Open Collections

UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

Factors influencing the life expectancy of immigrants in Canada and Australia Kliewer, Erich Victor 1979

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Item Metadata

Download

Media
831-UBC_1979_A1 K45.pdf [ 8.58MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 831-1.0076983.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0076983-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0076983-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0076983-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0076983-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0076983-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0076983-source.json
Full Text
831-1.0076983-fulltext.txt
Citation
831-1.0076983.ris

Full Text

cop •  1  REDUCTION OF MUSICAL PERFORMANCE ANXIETY BY ATTENTIONAL TRAINING AND BEHAVIOUR REHEARSAL: AN EXPLORATION OF COGNITIVE MEDIATIONAL PROCESSES by  MARGARET JOAN KENDRICK B.A., U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia, 1971 M.A., U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia, 1975  A DISSERTATION SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY in THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES (Department of Psychology)  We accept t h i s d i s s e r t a t i o n as conforming to the required standard  THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA April,  1979  (g) Margaret Joan Kendrick, 1979  In  presenting  an  advanced  the I  Library  further  for  this  degree shall  agree  thesis  in  at  University  the  make  that  his  of  this  may  representatives.  written  thesis  for  be  It  financial  kpevl  j  of  is  by  Columbia  for  the  understood  gain  shall  of  the  requirements  B r i t i s h Columbia,  extensive  granted  of.  The U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h 2075 Wesbrook P l a c e Vancouver, Canada V 6 T 1W5  fulfilment  available  permission.  Department  oatP  freely  permission for  s c h o l a r l y purposes  by  it  partial  copying Head  that  not  reference  be  of  agree  and  of my  I  this  or  allowed  without  that  study. thesis  Department  copying  for  or  publication my  ii.  Abstract  The present study evaluates a t t e n t i o n a l t r a i n i n g and behaviour rehearsal i n t r e a t i n g musical performance anxiety and i n modifying s e l f - t a l k and perceptions of s e l f - e f f i c a c y . P i a n i s t s who experienced extreme anxiety i n . performing s i t u a t i o n s were randomly assigned to the f o l l o w i n g conditions: t r a i n i n g (n = 19),  (2) behaviour rehearsal (n = 16),  l i s t c o n t r o l (n = 1 8 ) .  ( l ) attentional (3) w a i t i n g  Three therapy sessions were conducted over a  three-week p e r i o d w i t h subjects i n the f i r s t two conditions meeting i n small groups f o r one and one-half t o two hours.  Subjects i n the a t t e n t i o n a l  t r a i n i n g program were taught t o become aware of t h e i r negative thoughts ' before, during, and a f t e r t h e i r performances and t o s u b s t i t u t e these negative thoughts w i t h p o s i t i v e task-relevant self-statements. Cognitive r e c a l l from videotaped performances and cognitive-modeling s l i d e - t a p e sequences f a c i l i t a t e d t h i s process.  Subjects i n the behaviour  rehearsal program were given a r a t i o n a l e f o r the e f f e c t i v e n e s s of repeated performance before a small supportive audience i n reducing performance anxiety.  Both treatments required performances during therapy  sessions  and i n home assignments. A m u l t i v a r i a t e a n a l y s i s o f covariance revealed no d i f f e r e n c e among the three groups at post-treatment or p h y s i o l o g i c a l measures.  on s e l f - r e p o r t , behavioural,  At a five-week follow-up, however, a t t e n t i o n a l  t r a i n i n g and behaviour rehearsal were more e f f e c t i v e than the w a i t i n g l i s t c o n t r o l c o n d i t i o n i n reducing v i s u a l signs of anxiety and improving the q u a l i t y of p l a y i n g .  A t t e n t i o n a l t r a i n i n g was superior t o behaviour  rehearsal i n reducing v i s u a l signs o f anxiety.  iii.  Two scales were developed to measure the cognitive mediational variables of s e l f - t a l k and s e l f - e f f i c a c y .  At follow-up, both treatments  were superior to no treatment i n increasing p o s i t i v e and decreasing negative thinking surrounding performances.  Attentional t r a i n i n g was superior to  the other two conditions i n enhancing expectations of personal e f f i c a c y . Behaviour rehearsal d i d not surpass the attentional t r a i n i n g treatment on any of the s i x dependent measures, at follow-up. These findings were discussed i n r e l a t i o n to previous research on attentional t r a i n i n g and behaviour rehearsal, and to the cognitive mediational processes common to both therapies.  Issues such as modeling  e f f e c t s , expectancy e f f e c t s , follow-up, home assignments, subject a t t r i t i o n , and implications f o r the musical community were also discussed.  iv. Table of Contents Page Abstract  i i  Table of Contents L i s t of Tables  iv v i i  L i s t of Appendices  viii  Acknowledgements  x  OVERVIEW  1  REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE  6  Performance Anxiety  6—  Musical Performance Anxiety  7 ~~  Treatment Approaches t o Performance Anxiety  10  The Cognitive Perspective  10  Self-instructional training  11  Attentional training  13  Behaviour Rehearsal Cognitive Mediational V a r i a b l e s I n f l u e n c i n g Performance Anxiety  18 . .  24  Self-talk  24  Expectations of Personal E f f i c a c y  27  The Measurement of Performance Anxiety  29  Cognitive, Behavioural, and P h y s i o l o g i c a l Components of Anxiety  29  S e l f - r e p o r t , Behavioural, and P h y s i o l o g i c a l Measures of Performance Anxiety i n the Present Study  30  STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM  33  THE DEVELOPMENT OF A SCALE TO MEASURE SELF-TALK  35  Method .,  35  Results.  36  Discussion* . . •  38  V.  THE DEVELOPMENT OF A SCALE TO. MEASURE EXPECTATIONS OF PERSONAL EFFICACY  39  Method  39  Results  41  Discussion ...  41  A COMPARATIVE EVALUATION. OF ATTENTIONAL TRAINING AND BEHAVIOUR . REHEARSAL IN TREATING. MUSICAL PERFORMANCE ANXIETY  43  Method  43  Subjects  43  Experimental Room  43  Experimenters and Therapist  .  44  S e l f - r e p o r t Measures  44  Behavioural Measures  46  P h y s i o l o g i c a l Measures  47  Apparatus and Equipment  48  Procedure  49  S e l e c t i o n of subjects  49  Administration of pre- and post-treatment assessment sessions  .  51  Follow-up assessment  52  A d m i n i s t r a t i o n of A t t e n t i o n a l Training and Behaviour Rehearsal Treatments  53  Attentional training  53  Behaviour rehearsal  56  Post-study Workshops f o r Control Subjects  57  Results  58  Pre-measures  58  P r a c t i c e Time and Number of Performances, between Pre-  and  Post-treatment Assessments  63  C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of the Follow-up Performance Expectations  64  of Treatment Effectiveness f o r A t t e n t i o n a l  T r a i n i n g and Behaviour Rehearsal Groups  64  Inter-rater R e l i a b i l i t i e s .  65  Treatment Outcome  67  Post-study Workshop f o r Behaviour Rehearsal and L i s t Control Groups Relationships Among Dependent Variables  Waiting 69 69  vi. P r e d i c t o r Variables  71  Relationship of Improvement on the Dependent Measures to C l a s s i f i c a t i o n and Process Variables . . .  74  Discussion  ^5  Modeling E f f e c t s  81  Expectancy E f f e c t s  83  Follow-up  84  Post-study Workshop  85  Home Assignments  85  Measures  86  I n t e r r e l a t i o n s h i p s among Indices  ...  89  Subject A t t r i t i o n Implications f o r the Musical Community  90 .  91  Footnotes  93  Reference Notes  94  References  95  Appendices  103  vii. L i s t of Tables Page Table 1  Means, Standard Deviations, and F Values f o r Demographic and other C l a s s i f i c a t i o n Variables . . .  59  Table 2  Means and Standard Deviations of Outcome Measures  61  Table 3  Inter-Rater R e l i a b i l i t i e s i n Percentages  66  Table 4  Analyses of Covariance Summary Tables  68  Table 5  I n t e r r e l a t i o n s h i p s among Dependent Measures at Pre-Treatment I n t e r r e l a t i o n s h i p s among Dependent Measures at Follow-up  72  Post-Treatment Measures as P r e d i c t o r s of Outcome . . . .  73  Table 6 Table 7  ...  70  viii.  L i s t of Appendices Page APPENDIX A APPENDIX B APPENDIX C APPENDIX D APPENDIX E  Consensual V a l i d i t y Test on the Performance Anxiety Self-Statement Scale (Form l )  103  Item A n a l y s i s Test on the Performance Anxiety Self-Statement Scale (Form 2)  113  F i f t e e n Items from the Report of Confidence as a Performer  122  Threat Value of Magnitude Items from the Expectations of Personal E f f i c a c y Scale . . . . . .  