taskwas to identify which of five simple geomet-ric figures was embedded in each complexgeometric figure. The possible range ofscores was from ° to 32 with low scores indi-cating relative field dependence and highscores indicating relative field independence.

ResultsPearson correlations were computed and a

stepwise multiple regression analysis wassubsequently performed in order to indicatethe best linear combination of LOC, FDI, theMBTI variables, SR-EXPand AI as predictorsof sight-reading achievement. Pearson corre-lations among the predictor variables are pre-sented in Table 2.

LOC was negatively correlated with EI Cr=.-37), indicating that extroverts in the present

Volume VI, Number 1

sample tend to have external attributions oftheir successes or failures. Conversely, LOCwas positively correlated with SN (1=.23), andTF (r=.26), indicating a slight tendency forintuitive and feeling types to have an internallocus of control. The highest correlationamong the personality variables was JP,which correlated with SN (r=.45). The signifi-cant correlation between SN and JP has occa-sionally been found in previous MBTI re-search (see Myers & McCaulley, 1985). Alow negative correlation was found betweenTF and FDI (r=-.32), indicating that thinkingtypes tended to be slightly more field depen-dent than feeling types.

Moderately significant correlations werealso found between aural imagery and theSRAT. Because of the relatively high signifi-cant correlations between Part 1 and Part 2of the Aural Imagery Test Cr=.63), the com-bined score (AURAL)was used in subsequentanalysis. A low significant correlation of .34was found between FDI and SRAT. Auralimagery was not significantly correlated withLOC, FDI, or any of the personality variables.

A low significant correlation of .34 wasfound between FDI and SRAT. FDI was notcorrelated with sight-reading experience.Sight-reading experience was significantlycorrelated with JP at .26, however, indicatinga link between perception and greateramounts of experience.

Non-significant correlations were foundbetween LOC and SRAT,SR-EXP,AURAL,and FDI. With the exception of SN andJP,

639



Table 4

Discriminant Analysis for Sight-reading Group Membership

Variable .E Wilks' P

SR-EXP 1125 .80 <.01

FDI 8.51 .72 <.01

AUR 6.81 .68 <.01

TF 5.46 .66 <.01

tl=49

correlations among personality variableswere low. Non-significant correlations werefound between EI and SRAT, SR-EXP,AU-RAL,and FDI. Similar non-significant corre-lations were found for TF. For SN, non-sig-nificant correlations were found with SRAT,AURAL,and FDI. Non-significant correla-tions were also found between JP and SRAT,AURAL,LOC, and FDI. Thus, personalityvariables were relatively discrete.

Results of the multiple regression analysisare shown in Table 3.

The strongest predictor of sight-readingachievement was aural imagery, accountingfor 15 percent of the variance. The secondvariable to enter the equation was sight-read-ing experience, accounting for an additional8 percent of the variance. Finally, the thirdvariable to enter the equation was field de-pendence/independence, accounting for anadditional 10 percent of the variance. A totalof 32 percent of the variance is explained bythese three variables. Personality variables asmeasured by the METI and locus of controlwere non-Significant predictors of sight-read-ing achievement.

A discriminant analysis was carried out inorder to distinguish between the groups re-ceiving the highest and lowest scores on theSRAT The sample was partitioned into threegroups consisting of high, medium, and lowsight-reading scores for the purpose of pre-dicting group membership of the two ex-treme (high or low) scoring groups. Table 4presents the results for the prediction of

sight-reading group membership. The bestpredictors, in order, were sight-reading expe-rience, field independence, aural imagery,and thinking/feeling.

Sight-reading experience accounted for 37percent of the discriminant function, withfield independence accounting for an addi-tional 25 percent. The third variable to enterthe equation was aural imagery, accountingfor 22 percent of the discriminant function.The final variable to enter the equation wasthe METI thinking type, accounting for 15percent of the discriminant function.

The secondary objectives of this studywere also examined. Correlation coefficientsbetween sight-reading achievement and thevariables of AURAL,LOC, METI, FDI, andSRATfor male subjects, female subjects, andfor the total sample are presented in Table 5.

The combined score for aural imagery wascorrelated with SRATfor female subjects at.39. The correlation for male subjects andaural imagery was slightly higher (r=.45), ac-counting for 20 percent of the shared vari-ance. Aural imagery was correlated withSRATfor the entire sample at .41. Sight-read-ing experience was positively correlated withachievement for males at .36, for females at.44, and for the total sample at .41. LOC wasnegatively correlated with sight -readingachievement for males, indicating that maleswith a relatively external locus of controltended to receive higher scores on the SRATLOC was not significantly correlated withSRATfor the sub-group of females or the en-

64 The Quarterly journal of Music Teaching and Learning10



Table 5

Pearson Correlations for Aural Imagely. Sight-Reading Experience. Locus of Control, MBT!, FD!, andSight-Reading Achievement Among Male/Female and Total Sample

Aural Imagery TestPart 1Part 2Combined score

Male Female TotalCn=29) Cn=44) (1}=73)

.49':":' .47'''' .4S':'*

.44*':' .26 .35''':'

.45** .39"* .4l"'*

.36** .44* .41**

-.34':":' -.01 -.17

.19 .10 .13

.05 .11 .10-.26 .07 -.11.OS .22 .10

.52':":' .15 .34*':'

65

Sight-Reading Experience

Locus of Control (LOC)

Myers- BriggsEISNTFJP

Hidden Figures (FDI)

Significant at the .05 levelSignificant at the .01 level

Table 6

Pearson Correlations Among the Five Pieces of the SRAT

Ex 2 Ex 3 Ex 4Ex 1

Example 2 .s6**

Example 3 .82*" .90**

Example 4 .S5** .S7**.79**

Example 5 .85':'* .S3**.77"* .SO*':'

Significant at the .001 level

Key to examples in Table 6:

Example 1 Scriabin, Prelude Op. 13. No.6Example 2 Bach, CapriccioExample 3 Lajos Papp, Bagatelle No.5Example 4 Beethoven, Twelve VariationsExample 5 George Perle, Etude NO.1

Volume Vl, Number 111



Table 7

Pearson Correlations Among the Independent Variables and Individual Items on the SRATCN= 73)

LOC FDI EI SN JP TF SR-EXP

I1 -.23" .32** .19* .14 .09 -.10 .42*'"

I2 -.23" .34"'* .22* .10 .11 -.07 .45"'*

I3 -.19* .31··..•· .14 .11 .10 -.OS .46"'*

I4 -.27''''' .30""" .23'" .11 .07 -.15 .43"'*

IS -.23" .2S** .14 .OS .10 -.17 .42*'"

16 -.lS* .34··..' .14 .12 09 -.ll .43**

I7 -.21 * .35** .12 .16 13 -.11 .43"'"

IS -.10 .10 09 .13 .14 -.01 .39"'*

I9 -.01 .35"'" .07 .03 .04 -09 .22*"

I11 .04 .44··..•· .05 .07 .06 -13 .21*

I12 -.22* .31 *.•, .14 09 .06 -.13 .44"'*

II3 -15 .39** .16 .00 .01 -.12 .24"'"

II4 -.16 .33"'* .ll .10 .12 -.06 .45*'"

II5 -.lS* .39** .13 -.02 .00 -.21* .25*'"

I16 -.24* .2S*··· .12 .06 .09 -.ll .3S··"··

I17 -.19'" .24*'" 13 .ll .13 -.07 .42"'*

I1S -.23'" .41""" .16 -02 03 -.24"'" .26'·'*

II9 -.22* .38*" .16 .10 .07 -.05 .46"'*

120 -.27' ..•· .35··..•· .17 .07 09 -.15 .41 **

I21 -.12 .31 ** .OS .19 .21'" -.06 .37**

I22 -.05 .1S .02 .22" .14 -03 .38**

I23 -.11 .35** .13 09 13 -.07 .25*'"

66 The Quarterly Journal of Music Teaching and Learning12



I1 Appropriate shaping of melodic line12 Approproate dynamic nuance within phrases13 Appropriate rhythmic nuance within phrases14 Notes improperly accented within melodic lineIS Appropriate vertical balance to style of piece16 Appropriate dynamics for phrase endings17 Appropriate durational values in phrase endings18 Appropriate tempo chosen19 Notes omitted from right handI11 Notes omitted from left handI12 Phrases appropriate to styleIl3 Notes altered in right handIl4 Appropriate use of rhythmic nuanceI15 Notes altered in left handI16 Articulation stylistically appropriateI17 Interpretation stylistically accurateI18 Performance demonstrated high degree of pitch accuracyI19 Appropriate use of dynamics120 Theme or melody was clearly articulated in appropriate style121 Accurate performance of rhythmic notation122 Tempo maintained throughout piece123 Notes properly coordinated between right and left hands

Table 7 (continued)

Significant at the .05 levelSignificant at the .01 level

Key to abbreviations used in Table 7:

LOC Locus of ControlFDI Field Dependence/IndependenceEI Extraversion/IntroversionSN Sensing/IntuitionJP Judging/Perception

tire sample. None of the MBTI variables wascorrelated with the SRAT. For male subjects,FDI was highly correlated with the SRAT, ac-counting for 27 percent of shared variance.The positive correlation indicated that maleswho are relatively field independent achievedhigher scores on the SRAT. FDI was not corre-lated with the SRATfor females.

Table 6 presents correlations amongachievement scores for the five musical se-lections comprising the SRAT.

All the pieces were highly correlated withone another, indicating that sight-readingachievement was consistent across the fiveselections. The lowest correlation C!:=.77)was found between example one, a contem-porary work by Scriabin, and example five, acontemporary work by George Perle. The

Volume VI, Number 1

highest correlation was found between ex-ample two, a Baroque work by Bach, andexample three, a contemporary work byLajos Papp.

Table 7 presents correlations among theindependent continuous variables andtwenty-two individual items which wereused across all five sight-reading excerpts inthe SRAT.

These included items one through 23 withthe omission of item 10. Sight-reading experi-ence CSR-EXP)was significantly correlatedwith all items. Positive correlations for SR-EXP ranged from a low of .21 (item 11) to ahigh of .46 (items 3, 19), indicating a strongrelationship between high scores on subjects'choice of interpretive nuances and sight-reading experience. The lowest correlations

6713



Table 8

Pearson Correlations for Continuous Sight-Reading Experience Variables and SRAT Total Score

Pre-College experience:

Age subject began lessonsAge sight-reading included in lessonsAge subject sight-read on own initiativeNumber of pieces sight-read per weekHow often subject sight-readRange of sight-reading experienceNumber of pieces across range of experience

College experience:

Current sight-reading involvementNumber of pieces sight-read per weekRange of sight-reading experienceNumber of pieces across range of experienceSubject's rating of sight-reading abilitySubject's rating of like/dislike interest in sight-readingComposite number of pieces sight-readComposite number of pieces performed

Composite sight-reading experience (SR-EXP)

Item #

1 -.072 .01

3 .25*"4 .37*"5 .33*'6 .32*"6 .31·'

8 .38**9 .37*'"10 .1310 .21'11 .49**12 .40"14 .50'<·

14 .16

.41 **

~=73

between SR-EXP and sight-reading achieve-ment were found among items related topitch accuracy.

FDI was significantly correlated with allitems except item 8 and item 22, which wereconcerned with tempo. For the significantitems, relative FI was associated with higherperformance ratings. The highest correla-tions were found between items relating topitch accuracy and relative FI (items 11, 18,13, 15). The lowest correlation was foundbetween FI and accurate stylistic interpreta-tion U=.24).

Negative significant correlations werefound between LOC and items 1-7, 12, and15-20. The negative correlation coefficientsindicate a slight tendency for individuals withan external locus of control to achieve thehigher scores on the SRAT items. The high-est negative correlations, ranging from r=-.27

68

to r=-.24, were found among items related toarticulation (items 4, 16, 20). Shaping me-lodic lines, proper dynamic nuances, andpitch accuracy were correlated at -.24.

There were few significant correlations be-tween the METI personality variables andindividual sight-reading items. Introversionwas moderately correlated with shaping ofmelodic lines u=.19), dynamic nuanceU=.21), and notes improperly accentedu=.23). Thinking was moderately correlatedwith notes altered in left hand (r=-.21) andpitch accuracy) U=-.24). Intuition was posi-tively correlated with tempo maintenanceU=.24)

Correlations for the continuous indepen-dent variables of the Sight-Reading Experi-ence Questionnaire (SREQ) and the compos-ite Sight-Reading Achievement Test (SRAT)were statistically significant for all but two

T7JeQuarterly fournal of Music Teaching and Learning14



Table 9

Descriptive Statisticsfor Continuous Variables in Sight-ReadingExperience Questionnaire C!:::J.=73)

Variable Item # Mean SD Range

Pre-college experience

Age subject began lessons 1 6.84 2.45 12

Age subject sight-readon own initiative 3 7.46 5.74 21

Number of pieces sight-read per week 4 2.58 1.38 4

Frequency of sight-readingexperience 5 2.88 1.47 4

Range of sight-readingexperience 6 13.15 509 20

Number of pieces acrossrange of experience 6 20.60 20.53 99

College experience:

Current sight-readinginvolvement 8 3.45 131 4

Range of sight-readingexperience 10 13.38 4.41 24

Number of pieces sight-readacross range of experience 10 12.37 14.00 63

Subjects' rating ofsight-reading ability 11 2.84 1.19 4

Likingfor sight-reading 12 3.61 1.20 4

Composite number of piecessight-read 14 105.84 3728 186

Composite number of piecesperformed 14 9435 8783 797

items, as shown in Table 8. performed (PFST) was excluded because itSubsequently, twelve continuous variables was not significantly correlated with number

as outlined in Table 8 were equally weighted of pieces sight-read or any of the college ex-using Z: scores and collapsed into one vari- perience variables with the exception of sub-able, a composite of sight-reading experience jects' rating of interest in sight-reading(SR-EXP). Subject data for the composite (r=.21). The significant correlation computedwere operationally defined as the mean ~ for for SR-EXP and SRATwas .41, indicatingthese items. Composite number of pieces practical significance with 16 percent of the

Volume Vl, Number 1 6915



Table 10

Variable Item #

Frequencies for Categorical Variables in Sight-Reading Experience Questionnaire

Pre-College experience:

Sight-reading included in lessonsYesNo

Subject sight-read on own initiativeYesNo

Teacher encouraged sight-reading onsubject's own timeYesNo

223 31.50

5 68.50

353 72.6020 27.40

737 50.7036 49.30

t{=73

variance shared between experience andsight-reading achievement.

A low positive correlation Cr=.25)wasfound between SRAT and the age subjectssight-read on their own initiative. Significantcorrelations were also found between indi-vidual subjects' ratings of their own sight-reading ability and achievement Cr=.49), with24 percent of the variance shared betweentheir self-report of liking for sight-reading andsight-reading achievement. Finally, subjects'rating of like/dislike interest in sight-readingwas correlated with achievement at .40.

Descriptive statistics were computed for allitems in the Sight-Reading Experience Ques-tionnaire (SREQ). Means and standard devia-tions for the continuous variables are pre-sented in Table 9.

The mean age for beginning lessons was6.84 years. The mean age at which subjectsreported beginning sight-reading on theirown was 7.46 years. Only 53 of the 73 sub-jects in the main study, however, reportedhaving sight-read on their own during pre-college years. There was wide variability inthe number of pieces subjects reported sight-reading per week and among the types ofsight-reading experiences in which they par-

ticipated (SD=20.53 for both items).The mean for current sight-reading involve-

ment was 3.45, on a five-point scale, indicat-ing a moderate involvement by subjects insight-reading activities. Range of sight-read-ing experience was comprised of six Likertscales in which subjects indicated their in-volvement among various types of sight-reading experiences. These included: pianosolo, piano duet, accompanying solo instru-ments/ensembles, or accompanying solovoice/choral ensembles. Scoring rangedfrom a possible 6 to 30 points for the item.The means for range of experience for bothpre-college and college experience were13.15 and 13.38 respectively, indicating arather low level of sight-reading involvementfor the sample as a whole. There was awide distribution of pieces sight-read perweek with a mean of 6.35 and a relativelylarge standard deviation of 10.38. The scoreswere markedly skewed Csk=3.39), indicatingthat the majority of subjects tended to sight-read very few pieces. The number of piecesreported ranged from 0 to 50. Seventy-sevenpercent of the sample reported having sight-read five pieces or fewer per week. The dis-persion of the number of pieces sight-read

70 The Quarterly Journal oj Music Teaching and Learning 16



Table 11

Descriptive Statistics for Aural Imagel" Test MBTI. Locus of Control. FDt and Sight-ReadingAchievement

Variable Mean SD Skewness

Aural Imagery TestPart 1 2243 3.89 -63Palt 2 42.80 5.68 -48

Combined score 65.11 8.54 -.30

Locus of Control (LOC) 142.13 15.68 -23

Myers-BriggsEI 104.91 25.50 -.40SN 109.86 24.25 -41TF 104.12 2369 -53JP 97.93 27.62 .48

Hidden Figures (FDI) 10.04 5.77 .67

Sight-Reading Test (SRAT)Example 1 23645 61.21 56Example 2 242.98 66.43 94Example 3 23168 62.12 103Example 4 255.58 67.32 .63Example 5 235.50 64.11 .88

Total score 1202.21 29987 87

tl.=73

CM=105.84, SD=37.28) per composer was notas wide as the number of pieces performedCM=94.35,SD=87.83). In addition, subjectsrated how well they liked to sight-readCM=3.61),and they rated their ability to sight-read (M=2.84), indicating that subjects ratedtheir interest in sight-reading higher thanthey rated their ability to sight-read.

Data for the categorical variables from theSREQ are presented in Table 10.

Sixty-eight percent of the subjects reportedthat sight-reading was not included in les-sons. By contrast, 72 percent of the subjectsreported sight-reading on their own initiative.Fifty percent of the subjects reported thatpre-college teachers encouraged them tosight-read on their own initiative.

Descriptive statistics for the measures ofAural Imagery (AI), the Myers-Briggs TypeIndicator (MBTI), Locus of Control (LOC),

Volume VI, Number 1

Field Dependence/Independence (FDI) , andcomposite and individual items from theSight-Reading Achievement Test (SRAT) arepresented in Table 11.

The distributions were not markedlyskewed (sk < ± 1.00), indicating normal dis-tribution. The highest skewness was re-ported for Example 3 of the SRAT81=1.03),indicating a slightly positive skew. This maybe attributable to the difficulty of the piece.Example 3 was a contemporary atonal selec-tion with some rhythmic complexity, and alinear arrangement of notes requiring a highdegree of coordination between the rightand left hands. Mean scores for the five ex-amples in the SRATwere within a relativelynarrow range (i.e., m=235.50 to m=255.58).The variances were also within a relativelynarrow range (i.e., SD2=61.21 to 64.11).Standard deviations for the MBTI personality

71 17



scales ranged from 23.69 to 25.50, indicatingwide variability in the sample used for thisstudy.

DiscussionResults of this study indicate that selected

individual difference variables served as sig-nificant predictors of sight-reading achieve-ment. Significant relationships were foundwhen the composite measure of sight-read-ing was used as a criterion variable, and alsowhen individual sight-reading items were ex-amined. Sight-reading achievement was in-vestigated at different levels of analysis, andthe strength of the observed correlations var-ied accordingly.