123  Threat Value of G e n e r a l i z a t i o n Items from the Expectations of Personal E f f i c a c y Scale  125  APPENDIX F  Subject S e l e c t i o n C r i t e r i o n  127  APPENDIX G  Expectations o f Treatment E f f e c t i v e n e s s  128  APPENDIX H  Expectations of Personal E f f i c a c y Scale  129  APPENDIX I  Performance Anxiety Self-Statement Scale ( F i n a l Form)  131  APPENDIX J  I n s t r u c t i o n s f o r Performance E r r o r Tabulation . . . .  135  APPENDIX K  Performance E r r o r Tabulation Sheet  136  APPENDIX L  Consensual V a l i d i t y Test on V i s u a l Signs of  ....  Performance Anxiety i n P i a n i s t s  137  APPENDIX M  Timed Behavioural Checklist f o r Piano Performance . .  138  APPENDIX N  L e t t e r to Piano Teachers  139  APPENDIX 0  Telephone Screening Procedure . . .  141  APPENDIX P  Consent Form  APPENDIX Q  Pre-Treatment P r a c t i c e and Performance Information and I n s t r u c t i o n Sheet Post-Treatment P r a c t i c e and Performance Information Sheet Follow-Up Performance I n s t r u c t i o n s f o r A t t e n t i o n a l T r a i n i n g Subjects  APPENDIX R APPENDIX S  H3 .....  144 145 146  ix. Page APPENDIX T  Follow-Up Performance I n s t r u c t i o n s f o r Behaviour Rehearsal and V/aiting L i s t Control Subjects  147  APPENDIX U  Information on Follow-Up Performance  148  APPENDIX V  S i g n i f i c a n t Other Ratings of V i s u a l Signs of Anxiety and Q u a l i t y of P l a y i n g during Follow-Up Performance  149  Therapist Manual f o r A t t e n t i o n a l T r a i n i n g Sessions  150  Therapist Manual f o r Behaviour Rehearsal Sessions  170  Therapist Manual f o r A t t e n t i o n a l Training Workshop  176  Post-Workshop Follow-Up I n s t r u c t i o n s f o r Behaviour Rehearsal and Waiting L i s t Control. Subjects  177  A n t i c i p a t e d E f f e c t s of Success and F a i l u r e Models on the Performance of Observers  178  APPENDIX W APPENDIX X APPENDIX Y APPENDIX Z  APPENDIX AA  X.  Acknowledgements Many people contributed t o the successful.completion of t h i s study. I would f i r s t l i k e t o mention those who served as members of the superv i s o r y committee:  Dr. Park Davidson (Chairman), Dr.. Ken C r a i g , Dr.  David Lawson, Dr. Bob Knox, and Dr. Susan Butt-Finn. Dr. Dale Reubart was music consultant f o r the study. I would also l i k e t o mention those who a s s i s t e d i n carrying out the research.  Outstanding were the contributions of Denise B j e r r i n g and  Judy Shotton who r a t e d the audiotapes and served as models i n the s l i d e tape sequences, Bob and Isobel Harrison, who r a t e d the videotapes, and E l a i n e Smith who helped t o administer the two assessment sessions. Denella Sing and Vance Hoy also helped by serving as models i n the s l i d e tape  sequences. Mrs. Helen S i l v e s t e r provided her studio f o r the performance  assessments, and Trudy and Greg Morse, Mrs. E. Long, and Mrs. P. Wilson provided homes f o r the therapy sessions. In a d d i t i o n t o the p i a n i s t s i n the main study, there were many other musicians who a s s i s t e d i n the development of the two scales and c o n t r i b u t e d ideas at various stages along the way. Ruth A l l a n p a t i e n t l y and s k i l l f u l l y typed the manuscript. Dr. Jan Nordin played a major r o l e at every stage of the d i s s e r t a t i o n . In a d d i t i o n to.encouragement and moral support throughout, he photographed the modeling sequences, operated the polygraph and.video equipment, and d i d a l l the computer analyses.  I would l i k e t o express my deep a p p r e c i a t i o n t o a l l these people for t h e i r time and help.  This d i s s e r t a t i o n i s dedicated to my mother and to the memory of my father.  1.  OVERVIEW  In recent years behavioural theory, research, and p r a c t i c e have been extended t o include "private events" - that i s , what we t h i n k , imagine, and f e e l .  The cognitive behaviour modifier conceptualizes problematic  behaviours as the r e s u l t of f a u l t y patterns of thought (Wilson, 1978). There has been a burgeoning development of cognitive therapeutic techniques f o r a v a r i e t y of problematic behaviours.  These cognitive s t r a t e g i e s  attempt t o modify maladaptive behaviours by changing the images and/or self-statements which the c l i e n t emits p r i o r t o , d u r i n g a n d / o r f o l l o w i n g overt behaviour. The cognitive trend i s r e f l e c t e d i n the p u b l i c a t i o n of a j o u r n a l , Cognitive Therapy and Research, and a number of recent books devoted e n t i r e l y t o the. t o p i c (e.g., Beck, 1976; Foreyt and Rathjen, 1978; Meichenbaum, 1977).  Although much enthusiasm has. been generated f o r  t h i s trend i n behaviour therapy, there i s as y e t l i t t l e evidence t o demonstrate that i t i s superior t o a more t r a d i t i o n a l behaviour therapy approach.  An a n a l y s i s by Ledwidge (1978) of c o n t r o l l e d studies comparing  the effectiveness of cognitive therapy techniques w i t h t r a d i t i o n a l behaviour therapy procedures, revealed that n e i t h e r was superior. Ledwidge's review prompted a deluge of accusations but also t h o u g h t f u l consideration of some important issues.  Ledwidge was c r i t i c i z e d f o r  h i s assumptions about the nature of cognitive behaviour m o d i f i c a t i o n (Mahoney and Kazdin, i n p r e s s ) , h i s assumptions about the nature of behaviour therapy (Locke, i n p r e s s ) , and h i s " s e l e c t i v e r e p o r t i n g " and "misrepresentation" of some o f the studies (Meichenbaum, i n p r e s s ) . In a d d i t i o n , Meichenbaum questioned the usefulness of a comparative  2.  evaluation of behaviour therapy versus c o g n i t i v e behaviour therapy when differences among s p e c i f i c therapies, subjects, and outcome measures are  ignored. There seemed to be general agreement, however, that a l l therapies  are to some extent both c o g n i t i v e and behavioural.  As Mahoney and  Kazdin pointed out, the behaviour t h e r a p i s t r e l i e s h e a v i l y on verbal communication during treatment and the cognitive behaviour t h e r a p i s t r e l i e s on behavioural performances as a primary means of challenging maladaptive b e l i e f s .  This makes d e f i n i t e d i s t i n c t i o n s between the  two  approaches somewhat a r b i t r a r y . There was a l s o agreement on the importance of e m p i r i c a l research i n evaluating treatment e f f e c t i v e n e s s .  In responding to Ledwidge's  p o s i t i o n that cognitions are not behaviours and therefore cannot be made the object of proper s c i e n t i f i c study, Locke stressed the need to continue the development of methods to measure cognitions more accurately, rather than to abandon t h i s search prematurely.  There was  particularly  strong agreement on the need f o r more research w i t h c l i n i c a l  populations.  The f a c t that two d i f f e r e n t approaches appear to be equally e f f e c t i v e i n changing behaviour r a i s e s the question of what i t i s that accounts f o r t h e i r e f f e c t i v e n e s s .  I t may be that instead of focusing  our e f f o r t s on whether c o g n i t i v e or behavioural techniques are superior, we should look f o r the f a c t o r or f a c t o r s i n both which account f o r t h e i r effectiveness.  An attempt has been made (e.g., Bandura, 1977) t o i d e n t i f y  a s i n g l e c o g n i t i v e mediational process which could account, f o r the e f f i c a c y of a v a r i e t y of therapeutic techniques from widely d i f f e r i n g schools of psychology.  Bandura postulated that psychological procedures achieve  changes i n defensive behaviour by a l t e r i n g perceptions of s e l f - e f f i c a c y .  3.  An e f f i c a c y expectation i s the c o n v i c t i o n that one can s u c c e s s f u l l y execute the behaviour required to produce c e r t a i n outcomes.  Such  expectations influence choice of a c t i v i t i e s and the i n t e n s i t y and persistance of e f f o r t at those a c t i v i t i e s .  From Bandura's viewpoint, i t may be that  a cognitive and a t r a d i t i o n a l behavioural approach are successful because they both.raise c l i e n t s ' expectations of personal e f f i c a c y . Meichenbaum (1977) a l s o theorized about mechanisms of change involved i n a l l therapeutic procedures.  He proposed that behaviour  change occurs through a sequence of processes i n v o l v i n g the i n t e r a c t i o n of inner speech, c o g n i t i v e s t r u c t u r e s , and behaviour.  Although each  therapy approach might focus p r i m a r i l y on only one of these three mechanisms, a l l three are viewed as being important i n change.  Meichenbaum  has developed techniques based on h i s assumption that a l t e r a t i o n of s e l f - t a l k i s the most d i r e c t form of therapeutic i n t e r v e n t i o n . From Meichenbaum's viewpoint, i t may be that a c o g n i t i v e and a t r a d i t i o n a l behavioural approach are successful because they both at some point alter self-talk. This search f o r a s i n g l e mediational. process underlying therapeutic change has necessitated the development of new t o o l s to measure such cognitive processes as perceptions of s e l f - e f f i c a c y and s e l f - t a l k . Bandura, Adams, and Smith (1977) have r e c e n t l y developed an instrument s p e c i f i c a l l y f o r the measurement of s e l f - e f f i c a c y i n snake phobic clients.  Other scales f o r use w i t h other populations are needed i n  order t o extend the f i n d i n g s of Bandura et a l . S i m i l a r l y , the d i r e c t assessment of s e l f - t a l k i s a l s o new.  U n t i l r e c e n t l y , changes i n i n t e r n a l  speech were not assessed but were assumed t o accompany changes i n overt behaviour.  Scales have been developed to assess p o s i t i v e and negative  A. thoughts r e l a t i n g t o assert!veness (Schwartz and Gottman, 1976), c r e a t i v i t y (Henshaw, 1977), and t e s t anxiety (Sarason, 1978).  Further  research on d i f f e r e n t samples i s obviously needed t o v a l i d a t e the r e l a t i o n s h i p of negative t h i n k i n g t o behavioural d e f i c i t . In comparing the e f f e c t s of therapies i n terms of t h e i r common mediational processes, a s u i t a b l e and challenging target population should be chosen.  Since previous studies i n v o l v i n g college undergraduates  may be l i m i t e d i n . t h e i r g e n e r a l i z a b i l i t y , i t i s " p a r t i c u l a r l y . i m p o r t a n t t o study non-student p o p u l a t i o n s ,  more s p e c i f i c a l l y , c l i e n t s who are s e l f - r e f e r r e d  f o r a problem which i s f u n c t i o n a l l y r e l a t e d t o t h e i r day-to-day l i v e s (Kazdin, 1-978). In recent years there has been an increased i n t e r e s t i n modifying anxiety i n a wide v a r i e t y of evaluative s i t u a t i o n s (such as w r i t t e n exams, speeches, a t h l e t i c s , and musical performances).  To the extent  that a musical performance i s unique i n . t h a t i t incorporates elements of each of the others, i t may represent a p a r t i c u l a r , challenge t o the researcher and t h e r a p i s t . Musical performance.anxiety  i s a l s o an i n t e r e s t i n g  problem t o study because a t r a d i t i o n a l behavioural technique i s widely used i n the musical community as a way of t r e a t i n g i t .  Behaviour rehearsal  or repeated performance before an audience i s used by many musicians, both amateur and p r o f e s s i o n a l , as a way of coping w i t h anxiety about upcoming performances.  In f a c t , quite apart from the comparison ^  i t could a f f o r d w i t h a cognitive-behavioural technique, thet . widespread use of behaviour rehearsal f o r musical performance anxiety alone would, appear t o warrant an i n v e s t i g a t i o n o f i t s e f f e c t i v e n e s s . In t a k i n g a c o g n i t i v e therapy approach, a t t e n t i o n a l t r a i n i n g would seem t o be a u s e f u l strategy f o r reducing performance anxiety i n  t-.  5.  musicians.  This i s i n d i c a t e d by the c r i t i c a l importance of complete  c o n t r o l of a t t e n t i o n i n performing on a musical instrument, and by s i m i l a r i t i e s of musical performance w i t h t e s t a n x i e t y , ' f o r which a t t e n t i o n a l t r a i n i n g has been e f f e c t i v e (Sarason, 1975a, 1978; Wine, 1971).  There are, however, s e v e r a l important d i f f e r e n c e s , notably  the f i n e motor s k i l l involved i n p l a y i n g an instrument, and i t has been suggested that an approach which does not involve r e l a x a t i o n t r a i n i n g may not be e f f e c t i v e i n t r e a t i n g anxiety when a f i n e motor s k i l l i s involved (Wardle, 1975).  A t t e n t i o n a l t r a i n i n g , however, has not been  evaluated w i t h such a problem. In order to maximize maintenance of therapeutic change, the a t t e n t i o n a l t r a i n i n g should be cast i n a self-management framework. Although i t i s premature to draw conclusions as to the e f f e c t i v e n e s s of self-management procedures, t h e i r use has been recommended by Kazdin (1975) as one way of enhancing response maintenance over time and across s e t t i n g s . The comparison of behaviour r e h e a r s a l w i t h self-management a t t e n t i o n a l t r a i n i n g , allows an i n t e r e s t i n g comparison between what musicians and what psychologists are c u r r e n t l y recommending as the most e f f i c i e n t way to reduce performance anxiety and maintain improvement.  More importantly,  the design chosen i n the present study allows an i n v e s t i g a t i o n of the r e l a t i v e e f f e c t i v e n e s s of the a t t e n t i o n a l t r a i n i n g and behaviour rehearsal treatments, and of the. cognitive mediational processes common to both.  6. REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE Performance Anxiety  In one of the most widely-known and h i g h l y regarded experiments i n psychotherapy research, Gordon Paul (1966) set a precedent w i t h h i s p o s i t i o n that performance anxiety was a l e g i t i m a t e problem f o r p s y c h o l o g i c a l intervention.  The importance of t r e a t i n g such problem behaviours can  be argued from a preventive point.of view.  By i n c r e a s i n g the competence  of. i n d i v i d u a l s to deal w i t h problems they encounter i n t h e i r everyday l i v e s , t h e i r behavioural r e p e r t o i r e s can be strengthened to withstand stresses which might otherwise lead to more serious d i s r u p t i o n s and expensive, .and- at aime-consuming therapeutic i n t e r v e n t i o n s (Iscoe, 1974; Sanford, 1968; Zax and Specter, 1974). I t should not, however., be assumed that anxiety w i l l always a f f e c t performance i n a negative way.  Lomas (1937) found that p u b l i c  speakers who reported severe performance anxiety gave speeches judged l e a s t s a t i s f a c t o r y , those who reported moderate performance anxiety gave speeches judged superior, and those who reported l i t t l e or- no performance :.anxiety. gave-speeches judged mediocre.  •_. ~  The objective  then would be the development of e f f e c t i v e methods of reducing anxiety to the l e v e l necessary f o r optimal performance. Since Paul's study, a number of other i n v e s t i g a t o r s have focused t h e i r attentions on anxiety reduction i n a v a r i e t y of performance situations.  Attempts have been made t o modify performance anxiety i n  p u b l i c speakers (e.g., Casas, 1975; Fremauw and Harmatz, 1975; Meichenbaum, Gilmore, and Fedoravicius, 1971), students taking w r i t t e n exams (e.g., Finger and G a l a s s i , 1977; Holroyd, 1976: Meichenbaum, 1972; Sarason, 1972a, 1973, 1975b, 1978; Wine, 1970), performing a t h l e t e s  7.  (e.g., Suinn, 1972), and performing musicians (e.g., Appel, 1976; Goldstein, 1975; James, G r i f f i t h , Pearson, and Newbury, 1977; Lund, 1972; Wardle, 1975).  Musical Performance Anxiety Some degree of musical performance anxiety i s experienced.by"most musicians, both amateur and p r o f e s s i o n a l , during t h e i r musical careers. In the present i n v e s t i g a t i o n i t i s defined as a t r a n s i t o r y s u b j e c t i v e , behavioural, and p h y s i o l o g i c a l response to a s p e c i f i c s t r e s s s i t u a t i o n , that of piano solo performance before an audience.  That i t i s worthy  of i n v e s t i g a t i o n i s evidenced by the f o l l o w i n g statement: The need to develop several e f f e c t i v e methods of reducing high degrees of performance anxiety i s evident. F a i l u r e to overcome the performance anxiety problem may contribute to i n e f f i c i e n t use of acquired musical s k i l l s and negative performing experiences, s u f f i c i e n t l y negative to discourage students from f u r t h e r study of music. There i s a dearth of experimentation i n the f i e l d of musical performance and performance anxiety, and considerable need e x i s t s f o r more w e l l - c o n t r o l l e d studies (Appel, 1976, p. 14). Reduction of performance anxiety i n a musical sight-reading s i t u a t i o n w i t h an audience, has been reported by both Lund (1972) and Wardle (1975). Systematic d e s e n s i t i z a t i o n , r e l a x a t i o n t r a i n i n g , and " i n s i g h t therapy" treatments a l l s i g n i f i c a n t l y diminished s e l f - r e p o r t e d anxiety and performance e r r o r s r e l a t i v e t o a no-contact c o n t r o l group, although t h e i r e f f e c t s on p h y s i o l o g i c a l measures were not evaluated (Lund, 1972). Wardle used systematic d e s e n s i t i z a t i o n , and r e l a x a t i o n t r a i n i n g (combined with supportive discussion) as therapeutic techniques f o r two d i f f e r e n t groups.  He s i g n i f i c a n t l y reduced performance anxiety i n both t r a i n i n g  groups r e l a t i v e t o a no-contact c o n t r o l as measured by reduced heart rates and reduced observable signs of anxiety.  