The results of the multiple regressionanalysis are perhaps not surprising. The rela-tionship of aural imagery to music reading islogical since music involves the conversionof printed notation into sound. It would ap-pear that individuals who could more easilyform a mental image of the sound fromprinted notation would have an advantage insight-reading musical scores. Significant com-ponents of sight-reading experience in thepresent study included not only quantity, fre-quency, and range of experiences (i, e., pi-ano solo, accompanying vocal solos/choralensembles), but also factors of attitude andinitiative toward sight-reading. Another inter-esting factor in the results for sight-readingexperience was the clear distinction foundbetween performing pieces and sight-readingthem. Composite number of pieces per-formed was not significantly correlated withsight-reading achievement (1=.16), indicatingthat sight-reading involves skills that are notlikely transferred from the sole act of practic-ing and/or performing literature. This infor-mation calls into question the assumptionthat learning a large number of pieces willcontribute to sight-reading skill. The study'sfindings that FIs tend to score higher onsight-reading achievement are compatiblewith the results of previous studies (King,1983; Ciepluch, 1988). In addition, by exam-ining FDI in relation to other predictor vari-ables rather than in isolation, the relative im-portance of FDI as a predictor of sight-read-ing achievement was determined.

In contrast to the analysis for the entire

sample, the MBTI variable of Thinking/Feel-ing (TF) entered the discriminant equationfor high/low sight-reading achievers. Thefinding that high-achieving sight-readerswere relatively thinking (T) appears to be thefirst documentation of a relationship betweenpersonality and sight-reading achievement,and seems to be compatible with previousresearch on the TF scale. In particular, thethinking type's analytical, business-like ap-proach to mastering material may help toanalyze aspects of the music more quickly.In addition, since thinking types do not havethe same preference for working in groupsas feeling types (McCaulley & Natter, 1980),thinking types may be more willing to spendtime alone developing sight-reading skills.Several good sight-readers (Kornicke, 1989)did report that they regularly enjoyed check-inz out Iarze numbers of scores from the li-b b

brary and reading through all of the pieces.While sight-reading may also be practiced ingroup settings, the additional effort requiredto arrange rehearsal times could limit thefeeling types' number of opportunities to en-gage in sight-reading activities.

Gender differences in sight-readingachievement were found for aural imagery,sight-reading experience, FDI, and LOC. Thecorrelation for AI was stronger for males, andconversely, the relationship between sight-reading experience and achievement wasstronger for females. FI was found to be sig-nificantly related with higher achievement onthe SRATfor males but not for females. Al-though a One-way ANOVA for sight-readingachievement by gender indicated that therewas no significant difference between SRATscores for males versus females, an interac-tion between FDI and gender did emerge asa factor in sight-reading achievement.

The findings of this study regarding FDIare similar to those of other research studies(e.g., Riding and Boardman, 1983; Provost,1981; Travis, McKenzie, Wiley, & Kahn, 1988)which have found gender differences inmodes of instruction. The suggestion byTravis, et aI., (1988) that women may de-velop a different achievement schema maybe relevant. With regard to sight-reading, itis possible that for males the degree of fieldindependence appears to function to a




greater extent in sight-reading achievement.In addition, males may be relying more onthe development of aural imagery skills thando females. The stronger correlation be-tween experience and sight-reading achieve-ment for females would seem to supportfindings that indicate females may drawupon a more flexible global processing style,involving an intercorrelation of various com-ponents such as visual and verbal aspects,environmental and contextual cues, personalvariables, and learning styles. Some of thesefactors are found in the experience variable,which incorporates attitudes, range of experi-ence, and interest.

The interaction effect between males, ex-ternal LOC and sight-reading achievementappears upon first examination to be con-trary to previous literature on LOC, whichhas found greater academic achievement tobe linked to internal locus of control (e.g.,Findley & Cooper, 1983; Crump, Hickson, &Laman, 1985). One explanation may lie inthe LOC literature dealing with the interac-tion of person and environment. In particu-lar, internals are seen to adapt better in situa-tions that maximally allow them to controltheir own behavior while externals adapt bet-ter to situations that impose control on them(Baron & Ganz, 1972; Baron, Cowan, Ganz,& McDonald, 1974; Lefcourt, 1983). Sight-reading may favor externals because the taskcan involve external controls such as a con-ductor or other performers which require thesight-reader to continue playing; a risk factorin a "test" situation such as a jury exam; andan element of chance because the performerhas not practiced the music in advance.

While the reasons underlying this findingfor males but not for females is not readilyapparent, it may be related to previous re-search on situational factors and LOC. Malesmay be more willing to take risks in chancesituations than females (Karabenick & Addy,1979). In addition, since females may de-velop an attributional pattern which is closelyrelated to their cognitive abilities (Shute,Howard, & Steyart, 1984), it is possible thatsome type of interaction between cognitiveabilities andlor spatial abilities and LOC isinvolved (e.g., McGee, 1979; Sherman, 1967).

Correlations between and among the indi-

Volume VI, Number 1

vidual predictor variables and individualitems on the sight-reading achievement mea-sure indicate that items pertaining to inter-pretation appear to be related more stronglyto SR-EXP,while items having to do withnote and rhythmic notation are more stronglyrelated to FDI. Since FDI by definition per-tains to the skill of being able to disembedsimple patterns from more complex ones,and since the task of sight-reading involvesdifferentiating field-salient aspects from non-salient aspects within a musical score, it ap-pears logical that relative PI would be usefulin disembedding those aspects. In contrast,experience variables appear to be most relatedto the more global elements of sight-readingthat are related to understanding of style.

The significant negative correlations be-tween LOC and sight-reading achievementwere primarily items concerned with inter-pretive details rather than note accuracy.The explanation for the negative LOC corre-lations seems to correspond to the earlier dis-cussion regarding situational differences inLOC (e.g., Karabenick and Addy, 1979). Theitems correlated with LOC are related to deci-sions which require risk-choices at the givenmoment in order to be performed properly,such as choices about shaping lines, dynamicnuance, durational values, phrasing, and ar-ticulation. LOC was not related to the major-ity of the items regarding accuracy of pitches,nor was it related to the majority of therhythm items. It would seem that interpret-ing rhythm and maintaining a tempo involvesseparate skills (e.g., Boyle, 1968; Gregory,1972; Kelso, Southard, & Goodman, 1979;Shaffer, 1966; Revak, 1987). Therefore, risk-taking externals who perceive themselves tobe in a chance situation might make moreaccurate decisions about interpretation, butthat skill would not necessarily contribute tothe execution of their choices rhythmically.

Relatively few sight-reading items of theSRPS were significantly related to the MBTIpersonality variables. Three items concern-ing interpretation were correlated with intro-version. It seems possible that traits of theintrovert, such as concern with the innerworld of concepts and the tendency to becontemplative, would allow them to evaluatestylistic aspects of the music with which they

73 19



have interacted and then apply the ideas tonew musical situations (i.e., in sight-readingmusic). Maintaining the tempo throughoutthe piece was related to intuition. Theintuitives' tendency to use insight to analyzemeaning, relationships, and possibilities(Myers & McCaulley, 1985) would seem to beuseful in enabling them to make logical deci-sions about tempo maintenance. Perception(P) was correlated with accuracy in perform-ing rhythmic notation. Since musical compo-sitions generally incorporate a number ofrhythmical and melodic patterns in variouspermutations, the perceptives' ability to adaptquickly to the changing patterns of the musicappears to be useful in sight-reading. Think-ing (T) was correlated with notes altered inthe left hand and overall pitch accuracy.The traits of employing analytical thoughtand objectivity would seem useful in analyz-ing pitch relationships within musical com-positions, and hence judgments about alter-ations of pitch.