There was no d i f f e r e n c e  8.  among groups on number of errors and o v e r a l l q u a l i t y of p l a y i n g . concluded that r e l a x a t i o n t r a i n i n g i s e s s e n t i a l i n reducing when motor a c t i v i t i e s are involved.  Wardle  anxiety  He d i d not, however, i n v e s t i g a t e  e f f e c t s on s e l f - r e p o r t of anxiety, or the effectiveness of r e l a x a t i o n t r a i n i n g alone, as i t was  combined w i t h an. emotive hierarchy i n one  group and supportive discussion i n the  other.  In a more r e f i n e d study, Appel (1976) compared systematic d e s e n s i t i z a t i o n focusing on c o n t r o l of the p h y s i o l o g i c a l . a n x i e t y response, music analysis focusing on more complete i n t e l l e c t u a l mastery of the m a t e r i a l , and an assessment control..  The systematic  d e s e n s i t i z a t i o n group showed  the greatest improvements on p h y s i o l o g i c a l , s e l f - r e p o r t , and performance measures.  Only performance errors were s i g n i f i c a n t l y reduced by the  music a n a l y s i s group.  Control subjects showed the l e a s t improvement.  Goldstein (1975) evaluated the effectiveness of a c o g n i t i v e approach, Systematic  Rational Restructuring ( G o l d f r i e d , Decenteceo, and Weinberg,  1974), in.reducing performance anxiety i n p i a n i s t s . with systematic  In.a comparison  d e s e n s i t i z a t i o n , n e i t h e r treatment r e s u l t e d i n changes  which were s t a t i s t i c a l l y d i f f e r e n t from placebo and w a i t i n g l i s t c o n t r o l s . James, G r i f f i t h , Pearson, and Newbury (1977) i n v e s t i g a t e d the e f f e c t s of oxprenolol versus a placebo on performance anxiety i n s t r i n g players.  S i g n i f i c a n t improvements from oxprenolol were found i n q u a l i t y  of performance, s e l f - r e p o r t of anxiety, and pulse rate immediately before performance.  The i n v e s t i g a t o r s j u s t i f i e d the use. of a drug to t r e a t  "normal" subjects under acute emotional s t r e s s , by p o i n t i n g out that informal surveys among musicians, suggested that alcohol and  sedatives  were already widely used r e g u l a r l y on a long-term basis to cope with the adverse e f f e c t s of performance anxiety.  Drugs were therefore not being  introduced where none was p r e v i o u s l y used.  In a d d i t i o n , the i n v e s t i g a t o r s  9.  suggested that the need f o r the drug would probably lessen w i t h time. The p o t e n t i a l side e f f e c t s of oxprenolol (Wade and Reynolds, 1977, pp.  1322-1323)  together with the p o s s i b l e development of p s y c h o l o g i c a l  dependence on the drug argue against i t s use.  Thus the popular trend  of t a k i n g a p i l l as the f i r s t way of coping w i t h a problem i s of great concern.  Psychological therapies therefore would c e r t a i n l y be p r e f e r r a b l e  to the use of drugs i f the former are equally e f f e c t i v e i n reducing p e r f o r mance anxiety.  10.  Treatment Approaches to Performance Anxiety  The Cognitive Perspective Much of the recent i n t e r e s t and research i n c o g n i t i v e behaviour therapy i s based upon E l l i s ' s . ( 1 9 6 2 ) emphasis on the c l i e n t ' s i r r a t i o n a l b e l i e f s and the s e l f - t a l k aspect of anxiety.  In h i s R a t i o n a l Emotive  Therapy, E l l i s d i f f e r e n t i a t e d the fear of a r e a l environmental  danger  from anxiety, which he claimed i s caused by a person's i r r a t i o n a l fear of an imagined stimulus.  E l l i s f u r t h e r assumed that a person's  i r r a t i o n a l l a b e l i n g of a s i t u a t i o n and h i s s e l f - t a l k are responsible for maintaining anxiety. Beck (1970) agreed w i t h E l l i s ' s explanation of anxiety and suggested that a c l i e n t ' s b e l i e f s are important i n determining behaviour and. should be viewed as appropriate targets f o r a n a l y s i s and change i n c o g n i t i v e behaviour therapy.  Bergin (1970), however, c r i t i c i z e d c o g n i t i v e mediational  t h e o r i s t s because of a lack of e m p i r i c a l data to support t h e i r contentions. In a d d i t i o n , Bergin asserted that i t i s f r e q u e n t l y a change i n behaviour that leads to a change i n cognitions r a t h e r than the reverse (as Beck presented i t ) .  Thus although s e l f - t a l k was seen as important, i t s p r e c i s e  r o l e had not been e s t a b l i s h e d . Although Bergin (1970) d i d not f i n d the evidence f o r the e f f i c a c y of c o g n i t i v e behaviour therapy to be adequate, the research i n t h i s area i n the l a s t .10 years has considerably changed the status of the cognitive approach to problem behaviours.  Mahoney and Arnkoff (1978)  reviewed the studies on the c o g n i t i v e l e a r n i n g therapies and  concluded  that a f t e r a r e l a t i v e l y slow s t a r t , the c o g n i t i v e r e s t r u c t u r i n g , coping s k i l l s , and problem-solving therapies are gathering growing support i n  11.  c l i n i c a l outcome research.  Two c o g n i t i v e r e s t r u c t u r i n g therapies emerging  from E l l i s ' s work have been developed, and appear to have some e m p i r i c a l support. Systematic R a t i o n a l Restructuring ( G o l d f r i e d , Decenteceo,• and Weinberg, 1974) places R a t i o n a l Emotive Therapy i n t o a systematic program which attempts t o make c l i e n t s aware of t h e i r maladaptive self-statements and to change t h e i r behaviour through persuasion, encouragement, and education i n the form of r a t i o n a l analyses.  The research on the e f f e c t i v e -  ness of Systematic R a t i o n a l Restructuring i s s t i l l at.a p r e l i m i n a r y stage.  The r e s u l t s so f a r have been equivocal w i t h some studies demonstrating  i t s s u p e r i o r i t y over other techniques (e.g., G o l d f r i e d , Linehan, and Smith, 1978) while others show i t leads only to minimal changes (Casas, 1975; Goldstein, 1975). Although S e l f - I n s t r u c t i o n a l T r a i n i n g (Meichenbaum, 1974) a l s o aims t o make c l i e n t s aware o f t h e i r negative thoughts, there i s an important d i f f e r e n c e between the two approaches.  The goal o f Systematic  R a t i o n a l Restructuring i s broader - to help the c l i e n t get r i d of i r r a t i o n a l concerns and worries and place each s i t u a t i o n i n t o a more r e a l i s t i c perspective.  The goal of S e l f - I n s t r u c t i o n a l T r a i n i n g i s more  s p e c i f i c - t o s u b s t i t u t e s e l f - o r i e n t e d i n t e r f e r i n g responses w i t h taskfocused ones.  Mahoney and Arnkoff (1978) pointed out t h a t :  Although the major emphasis o f R a t i o n a l Emotive Therapy i s the d e s t r u c t i o n of maladaptive b e l i e f s £and the same can be s a i d of i t s behavioural counterpart Systematic Rational Restructuring], s e l f - i n s t r u c t i o n a l t r a i n i n g supplants t h i s w i t h a c o n s t r u c t i v e phase of s k i l l s development (p. 705).  Self-instructional training.  Although the r o l e of " p r i v a t e monologues"  i n emotional experience and performance r e g u l a t i o n has been recognized  12.  for many years, i t i s only r e c e n t l y that v e r b a l s e l f - i n s t r u c t i o n has become a t o p i c of experimental i n t e r e s t .  Some of the most extensive and  c l i n i c a l l y impressive work i n t h i s area has come from Don Meichenbaum and h i s colleagues.  Meichenbaum (1974) presented an i n t e g r a t i o n of the  cognitive and s t r i c t l y behavioural approaches t o therapy that has a wide range of c l i n i c a l a p p l i c a t i o n s .  Rather than looking at s p e c i f i c v e r b a l -  i z a t i o n s as targets f o r change, as a r a d i c a l behaviourist might, Meichenbaum suggested t h i n k i n g s t y l e as a target f o r behavioural i n t e r v e n t i o n . In h i s S e l f - I n s t r u c t i o n a l T r a i n i n g , self-management and c o g n i t i v e behavioural approaches are combined i n a treatment designed to modify maladaptive behaviours through changing the way people t a l k t o  themselves.  C l i e n t s are taught to become aware of t h e i r negative thoughts and to s u b s t i t u t e them w i t h p o s i t i v e self-statements.  Independent r e p l i c a t i o n s ,  refinements, and extensions to a v a r i e t y . o f problems and populations corroborate a growing confidence i n the e f f i c a c y of t h i s strategy (Meichenbaum, 1977). Several recent reviews (Meichenbaum, 1977, Note 1, Note 2, Note 3) r e v e a l an i n c r e a s i n g number of studies on S e l f - I n s t r u c t i o n a l T r a i n i n g w i t h both adults and c h i l d r e n experiencing a wide v a r i e t y of problematic behaviours.  