Descriptive statistics from the Sight-ReadingExperience Questionnaire (SREQ) indicatethat there was wide variability among sub-jects regarding type and quantity of sight-reading experience. The range of 0 to 50 forpieces sight-read per week indicates a lack ofuniformity regarding sight-reading involve-ment among subjects. Interestingly, the ma-jority of subjects reported sight-reading ontheir own initiative, and less than half re-ported sight-reading as having been includedin lessons. It would appear then, for thissample, that subjects' interest in sight-readingmay be intrinsic, rather than being predicatedon the extrinsic encouragement of teachersin formal instructional settings.

The modest association between sight-reading achievement and beginning sight-reading at a relatively older age is notable.While the mean age for subjects' sight-read-ing on their own initiative was 7.46, therange was 16 years, with the youngest beingfive and the oldest 21 when they began tosight-read. This finding is not necessarily inline with the pedagogical literature, whichencourages teachers to introduce sight-read-ing at the very first lessons (Last, 1972; Maier,1963; and Johnstone, no date). Part of the

explanation may be found in the complexnature of sight-reading skill, which seems torequire the subjects' use of higher levels offormal thinking in order to recognize struc-tures and patterns in the music and to evalu-ate essential components of style quickly.Given this complexity, it would seem logicalthat older subjects could use their sight-read-ing experiences cumulatively in a more effi-cient and perhaps beneficial way than youngchildren, who may not be able to transferelements from one sight-reading experienceto the next (e. g., see learning theoristsPiaget, 1952a, 1952b; Gagne, 1979, 1985;Bruner, 1960). The advantage of early sight-reading, however, may not necessarily bethat students are learning to see patterns, butrather that they are establishing good habits.Later at the appropriate developmentalstages, these habits may enhance sight-read-ing achievement (e.g., Asmus, 1986; Gordon,1989; and Kendall, 1988).

Other results of this study suggest that sub-jects' interest in sight-reading is related tosight-reading experience. There were mod-erate correlations between subjects' ratings ofability and self-reported interest in sight-read-ing, and between subjects' ratings of abilityand achievement as measured by the SRAT.Support for a relationship between attitudeand achievement has been noted in the lit-erature (Greenberg, 1970; Vander Ark, Nolin,& Newman, 1980; Asmus, 1986; Austin,1988). Although it is not possible to deter-mine the causal relationships between atti-tude and achievement in sight-reading fromthe current study, it appears that interest maybe part of a logical progression leading tosight-reading achievement in the followingmanner: subjects' interest could contribute totheir desire to engage in sight-reading activi-ties, which would increase their overall experi-ence level. The greater experience level couldlead to greater familiarity with style, a sugges-tion that is supported by the correlation be-tween composite number of pieces sight-readamong 53 composers and sight-readingachievement. Finally, higher achievement insight-reading could increase the subject's en-joyment of participating in sight-reading expe-riences, as suggested by Asmus (986).

74 The Quarterlyjournal of Music Teaching and Learning 20



Implications for Educators1. The importance of range of sight-read-

ing experience for pre-college years suggeststhe value of introducing a wide range of stylesduring the earlier years of piano instruction.

2. The finding that greater sight-reactingachievement was related to a relatively late ageof beginning Sight-reading offers evidence thatwhile young children do learn to read music,they may be processing the information differ-ently from adults, according to their develop-mental stage. Therefore, children's early un-derstanding of notation may not be contribut-ing to their skill at sight-reading as much assome pedagogues have thought.

3. The finding that part of sight-reading in-volvement is related to subjects' interest insight-reading and self-ratings of sight-readingability is a further indication that achieve-ment in musical endeavors such as sight-reading is not solely predicated on learningthe rudiments of the skill, but on individualdifferences in motivation, self-concept, atti-tude and so forth.

4. The finding that number of pieces per-formed was not related to sight-readingachievement supports indirectly the view ofsome pedagogues (e.g., Rowley, no date;Broughton, 1956) that sight-reading must bedeveloped independently from performance,and may encourage teachers to place moreemphasis on the development of sight-read-ing skills separately from the study of pianoliterature. In addition, the finding that sub-jects' sight-reading scores were largely con-sistent across styles suggests that teachersmay need to modify their view of the sight-reading process and the relationships amongstyle, genre, time periods, and technical de-mands in sight-reading achievement.

5. The importance of aural imagery insight-reading may help to explain why somestudents can play music by ear but cannotread notation fluently. For these students,their aural awareness is possibly more devel-oped than their aural imaging of the printedpage. Perhaps there should be more focuson teaching aural imagery as a separate skillfrom ear training. A program linking visualnotation to aural sound could be developedcommencing with dyads, and simple melodic

Volume VI, Number 1

patterns, and progressing to more complexpatterns with the use of key signatures.

6. The significant relationship of FDI tosight-reading achievement may have implica-tions for teachers. Perhaps the findings ineducation and music education literature(e.g., Strawitz, 1984; Carbo, 1984; Schmidt &Lewis, 1987; MacGregor, Shapiro, andNiemiec, 1988; Osborne, 1988) which hasinvestigated methods of instruction for FDstudents could be applied to piano instruc-tion. For example, the Hidden Figures Testcould be administered to those students whofind Sight-reading difficult, in order to deter-mine if they are FD. The teacher could thendevelop a program of drill sequences forrecognizing notes, chords, and melodic!rhythmic patterns. By focusing the student'sattention on such details, the FD student couldconceivably become more proficient atdisembedding patterns from the musical score.

7. The gender interaction between LOCand sight-reading achievement may indicatethat the situation or context of the task per-formance is a factor in sight-reading achieve-ment. \Vhile a number of teachers advocateensemble playing as a means of learningsight-reading skills, there may be some stu-dents who would receive greater benefit bypracticing sight-reading alone. Therefore. dif-ferent types of experiences could be off~red,such as a group setting for external LOC indi-viduals who seem to respond to risk situa-tions, individual assignments for internalswho like to work alone, or duet assignmentsto appeal to MBTI feeling types who prefergroup learning situations.