Although most of the experimental a c t i v i t y has been confined  to treatment outcome s t u d i e s , more r e c e n t l y i n v e s t i g a t o r s have begun to "dismantle"  S e l f - I n s t r u c t i o n a l T r a i n i n g i n order to i s o l a t e . i t s  c r i t i c a l components (e.g., Bowman, 1977; Novaco, 1975). One serious problem i n the research and c l i n i c a l a p p l i c a t i o n of treatment "packages" (such as S e l f - I n s t r u c t i o n a l T r a i n i n g ) , has been that each i n v e s t i g a t o r or t h e r a p i s t has h i s or her own p a r t i c u l a r idea as t o what components are involved and how much emphasis should be placed on each.  This makes comparisons across studies very complicated.  13.  In order to f a c i l i t a t e r e p l i c a t i o n s and comparisons of r e s u l t s , i t i s important that the components of programs and t h e i r r e l a t i v e emphases be c l e a r l y s p e c i f i e d . The a v a i l a b i l i t y of treatment manuals i s important i n t h i s respect. The S e l f - I n s t r u c t i o n a l T r a i n i n g program as Meichenbaum (Note 4) conceived i t , incorporates progressive muscle r e l a x a t i o n as an i n t e g r a l part of treatment.  I t appears, however, that S e l f - I n s t r u c t i o n a l Training  can be e f f e c t i v e without the r e l a x a t i o n component, at l e a s t f o r some problem behaviours.  An example i s the a t t e n t i o n a l t r a i n i n g approach  f o r c l i e n t s with t e s t anxiety.  Attentional training.  Much of the current research on performance  anxiety has focused on the t a s k - i r r e l e v a n t i d e a t i o n that h i g h l y test-anxious i n d i v i d u a l s experience i n evaluative s i t u a t i o n s . When performance i s being evaluated, high-anxious persons spend much of t h e i r time, (a) worrying about t h e i r performance and about how w e l l others are doing, (b) ruminating over a l t e r n a t i v e answers, ( c ) being preoccupied w i t h such things.as f e e l i n g s of inadequacy, a n t i c i p a t i o n of punishment, l o s s of status and self-esteem, and heightened somatic and autonomic reactions and Watson, 1966; Marlett and Watson, 1968). of Mandler and S.B.  (Handler  Following the e a r l y work  Sarason (1952), Irwin Sarason (i960, 1972a, 1975a)  and J e r i Wine (1971) suggested that the h i g h l y anxious i n d i v i d u a l divides a t t e n t i o n between s e l f - and task-relevant v a r i a b l e s , whereas the m i l d l y anxious i n d i v i d u a l focuses a t t e n t i o n more f u l l y on the task. This hypothesis was consistent w i t h abundant evidence that the high test-anxious person i s more self-preoccupied and s e l f - d e p r e c a t i n g than a person w i t h low t e s t anxiety (Sarason, I960; Wine, 1971). In a d d i t i o n , research demonstrated that these s e l f - f o c u s i n g tendencies  14. were a c t i v a t e d by the t e s t i n g s i t u a t i o n (Ganzer, 1968; Mandler and Watson, 1966; M a r l e t t and Vfatson, 1968; Neale and Katahm, 1968). The d e b i l i t a t i n g e f f e c t s of worry on performance on w r i t t e n t e s t s have been documented by Liebert and Morris (1967), S p i e g l e r , M o r r i s , and L i e b e r t (1968), Doctor and Altman. (1969), and Morris and L i e b e r t (1970). The importance of autonomic arousal i n t e s t anxiety has a l s o been i n v e s t i g a t e d .  L i e b e r t and Morris (1967) suggested that t e s t  anxiety i s composed of two major components, worry and emotionality. The worry component was described as c o g n i t i v e concern over performance; emotionality as the autonomic arousal aspect of anxiety.  In comparative  studies, several i n v e s t i g a t o r s found that the emotionality component was l e s s l i k e l y to i n t e r f e r e with the performance of high test-anxious persons than worry which required more of the i n d i v i d u a l ' s a t t e n t i o n (Doctor and Altman, 1969; Morris and L i e b e r t , 1969, 1970).  In a review of the  research, Wine (1971) found that autonomic arousal appeared to bear no consistent r e l a t i o n s h i p to performance on i n t e l l e c t u a l or c o g n i t i v e t a s k s , while worry was c o n s i s t e n t l y and negatively r e l a t e d to performance. Wine concluded that worry, a d i s t r a c t i n g c o g n i t i v e a c t i v i t y , i s more d e b i l i t a t i n g of task performance than arousal.  Doctor and Altman (1969)  reported that autonomic a c t i v i t y was l e s s l i k e l y than worry to require a t t e n t i o n , 'except at high l e v e l s where p h y s i o l o g i c a l r e a c t i v i t y might be d i s t r a c t i v e and annoying" (p. 364). I f worry I s a more Important f a c t o r i n t e s t anxiety than autonomic arousal, a t t e n t i o n a l t r a i n i n g would appear to be the most appropriate treatment.  In a l l e v i a t i n g t e s t anxiety both Wine (1970) and Sarason  (1972a, 1975a) suggested that i t might be s u f f i c i e n t to s u b s t i t u t e task-relevant responses f o r the s e l f - o r i e n t i n g ones by means of  15.  straightforward a t t e n t i o n - d i r e c t i n g i n s t r u c t i o n s . was t e s t e d and.corroborated  This hypothesis  by Wine (1970) and Sarason (1972a, 1978).  Wine found that a t t e n t i o n a l t r a i n i n g combined w i t h r e l a x a t i o n t r a i n i n g r e s u l t e d i n general improvement i n performance on i n t e l l i g e n c e t e s t s and i n s e l f - r e p o r t e d t e s t anxiety, but no more so than d i d a t t e n t i o n a l t r a i n i n g alone. Sarason (1978) reported that test-anxious subjects' performance on an anagram task was s i g n i f i c a n t l y improved by advising subjects to be f l e x i b l e i n t h e i r approach and suggesting s t r a t e g i e s f o r completing the task.  This l e d to adaptive coping behaviour because i t reduced  self-preoccupying thoughts that i n t e r f e r e d w i t h ongoing a c t i v i t i e s and because i t provided d i r e c t i o n i n approaching a challenging s i t u a t i o n . Sarason (1973? 1975b) also documented the e f f e c t i v e n e s s of a coping model who v e r b a l i z e s c o g n i t i v e s t r a t e g i e s , i n reducing anxiety i n high test-anxious i n d i v i d u a l s . . In the f i r s t study he demonstrated that a model's enunciation of general p r i n c i p l e s and suggestions f o r approaching a task helped high-  but not low-anxious subjects.  he found that observing a model who  In the second study  admitted to t e s t anxiety but described  ways of coping w i t h i t , r e s u l t e d i n s i g n i f i c a n t l y greater anxiety reduction than exposure to a model who only admitted to t e s t anxiety, and to a model who d i d not s e l f - d i s c l o s e .  These, f i n d i n g s suggested  the value of i n c o r p o r a t i n g a c o g n i t i v e coping model i n t o the a t t e n t i o n a l t r a i n i n g program. This d i s c u s s i o n has been based on studies i n v o l v i n g test-anxious clients.  I t may not be l e g i t i m a t e , however, to draw similar, conclusions  when the target population i s performance-anxious musicians."'"  Otto Deri  (1972) made a case that the performing musician faces the s t i f f e s t t e s t . He stated that w r i t t e n examinations,  a t h l e t i c endeavours and p u b l i c  16.  addresses do not make as many demands on the i n d i v i d u a l as a musical performance.  According t o D e r i , the musician must be i n absolute c o n t r o l  of motor co-ordination i n v o l v i n g the f i n e s t muscle a c t i o n , has t o t r u s t memory, and a t the same time f e e l and p r o j e c t the music w i t h a u t h o r i t y and c o n v i c t i o n . There are several important f a c t o r s then, which d i s t i n g u i s h musical performance from other types of performance anxiety.  One e s s e n t i a l  difference between a musical performance and a w r i t t e n t e s t s i t u a t i o n i s that i n the l a t t e r , a temporary lapse of concentration or overwhelming f e e l i n g s of anxiety can occur and be followed by s e l f - i n s t r u c t i o n s t o cope through a t t e n t i o n focusing o r r e l a x a t i o n .  I n p l a y i n g a musical  instrument, concentration lapses and overwhelming f e e l i n g s of anxiety are  not "allowed."  I f these do occur they are immediately and often  d r a s t i c a l l y r e f l e c t e d i n the performance.  In. contrast, i f the t e s t -  anxious student can cope w i t h i n t r u d i n g anxious thoughts and f e e l i n g s , the  examiner w i l l never know they have occurred. A difference between speech and musical performance s i t u a t i o n s  i s that i t i s much e a s i e r t o "ad l i b " i n speaking than i t i s t o improvise m u s i c a l l y , because i n t h e . l a t t e r ease a set piece of music well-known to at l e a s t some members of the audience i s performed. Perhaps the most c r i t i c a l d i f f e r e n c e between t e s t and speech anxiety on the one hand and musical performance anxiety on the other, i s the complex motor s k i l l involved,In p l a y i n g a musical instrument. Because musical performance involves a complex motor s k i l l , the suggestion that autonomic arousal i s l e s s l i k e l y t o i n t e r f e r e w i t h performance than worry o r c o g n i t i v e concern (Wine, 1971.) may be r e s t r i c t e d t o t e s t and speech s i t u a t i o n s .  