8. From this study, it seems that the incli-viduals who are relatively introverted, intui-tive, thinking, and perceiving may have par-ticular advantage in some piano sight-readingtasks. It follows that instructors could pro-vide sensing students with a number of drillsto enhance Sight-reading achievement. In ad-dition, instructors could point out the valueof curiosity to judging types, and could ex-plore ways to increase students' curiosityabout sight-reading new pieces. Feelingtypes could be placed in group or duet situa-tions so that sight-reading can be carried outwithin the context of interpersonal interaction.

7521



RecommendationsThis study was exploratory in nature. Con-

sequently, the majority of findings are pre-liminary and in need of further research inorder to increase generalizability. The result-ing methodological applications that can beshared from this research effort could poten-tially benefit a great many students. Perhapssuch concentrated efforts to enhance thelearning process of students will enable timeto realize their highest potential in this vital yetoften elusive facet of musical performance.

ReferencesAbel, ]., & Larkin, K. T. (1990). Anticipation of

performance among musicians: Physiologicalarousal, confidence, and state-anxiety. Psy-chology of Music, 18, 171-182.

Abeles, H. F. (975). Student perceptions of char-acteristics of effective applied music instruc-tors. Journal of Research in Music Education,23(2),147-154.

Asmus, E.P. (1986). Student beliefs about thecauses of success and failure in music: Astudv of achievement motivation. Tournai ofRese~rch in Music Education, 34(4), 262-278.

Austin, ]. R. (1988). The effect of music contestformat on self-concept, motivation, achieve-ment, and attitude of elementary band stu-dents. Journal of Research in Music Educa-tion, 36(2), 95-107.

Bar-Tal, D., & Bar Zohar, Y. (1977). The relation-ship between perception of locus control andacademic achievement. Contemporary Edu-cational Psychology, 2, 181-199.

Barger, R. R., & Hoover, R. L. (984). Psychologi-cal type and the matching of cognitive styles.Theory Into Practice, 23(1), 56-63.

Baron, R. M., & Ganz, R. L. (1972). Effects of lo-cus of control and type of feedback on thetask performance of lower-class black chil-dren. Journal of Personality and Social Psy-chology, 21, 124-130.

Baron, R. M., Cowan, G., Ganz, R. L., & McDonald,M. (974). Interaction of locus of control andtype of performance feedback: Considerationsof external validity. Journal of Personality andSocial Psychology, 2CX2) , 285-292.

Beal. A L. (1985), The skill of recognizing musi-cal structures. Memory and Cognition, 13(5),405-412

Bean, K. L. (938). An experimental approach tothe reading of music. Psychological Mono-graphs, 50, Whole number 226.

Bell, C. R., & Cresswell, A (1984). Personalitydifferences among musical instrumentalists.Psychology of Music, 12(2),83-93.

Bishop, D. (964). Sight reading in the pianoclass. Clatner, 1(2), 48-51.

Bone, R. N., & Eysenck, H. ]. (1972). Extraver-sion, field dependence and the Stroop Test.Perceptual and Motor Skills, 34, 873-874.

Bourgeois, A., Levenson, H., & Wagner, C. (1980).Success on a biofeedback task: Effects of con-gruence-incongmence between locus of con-trol and psychological differentiation. Jour-nal of Personality Assessment, 44(5), 487-491.

Boyle,]. D. (968). The effect of prescribedrhythmical movements on the ability to sightread music. Dissertation Abstracts Interna-tional, 29, 2290A.

Broughton, ]. (1956). Success in Piano Teaching.New York: Vantage Press.

Bruner.}. (960). The Process of Education. NewYork: Alfred A Knopf.

Carbo, M. (1984). Research in learning style andreading: implications for instruction. TheoryInto Practice, 23(1), 72-76.

Ciepluch, G. M. (1988). Sightreading achievementin instrumental music performance, learninggifts, and academic achievement: A correla-tion study. Dissertation Abstracts Interna-tional, 49, 1398A (University Microfilms No.#8810008).

Crump, B. R., Hickson,]. H., & Laman, A (1985).Relationship of locus of control to achieve-ment and self-concept in education majors.Psychological Rep011s~57, 1055-1060.

Deever, S. G. (1968). Ratings of task oriented ex-pectancy for success as a function of internalcontrol and field independence. DissertationAbstracts International, 29, 365B.

Dews, C. L. & Williams, M. S. (989). Student mu-sicians' personality styles, stresses, and cop-ing patterns. Psychology of Music, 17, 37-47.

Doyle, ]. A (1975), Field independence and selfactualization. Psychological RepOJ1s, 36,363-366

Duke, M. P., & Nowicki, S. (973). Personalitycorrelates of the Nowicki-Strickland locus ofcontrol scale for adults. Psychological Re-POJ1s,33, 267-270.

Eaton,]. (978). A correlation study of keyboardsight-reading facility with previous training,note-reading, psychomotor, and memoriza-tion skills. (Doctoral dissertation, IndianaUniversity). Dissertation Abstracts Interna-tional,39, 4109A

Ellis, M. c., & McCoy, C. w. (990). Field depen-dence/independence in college nonmusicmajors and their ability to discern form inmusic. Journal of Research in Music Educa-tion. 38(4),302-310

Feather, N. T., & Volkmer, R. E. (988). Prefer-ence for situations involving effort, time pres-sure, and feedback in relation to Type A be-havior, locus of control and test anxiety.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,55(2), 266-271.

Fiebert, M. (1967). Sex differences in cognitivestyle. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 24, 1277-1278




Findley, M. ]., & Cooper, H. M. (1883). Locus ofcontrol and academic achievement. A litera-ture review. journal of Personality and So-cial Psychology, 44(2), 419-427.

Fjerstad, C. D., (969), A comparison oftachistoscipic and metronomic training fordeveloping sight-reading of harmonic nota-tion within class piano instruction. (Doctoraldissertation, Indiana University). DissertationAbstracts International, 30, 1194A.

Frank, B. M. (1984). Effect of field independence-dependence and study technique on learningfrom a lecture. American Educational Re-search journal, 21(3), 669-678.

French, J. W., Echstrom, R. B., & Price, L. A.(1962). Manual for Kit of Reference TestsforCognitive Factors. Princeton: NJ: EducationalTesting Service.

Gagne, R. M. (1979). Principles of InstructionalDesign. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Win-ston.

Gagne, R. M. (1985). The Conditions of Learningand Theory of Instruction. New York: Holt,Rinehart and Winston.

Gates, A., & Bradshaw,]. L. (1974). Effects of au-ditory feedback on a musical performancetask. Perception and Psychophysics, 16<:1),105-109.

Gordon, E. E. (989). Learning Sequences in Mu-sic: Skill, Content, and Patterns. Chicago:GIA Publications.

Greenburg, M. (970). Musical achievement andself-concept. journal of Research in MusicEducation, 18, 57-64.

Cregory, T. B. (1972). The effect of rhythmic no-tation variables on sight-reading errors. jour-nal of Research In Music Education, 2CX4),462-468.