The evidence f o r Wine's conclusion comes from performance  on " i n t e l l e c t u a l or c o g n i t i v e tasks" and not on tasks which also involve  17.  a complex motor s k i l l . Given the n e c e s s i t y of . good- ' c o n t r o l of motor co-ordination i n p l a y i n g an instrument, i t may be that an approach i n v o l v i n g muscle r e l a x a t i o n would be more e f f e c t i v e i n reducing the anxiety associated with performing i n p u b l i c . I t i s not p o s s i b l e t o a s c e r t a i n however from the l i m i t e d number of studies on musical performance anxiety ( G o l d s t e i n , 1975; Lund, 1972; Wardle, 1975), whether an approach which does not include r e l a x a t i o n t r a i n i n g could be e f f e c t i v e i n reducing anxiety as assessed by s e l f - r e p o r t , behavioural, and p h y s i o l o g i c a l i n d i c e s . Lund and Wardle did not, evaluate changes i n a l l three response systems and Goldstein found no s i g n i f i c a n t differences among groups on any of the measures.  Appel (1976), however, showed that a cognitive-type approach  (music a n a l y s i s ) could be as e f f e c t i v e as systematic d e s e n s i t i z a t i o n i n reducing performance e r r o r s . In deciding whether a t t e n t i o n a l t r a i n i n g i s an appropriate treatment for performance anxiety i n musicians, i t i s necessary f i r s t to i n v e s t i g a t e whether high-anxious performers are more self-preoccupied and s e l f deprecating than low-anxious performers. that we often provide.therapy of our c l i e n t s ' d e f i c i t s .  Meichenbaum (Note 2) cautioned  regimens without f u l l y exploring the nature  I f musical performance anxiety i s associated  with self-preoccupied and self-deprecating t h i n k i n g , then an a t t e n t i o n a l t r a i n i n g approach would seem t o be an appropriate method of treatment. In summary, although not yet evaluated, a t t e n t i o n a l t r a i n i n g would appear to be a u s e f u l technique f o r reducing performance anxiety i n musicians.  This was suggested by i t s s i m i l a r i t y i n part to t e s t anxiety  for which a t t e n t i o n a l t r a i n i n g had been e f f e c t i v e , and by the c r i t i c a l importance of complete c o n t r o l of a t t e n t i o n i n performing on a musical instrument.  The e f f i c a c y of a c o g n i t i v e approach when a complex motor  18.  s k i l l i s involved warranted f u r t h e r i n v e s t i g a t i o n .  Behaviour Rehearsal Behaviour rehearsal i s based on the p r i n c i p l e of e x t i n c t i o n , which r e f e r s to the' reduction i n frequency of a behaviour as a f u n c t i o n of occurrences that are nonreinforced (Woodworth and Schlosberg, 1954). In performance anxiety terms, t h i s means that performing without  negative  consequences w i l l lead to a reduction i n the anxiety associated with performing that p a r t i c u l a r  behaviour.  Studies of the e f f e c t i v e n e s s of behaviour rehearsal i n reducing anxiety suggest that i t i s an important component of treatment programs such as p a r t i c i p a n t modeling (Bandura, 1971) and assertiveness t r a i n i n g (McFall and Twentyman, 1973), but that used alone i t i s not as e f f e c t i v e as other techniques  ( B e l l a c k , and Hersen, 1977; Paul, 1966).  Bellack  and Hersen found that mere p r a c t i c e i n the absence of i n s t r u c t i o n s or coaching was i n e f f e c t i v e i n b r i n g i n g about improvements i n a s s e r t i v e behaviour i n c l i n i c a l populations.  In a study of the m o d i f i c a t i o n  of speech anxiety, Paul found that subjects who presented s i x speeches over the course of f i v e months without f u r t h e r i n t e r v e n t i o n , reported e s s e n t i a l l y no change i n performance anxiety as measured by s e l f - r e p o r t , behavioural, and p h y s i o l o g i c a l i n d i c e s . . Paul concluded that d i s t r i b u t e d p r a c t i c e i n p u b l i c speaking served only to r e i n f o r c e and  maintain  anxiety p r e v i o u s l y attendant on the speaking s i t u a t i o n .  From these  studies i t appears that repeatedly rehearsing a p a r t i c u l a r behaviour i s not s u f f i c i e n t i n i t s e l f to reduce the anxiety associated with i t . Other studies have suggested that repeated performance a c t u a l l y r e s u l t s i n a d e t e r i o r a t i o n of the problematic behaviour.  In reducing performance  anxiety i n brass p l a y e r s , Wardle (1975) found that a repeated assessment  19.  c o n t r o l group showed increased heart rates and more observable of anxiety.  signs  Of nine performance-anxious p i a n i s t s i n a s i m i l a r c o n t r o l  group, Appel (1976) reported that s i x showed no change or an increase i n heart r a t e , f i v e showed no change or an increase i n s e l f - r e p o r t e d anxiety, and f i v e evidenced a d e t e r i o r a t i o n i n performance.  Both s t u d i e s ,  however, involved only two performances so they do not represent a f a i r t e s t of the value of repeated performance. In contrast t o t h i s , two studies have appeared i n the l i t e r a t u r e which a t t e s t to the value of behaviour rehearsal i n reducing speech anxiety.  Sanders (1967) found that speech anxiety was reduced as a  r e s u l t o f repeated performance before an audience.  He concluded that  anxiety can be reduced through exposure to the feared s i t u a t i o n s , i f no adverse e f f e c t s accompany the consequent anxiety arousal.  Sanders  suggested that anxiety i s reduced i n . r o l e . p l a y i n g as the make-believe q u a l i t y reduces perception of threat by the c l i e n t .  Johnson, T y l e r ,  Thompson, and Jones (1971) found that systematic d e s e n s i t i z a t i o n and repeated p r a c t i c e were equally e f f e c t i v e i n reducing speech anxiety i n j u n i o r high students and were superior t o a no-contact c o n t r o l condition. More r e c e n t l y the value of behaviour rehearsal i n a f f e c t i n g change has been re-examined.  The current p o p u l a r i t y of c o g n i t i v e methods has  been accompanied by attempts t o evaluate whether they are more e f f e c t i v e than t r a d i t i o n a l behavioural therapies.  Kazdin (1977) reviewed the  l i t e r a t u r e on covert conditioning techniques versus overt behavioural rehearsal and concluded that overt presentation of s t i m u l i and overt c l i e n t performance lead to greater therapeutic change than do imagerybased treatments.  This i s consistent with Bandura's view that performance-  based treatments are superior t o other types of therapy (1969, 1971, 1977).  From t h i s review of the a v a i l a b l e l i t e r a t u r e , i t appears that  20.  the b e n e f i t s or l i m i t a t i o n s of behaviour rehearsal i n reducing p e r f o r mance anxiety have not been thoroughly assessed. Despite the uncertain status of behaviour rehearsal as f a r as psychologists are concerned, the musical community continues to place great import on the value of repeated performance before an audience. A number of well-known teachers and musicians - such as A r t u r Rubinstein (McNabb, 1951) - have recommended that simply performing o f t e n i n f r o n t of others i s the key to the performance-anxiety problem.  They  advise musicians to do the very t h i n g they fear - to p l a y i n p u b l i c as often as p o s s i b l e , even though at f i r s t i t may be d i f f i c u l t because of high l e v e l s of anxiety.  Some w r i t e r s are almost f a n a t i c a l i n t h e i r b e l i e f  that repeated-performance i s the s o l u t i o n to s t a g e - f r i g h t .  Don M i l s  (1972) advised musicians to "never shy away from an opportunity to perform" (p. 33).  Ralph Lewando (1968) s a i d "Ask to perform f o r clubs,  p a r t i e s , meetings.  O f f e r your music to the Lions, the E l k s , the Moose,  bridge and bingo groups" (p. 64). The endorsement of behaviour rehearsal by so many musicians (many of whom are eminent i n t h e i r p a r t i c u l a r f i e l d s ) suggests that i t must have been associated w i t h some degree of success i n reducing performance anxiety.  I t may be u s e f u l then f o r psychologists to have a c l o s e r  look at the way i n which behaviour rehearsal has been conceptualized and c a r r i e d out i n the musical community.  Perhaps the effectiveness  of behaviour rehearsal d i f f e r s as a f u n c t i o n of the nature of the problem, c l i e n t , and t h e r a p i s t or i n v e s t i g a t o r employing i t . One f a c t o r which may be c r i t i c a l i n determining whether repeated performance can be of b e n e f i t i n reducing performance anxiety, i s the nature of the a n t i c i p a t e d and/or a c t u a l response from the audience. Weiss and M i l l e r (1971) argued that evaluation apprehension i s evoked  21.  