Guttinger, H. I. (974). Patterns of perceiving:Factors which affect individualized readinginstruction at the high school level. Paperpresented at the American Educational Re-search Association Annual Meeting, Chicago,Ill. (Available from the Center for Applica-tions of Psychological Type, Gainesville, Fl.)

Hahn, L. (1987). Music reading and languagereading: Correlations in processes and in-struction. journal of Research in Music Edu-cation, 4(1), 41-47.

Halpern, A. R., & Bower, G. H. (1982). Musicalexpertise and melodic notation. Americanjournal of Psychology, 95(1), 31-50.

Hamann, D. L., & Sobaje, M. (1983). Anxiety andthe college musician: A study of performanceconditions and subject variables. Psychologyof Music, 11(1), 37-50.

Heitland, K. W. (983). Cognitive styles and musi-cal aptitudes: An exploratory study. Disserta-tion Abstracts International, 43(8), 2534A.

Hyman, R., & Rosoff, B. (984). Matching learningand teaching styles: The jug and what's in it.Theory Into Practice, 23(1), 36-43.

Volume VI, Number 1

Idson, W. L., & Massaro, D. W. (1976). Cross-oc-tave masking of single tones and musical se-quences: The effects of structure on auditoryrecognition. Perception and Psychophysics,1!X2),155-175

Johnstone,]. A. (no date). The Art of TeacbingPiano Playing. London: W. M. Reeves, Ltd.

Karabenick, S. A., & Addy, M. M. (1979). Locus ofcontrol and sex differences in skill andchance risk-taking conditions. Thejournal ofGeneral Psychology, 100, 215-228.

Kardash, C. lVI.,Lukowski, L., & Bentmann, L.(1988). Effects of cognitive style and immedi-ate testing on learning from a lecture. jour-nal of Educational Research, 81(6), 360-364.

Kelso,]. A., Southard, D. L., & Goodman, D.(1979). On the coordination of two-handedmovements. [ournal of Experimental Psychol-ogy: Human Perception and Performance,5(2), 229-238.

Kemp, A. 0981a). The personality structure ofthe musician: I. Identifying a profile of traitsfor the performer. Psychology of Music, !X2),69-75.

Kemp, A. CI981b). The personality structure ofthe musician: II. Identifying a profile of traitsfor the composer. Psycbology of Music, !X2),69-75.

Kemp, A. C1981c). Personality differences be-tween the players of string, woodwind, brass,and keyboard instruments, and singers.Council for Research in Music Education, 66-67,33-38.

Kendall, M. J (1988). Two instructional ap-proaches to the development of aural andinstrumental performance skills. journal ofResearch in Music Education, 3CX4), 205-219.

Kiewra, K.A., & Frank, B.M. (1988). Encoding andexternal-storage effects of personal lecturenotes, skeletal notes, and detailed notes forfield-independence and field-dependentlearners. journal of Educational Research, 81(3), 143-148.

King, D. (983). Field dependence/field indepen-dence and achievement in music reading.Dissertation Abstracts International, 44,1320A.

Kornicke, E. (1989). [Achievement in sight-read-ing: Interviews with pianists]. Unpublishedraw data.

Last, J. (1972). The Young Pianist (2nd ed.), Lon-don: Oxford University Press.

Lefcourt, H. M. (Ed.). (1982). Locus of Control:Current Trends in Theory and Research (2nded.). Hillsdale, New Jersey: LawrenceErlbaum Associates, Pub.

Lefcourt, H. M. (Ed.), (1983). Research untb tbeLocus of Control Construct: Vol. 2. Develop-ments and Social Problems. ew York: Aca-demic Press.

Lefcourt, H. M., & Telgadi, M. (1971). Perceivedlocus of control and field dependence as pre-

7723



dictors of cognitive activity. Journal of Con-sulting and Clinical Psychology, 37, 53-56.

Levenson, H. (1981). Differentiating among inter-nality, powerful others, and chance. In H. M.Lefcourt (Ed.). Research with the Locus ofControl Construct: Vol. 1. Assessment Methods(pp. 15-61). New York: Academic Press.

Lewis, B. E., & Schmidt, C. P. (1991) Listeners'response to music as a function of personalitytype. Journal of Research in Music Educa-tion, 35(4),311-321

Lowder, ]. (973). An experimental study of akeyboard sightreading test administered tofreshman secondary piano students at theOhio State University. Contributions to MusicEducation, 3, 97-105.

Lowder, ]. F. (1974). Evaluation of a sight-readingtest administered to freshman piano classes.Journal of Research in Music Education, 3,97-105.

MacGregor, S. K., Shapiro,]. Z., & Niemiec, R(1988). Effects of a computer-augmentedlearning environment on math achievementfor students with differing cognitive style.Journal of Educational Computing Research,4(4), 453-465.

Maier, G. (1963). The Piano Teacher's Compan-ion. New York: Mills Music, Inc.

McCaulley, M. H, & Natter, F. L (980). Psycho-logical (Myers-Briggs) Type Differences inEducation. Gainesville, FI: Center for Applica-tions of Psychological Type, Ine.

McGee, M. G. (979). Human spatial abilities:Psychometric studies and environmental, ge-netic, hormonal, and neurological influences.Psychological Bulletin, 86, 889-918.

McGhee, P. E., & Crandall, V. C. (1968). Beliefs ininternal-external control of reinforcement andacademic performance. Child Detielopment,39, 91-102.

Myers, 1. B., & McCaulley, M. H. (985), Manual:A guide to the Development and use of theMyers-Briggs Type Indicator. Palo Alto, Calif.:Consulting Psychologists Press.

Myers, 1. B., and Myers, P. B. (980). Gifts Differ-ing. Palo Alto, Calif.: Consulting PsychologistsPress, Inc.

Nagel,]. ]., Himle, D. P., & Papsforf,]. D. (1989).Cognitive-behavioural treatment of musicalperformance anxiety. Psychology of Music.17, 12-21.

Ortmann, O. (1937). Span of vision on note-read-ing. Music Educator's National ConferenceYearboole. 88-93.

Osborne, A. M. (1988). The interaction of fielddependence/independence, instructionalmethodology and achievement in harmonicdictation skills. Dissertation Abstracts Inter-national, 49(10), 2959A.

Pagan, K. A. (1970). An experiment in the mea-surement of certain aspects of score readingability. (Doctoral dissertation, Indiana Univer-

sity). Dissertation Abstracts International, 31,1313A.

Parent, M., FOlward,]., Canter, R, & Mohling,].(975) Interactive effects of teaching strategyand personal locus of control on student per-formance and satisfaction. [ournal ofEduca-tiona I Psychology, 67, 764-769.

Parkes,]. R (1984), Locus of control, cognitiveappraisal, and coping in stressful episodes.journal of Personality and Social Psychology,46(3), 655-668.

Phares, E. ]. (976). Locus of Control in Personal-ity. Morristown, N.].: General Learning Press.

Piaget,]. (1952a). The Language and Thought ofthe Child. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.

Piaget, ]. 0952b). The Origins of Intelligence inChildren. New York: International Universi-ties Press.

Provost, G. L (981). Teaching strategies, modesof evaluation, and field-dependence factor.Perceptual and Motor Skills, 52, 163-173.

Restle, F., & Brown, E. R 0970a). Serial patternlearning. Journal of Experimental Psychology,83, 120-125.

Restle, F., & Brown, E. R 0970b). Serial patternlearning: Pretraining of runs and trills.Psycbonomic Science, 15(6), 321-322.

Revak, C. A. (1987). Relationship among selectedpsychomotor abilities and music readingachievement of beginning woodwind instru-mentalists. Unpublished thesis proposal. In-diana University, Bloomington, Indiana.

Richert, A. ]. (1981). Sex differences in relation tolocus of control and reported anxiety. Psy-chological Reports, 49, 971-974.

Riding, R J, & Boardman, D.]. (1983). The rela-tionship between sex and learning style andgraphicacy in I-i-year-old children. Educa-tional Review, 35(1), 69-78.

Rowley, A. (no date). Do's and Don'ts For Musi-cians. London: Edwin Ashdown, Ltd.

Salis, D. (977). The identification and assessmentof cognitive variables associated with readingof advanced music at the piano. (Doctoraldissertation, University of Pittsburgh). Disser-tation Abstracts International, 38, 7239A.

Saracho, O. N. (984). Young children'S academicachievement as a function of their cognitivestyles. Journal of Research and Developmentin Education, 16'0), 44-50.

Schmidt, C. (984). The relationship among as-pects of cognitive style and language-bound/language-optional perception to musicians'performance in aural discrimination tasks.Journal of Research in Music Education,32(3), 159-168.

Schmidt, C. P. 0989a). Applied music teachingbehavior as a function of selected personalityvariables. Journal of Research in Music Edu-cation, 37(4), 258-271.

Schmidt, C. P 0989b). Individual differences inperception of applied music teaching feed-

78 The Quarterly Journal of Music Teaching and Learning24



back. Psychology of Music, 17, 110-122.Schmidt, c., & Lewis. B. E. (1987). Field depen-

dence/independence, movement-based in-struction and fourth graders' achievement inselected musical tasks. Psychology of Music,15(2), 117-127.

Schmidt, C. P., & McCutcheon, J. W. (l988) Re-examination of relations between the Myers-Driggs Type Indicator and field dependence-independence. Perceptual and Motor Skills,67, 691-695.

Schmidt, C. P., & Stephans, R. (1991). Locus ofcontrol and field dependence as factors instudents' evaluations of applied music instruc-tion. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 73, 131-136.

Shaffer, P. W. (966). Functional similarity ofimagining to perceiving: Individual differ-ences in vividness of imagery. Perceptual andMotor Skills, 25, 744.

Sherman, ]. A., (1967). Problem of sex differencesin space perception and aspects of intellec-tual functioning. Psychological Review, 74,290-299.

Shute, G. E., Howard, M. M., & Steyaert,]. P.(1984). The relationships among cognitivedevelopment, locus of control, and gender.Journal of Research in Personality, 18, 335-341.

Sloboda,]. A. (974). The eye-hand span: An ap-proach to the study of sight-reading. Psvchol-ogv of Music, 2, 4-10.

Sloboda, ]. A. Cl976a). Visual perception of musi-cal notation: registering pitch symbols inmemory. Qum1erlYJournalofExperimentalPsychology, 28, 1-16.

Sloboda,]. A. (1978a). Perception of contour inmusic reading. Perception, 6, 323-331.

Sloboda, ].A. (1978b). The psychology of musicreading. Psychology of Music, 6 (2), 3-20.

Sloboda, J. A., & Gregory, A. H. (1980). The psy-chological reality of musical segments. Cana-dian journal Psychological Review, 34(3),274-280.

Slododa, ]. A. Cl981} The uses of space in musicnotation. Visihle Language, 15, 86-110.

Solomon, D., Houlihan, K. A., Busse, T. V., &Pareiius, R.]. (1971). Parent behavior andchild academic achievement, achievementstriving and related personality characteristics.Genetic Psychology Monographs, 83, 173-273.

Steptoe, A. (1989). Stress, coping and stage frightin professional musicians. Psychology ofMu-sic, 17, 3-11.

Stern, J F. (975). The application of languagereading skills to the teaching of music readingin elementary schools. Counsel for Researchin Music Education, 41, 45-53.

Strawitz, B. M. (1984). Cognitive style and theacquisition and transfer of the ability to con-trol variables. Journal of Research in ScienceTeaching, 21(2), 133-141.

Volume W, Number 1

Travis, C. B., l\1cKenzie, B.]., Wiley, D. L., &Kahn, A. S. (1988). Sex and achievement do-main: Cognitive patterns of success and fail-ure. Sex Roles, lCX7, 8), 509-525.

Vander Ark, S. D .. Nolin, W. H., & Newman, 1.(1980). Relationship between musical atti-tudes, self-esteem, social status, and gradelevel of elementary children. Bulletin of tbeCouncilfor Research in Music Education, 62,31-41

\Veaver, H. E. C1943a). A survey of visual pro-cesses in reading differently constructed mu-sical selections. Psychological Monographs,55, HO.

Weaver, H. E. C1943b). Iernory span and visualpauses in reading rhythms and melodies.Psychological Monographs, 55, 33-50.

Weber, R. j., & Brown, S. (986). Musical imag-ery. Music Perception, 3(4), 411-426.

Wolf, T. (976). A cognitive model of musicalsight-reading. Journal ofPsycbolinguistic Re-search, 5(22), 143-171.

Yokomoto, C. F., & Ware, J R. (980) Improvingproblem solving performance using the MBT!.Proceedings of tbe 1982 American Society ofEngineering A nnual Conference, pp.163-167)'(Available from the Center for Applications ofPsychological Type, Gainesville Fl)

Young, L. J. (1971). A study of the eye move-ments of successful and unsuccessful pianosight readers while piano sight-reading.(Doctoral dissertation, Indiana University).Dissertation Abstracts International, 32,5834A ~

The QuarterlyJournal of

MusicTeaching and

Learning

Subscribe Today!

See Page 80 for Details

7925



Date post:	08-May-2023
Category:	Documents
Upload:	khangminh22
View:	0 times
Download:	0 times

Visions of Research in Music Education

Documents