only when negative outcomes are a n t i c i p a t e d by the performer.  Paul  (1966) suggested that continued p r a c t i c e i n p u b l i c speaking w i t h p o s i t i v e reinforcement anxiety.  from the audience would probably lead t o a reduction i n  Support f o r the.importance of "audience" r e a c t i o n comes from  the assertiveness t r a i n i n g l i t e r a t u r e .  The reinforcement  of improvement  i s an e s s e n t i a l ingredient of.behaviour rehearsal as employed i n assertiveness t r a i n i n g (Rimm and Masters, 1974).  These authors noted  that feedback, when necessary, i s presented i n a "decidedly  nonpunitive  manner" (p. 93). A second f a c t o r , r e l a t e d t o the f i r s t , which may influence the effectiveness of behaviour rehearsal i s the threat-value of the audience. An audience which the i n d i v i d u a l perceives as threatening may not be as e f f e c t i v e i n reducing anxiety as an audience which i s perceived as nonthreatening or f r i e n d l y and supportive.  Support f o r t h i s comes from  Davidson and K e l l e y (1973) who corroborated the hypothesis that when audiences are perceived as a "safety s i g n a l , " c l i e n t s ' a b i l i t y t o cope with s t r e s s i s f a c i l i t a t e d .  Perhaps the threat-value of the audience  would decrease i f performance-anxious i n d i v i d u a l s b e l i e v e d that the audience members could i d e n t i f y w i t h t h e i r problem. A t h i r d f a c t o r which may influence the e f f e c t i v e n e s s of behaviour rehearsal i s the use of a hierarchy of anxiety-producing s i t u a t i o n s as part of treatment.  Assertiveness..training programs u s u a l l y make  use of such a hierarchy.  C l i e n t s are f i r s t required t o i n t e r a c t w i t h  an empathetic t h e r a p i s t .  Then others are included i n r o l e - p l a y i n g s i t u a t i o n s ,  and f i n a l l y the c l i e n t i s asked t o t r y the newly-acquired prospective employer, g i r l f r i e n d , or foe.  s k i l l s on a  Grossberg (1965) used a  hierarchy i n t r e a t i n g a s i n g l e case of public-speaking anxiety.  He  asked h i s c l i e n t t o face p r o g r e s s i v e l y l a r g e r audiences and d e l i v e r  22.  longer and longer speeches and.reported s i g n i f i c a n t improvement - from i n a b i l i t y t o perform a one-minute speech to completing s i x required speeches. A f o u r t h f a c t o r which undoubtedly a f f e c t s the b e n e f i t s derived from behaviour rehearsal i s perceived successes or f a i l u r e s i n the f i r s t few attempts.  This f a c t o r , u n l i k e the previous.three, i s under much  less therapist control.  I f a performer experiences f a i l u r e ( i . e . , i n a b i l i t y  to c o n t r o l anxiety r e s u l t i n g i n a poor performance) on the f i r s t few performances, i t i s l i k e l y that behaviour rehearsal w i l l f a i l t o be e f f e c t i v e f o r that indivi.'dual.  I f , however,, a performer  experiences  success, s/he w i l l gain a f e e l i n g of. mastery (Bandura, 1977) and f o r that i n d i v i d u a l the treatment may be e f f e c t i v e . I t i s s u r p r i s i n g that researchers, have not addressed themselves to the value of these four f a c t o r s i n determining the e f f e c t i v e n e s s of behaviour r e h e a r s a l therapy.  Given the v a r i e t y of ways that behaviour  rehearsal could be conceptualized i t i s not s u r p r i s i n g , however, that much confusion e x i s t s as t o the value of the technique i t s e l f . that a behaviour rehearsal, "package" using a non-threatening  I t seems audience,  p o s i t i v e feedback, h i e r a r c h i c a l presentation of anxiety-producing s i t u a t i o n s , and minimization of perceived f a i l u r e by subjects has not yet been evaluated. I t i s i n t e r e s t i n g that behaviour rehearsal as i t i s conceptualized by the musical community incorporates these four f a c t o r s .  Many music  teachers arrange informal afternoon or evening "get-togethers" t o a i d t h e i r students i n preparing f o r r e c i t a l s , competitions, and exams. Anxious students perform f o r other anxious students.  Even very  experienced musicians arrange p r e - r e c i t a l gatherings of f r i e n d s t o " t r y out" a program.  T y p i c a l l y the feedback from the audience i s p o s i t i v e  23.  or at l e a s t encouraging.  Gradually audience s i z e i s increased and the  actual performance s i t u a t i o n more c l o s e l y approximated.  And f i n a l l y ,  care i s taken t o prevent performers from viewing d i f f i c u l t i e s as an i n d i c a t i o n of f a i l u r e . In summary, although experimental evidence f o r the e f f e c t i v e n e s s of behaviour r e h e a r s a l i s equivocal, the musical community continues to place great import on i t s use. A number of c r i t i c a l features of behaviour r e h e a r s a l as i t i s employed by musicians, suggested that a f u r t h e r i n v e s t i g a t i o n of i t s effectiveness was warranted.  24.  Cognitive Mediational V a r i a b l e s Influencing Performance Anxiety  Self-Talk Meichenbaum's annual newsletter on cognitive behaviour m o d i f i c a t i o n (Note 1, Note 2, Note 3) and other p u b l i c a t i o n s (e.g., Meichenbaum, 1977) a t t e s t t o the p l e t h o r a of i n v e s t i g a t i o n s since 1969 of the S e l f - I n s t r u c t i o n a l Training technique.  The effectiveness of the .complete S e l f - I n s t r u c t i o n a l  Training "package," and more r e c e n t l y i t s components, has been examined f o r a wide v a r i e t y of problematic.behaviours i n both c h i l d r e n and adults. In almost a l l of these studies, changes i n c l i e n t s ' s e l f - t a l k has been assumed t o account f o r demonstrated changes i n v e r b a l , motor, and/or p h y s i o l o g i c a l behaviour.. I t i s an unwarranted assumption, however, that changes i n behaviour are n e c e s s a r i l y caused by changes i n s e l f - t a l k , or that no changes i n behaviour are associated w i t h no change i n the i n d i v i d u a l ' s i n t e r n a l dialogue. An i n d i v i d u a l may change c o g n i t i v e s t y l e w i t h the change not immediately r e f l e c t e d i n the observable behaviour. On the other hand, i f changes i n behaviour r e s u l t i n a change i n cognitive s t y l e , i t i s p o s s i b l e that a change i n behaviour i s not immediately r e f l e c t e d i n changes i n the i n d i v i d u a l ' s s e l f - t a l k . I t seems important, then, t o gather s p e c i f i c information about c l i e n t s ' thoughts r a t h e r than t o make assumptions about these thoughts from the observable behaviour.  I t i s only r e c e n t l y , however, that  i n v e s t i g a t o r s have turned t h e i r a t t e n t i o n t o the s e l f - t a l k i t s e l f . Schwartz and Gottman (1976) developed an assertiveness questionnaire t o assess i n d i v i d u a l s ' thoughts and f e e l i n g s f o l l o w i n g a r o l e - p l a y i n g s i t u a t i o n . Subjects responded t o 34 items - 17 p o s i t i v e self-statements which would make i t e a s i e r t o refuse an unreasonable request, and 17 negative s e l f -  25. statements which would make i t harder t o refuse.  Subjects i n d i c a t e d on  a scale from one. to f i v e how frequently these self-statements characteri z e d t h e i r thoughts during the preceding a s s e r t i v e s i t u a t i o n s .  Schwartz  and Gottman used t h i s questionnaire to determine the r o l e of c o g n i t i v e f a c t o r s i n the behavioural d e f i c i t of unassertive i n d i v i d u a l s .  They  found that moderate- and h i g h - a s s e r t i v e subjects had s i g n i f i c a n t l y more p o s i t i v e than negative self-statements., whereas low-assertive subjects d i d not d i f f e r i n t h e i r numbers of p o s i t i v e and negative self-statements. Since that.time, other i n v e s t i g a t o r s have used Schwartz and Gottman's approach to develop s i m i l a r scales f o r other target behaviours.  Sarason  (1978) developed a scale designed to assess the thought.processes test-anxious subjects.  of high  His Cognitive Interference Questionnaire consisted  of 11 items representing 11 negative thoughts which a person could have while taking a w r i t t e n t e s t .  Sarason found that high test-anxious subjects,  u n l i k e low and middle test-anxious subjects, were preoccupied w i t h  how  poorly they were doing, how other people were f a r i n g , and what the examiner would think.  S i m i l a r l y Henshaw (1977) constructed • a questionnaire to  examine the c o g n i t i v e processes of subjects engaged i n c r e a t i v i t y t e s t s . Scores on t h i s scale c o r r e l a t e d w e l l w i t h c r e a t i v e performance, were r e l i a b l e over time, and r e l a t e d to an external c r i t e r i a of c r e a t i v e performance (Meichenbaum, 1977). While lauding the development of these questionnaires, Meichenbaum (Note 3) cautioned that " i t i s impossible t o determine i f the reported thoughts represent post hoc r a t i o n a l i z a t i o n s of performance and/or i f they r e f l e c t a c t u a l thought sequences the subjects experienced.during performance" (p. 18).  actual  Bruch (Note 5) attempted to overcome t h i s problem by  administering a c o g n i t i v e s e l f - r e p o r t scale at s e v e r a l i n t e r r u p t e d points during a laboratory anagram task.  One wonders about the r e a c t i v e e f f e c t s of such  26. a procedure on performance at the task i . e . , the assessment i t s e l f would probably change the behaviour which followed i t .  I n a d d i t i o n , such i n t e r r u p t e d  assessments are not r e a l l y appropriate i n tasks such as piano performance because they would t o t a l l y disrupt the mood and flow of the music f o r the performer.  I t i s a n t i c i p a t e d that most musicians would refuse t o  undergo such a procedure. A refinement of such c o g n i t i v e scales which are administered f o l l o w i n g the performance, would t o some extent overcome the problem r a i s e d by Meichenbaum.  The establishment of before, during, and a f t e r subscales  would require subjects t o c a r e f u l l y consider t h e i r thoughts at each of these time periods separately.  Thus a negative set r e s u l t i n g from  a poor performance would be l e s s l i k e l y t o generalize over a l l the answers than i n questionnaires which do not make t h i s d i s t i n c t i o n .  In addition,  t h i s segmentation could also provide information on whether a subject who performed poorly would s t i l l report p o s i t i v e thoughts which occurred before the performance began. While "attempting t o search f o r f u r t h e r s o l u t i o n s t o the problems i n c u r r e d w i t h r e t r o s p e c t i v e r e p o r t i n g , i t i s worthwhile t o continue t o gather the k i n d of information which these post-performance questionnaires provide.  As i n Schwartz and Gottman's (1976) approach, i t can be used t o  examine d i f f e r e n c e s i n cognitive s t y l e between i n d i v i d u a l s who are low and high on any given v a r i a b l e . I n other words, i t i s a u s e f u l t o o l f o r a task a n a l y s i s of the r o l e of cognitive f a c t o r s i n a behavioural d e f i c i t . Secondly, scales which examine i n t e r n a l dialogues can be used t o assess changes i n self-statements as a r e s u l t of various types of therapeutic intervention.  This has not y e t been attempted.  27. Expectations of Personal E f f i c a c y Bandura (1977) postulated that p s y c h o l o g i c a l procedures achieve changes i n behaviour by a l t e r i n g perceptions of s e l f - e f f i c a c y .  Perceived  s e l f - e f f i c a c y influences choice of a c t i v i t i e s and the i n t e n s i t y and persistance of e f f o r t at those a c t i v i t i e s . Bandura d i s t i n g u i s h e d among several dimensions of e f f i c a c y expectations.  The f i r s t of these was magnitude.  Expectancies may vary from  being able to carry out only simple tasks, to mastering very d i f f i c u l t ones.  E f f i c a c y expectations also d i f f e r i n g e n e r a l i t y . Expectancies  may  vary from engaging i n only a l i m i t e d number of t a s k s , to a n t i c i p a t i n g success at a wide v a r i e t y of tasks and s i t u a t i o n s . expectancies a l s o v a r i e s .  The strength of  The stronger the expectations, the greater the  l i k e l i h o o d of perseverance, at a task despite dissuading experiences. According to Bandura, expectations of. personal e f f i c a c y are gathered from four main sources of information:  performance accomplishments,  v i c a r i o u s experience, verbal persuasion, and emotional arousal.  Bandura  hypothesized that the most i n f l u e n t i a l of these would be performance accomplishments because of i t s b a s i s i n experiences of personal mastery. According t o Bandura (1977), independent performance enhances e f f i c a c y expectations by (a) c r e a t i n g exposure to former threats which provides p a r t i c i p a n t s w i t h evidence that they are no longer a v e r s i v e l y aroused by what they p r e v i o u s l y feared, (b) p r o v i d i n g an opportunity to p e r f e c t coping s k i l l s , ( c ) producing success experiences which r e i n f o r c e expectat i o n s of s e l f - e f f i c a c y .  Bandura expected that v i c a r i o u s experience,  v e r b a l persuasion, and emotional arousal would also i n f l u e n c e e f f i c a c y expectations, although to a l e s s e r degree. In order t o t e s t h i s hypothesis, Bandura et a l . (1977) designed  an  experiment to examine the r e l a t i v e powers of performance accomplishments  28. and v i c a r i o u s experience, i n r a i s i n g expectations of personal e f f i c a c y , and to i n v e s t i g a t e whether greater expectations of s e l f - e f f i c a c y were r e l a t e d to improvements i n behaviour. were divided i n t o three groups: and no treatment.  T h i r t y - t h r e e snake-phobic subjects  p a r t i c i p a n t modeling, modeling alone,  The magnitude, g e n e r a l i t y , and strength of e f f i c a c y  expectations as w e l l as approach behaviour and f e a r arousal were measured before and a f t e r treatment.  The mastery-based  treatment produced higher,  stronger, and more generalized expectations of personal e f f i c a c y than the treatment r e l y i n g on v i c a r i o u s experience alone.  In a d d i t i o n , the hypothesized  r e l a t i o n s h i p between s e l f - e f f i c a c y and behaviour change was  confirmed.  In both t h i s study and a second one (Bandura, 1977), the p r e d i c t i v e s u p e r i o r i t y of e f f i c a c y expectations over past performance was demonstrated.  Perceived  s e l f - e f f i c a c y was a b e t t e r p r e d i c t o r of behaviour toward f a m i l i a r and u n f a m i l i a r threats than was past  performance.  29. The Measurement of Performance Anxiety  Cognitive, Behavioural, and P h y s i o l o g i c a l Components of Anxiety There has been abundant evidence to support the independence of the c o g n i t i v e , behavioural, and p h y s i o l o g i c a l components of anxiety (Bergin and Suinn, 1975).  Several i n v e s t i g a t o r s have reported that systematic  d e s e n s i t i z a t i o n r e s u l t s i n modified behaviour but no accompanying s i g n i f i cant decrease i n s e l f - r e p o r t s of fear and anxiety (Davison,  1968;  Lang and Lazovik, 1963; Lang, Lazovik, and Reynolds, 1965; Paul, 1966). Johnson and Sechrest (1968) i n a study i n v o l v i n g test-anxious  students,  i n d i c a t e d that verbal behaviour of r e p o r t i n g oneself as anxious i s not dealt with d i r e c t l y by d e s e n s i t i z a t i o n procedures.  I t has a l s o been  reported that a person's cognitive a p p r a i s a l of a s i t u a t i o n and s e l f - r e p o r t of anxiety can be a l t e r e d without changing the p h y s i o l o g i c a l i n d i c a t i o n s of anxiety (Leitenberg, Agras, Butz, and Wincze, 1971; Morris and L i e b e r t , 1969). On the b a s i s of t h i s research one might wonder whether s p e c i f i c types of treatment are e f f e c t i v e i n changing only s p e c i f i c components of anxiety responses.  Perhaps c o g n i t i v e behaviour m o d i f i c a t i o n a l t e r s  behavioural and s e l f - r e p o r t measures of anxiety but not p h y s i o l o g i c a l indices.  Perhaps r e l a x a t i o n t r a i n i n g i s e f f e c t i v e i n reducing p h y s i o l o g i c a l  arousal but not s e l f - r e p o r t e d anxiety. There have been data, however, which i n d i c a t e that the three components of anxiety can be a f f e c t e d by the same treatment.  The operating f a c t o r  may be t h a t , as Gambrill (1977) has noted, events i n one system may act as cues f o r reactions i n other systems.  F o l k i n s , Lawson, Opton, and  Lazarus (1968) and Musante and Anker (1974-) have shown that treatments aimed at a l t e r i n g the cognitive a p p r a i s a l of f e a r and anxiety also a l t e r  30.  p h y s i o l o g i c a l responses such as s k i n r e s i s t e n c e and heart r a t e .  And  conversely, r e l a x a t i o n t r a i n i n g can a l t e r not only p h y s i o l o g i c a l but s e l f - r e p o r t and behavioural measures as w e l l (e.g., G o l d f r i e d and T r i e r , 1974).  Although s e l f - r e p o r t , behavioural, and p h y s i o l o g i c a l responses  can a l l be a f f e c t e d by a s i n g l e treatment, there i s f r e q u e n t l y an uneven pattern of change across the three systems e.g., behavioural change may occur before reductions i n p h y s i o l o g i c a l or c o g n i t i v e s t r e s s ( L i c k and K a t k i n , 1976).  The need f o r a multimodal approach to assessment  i s thus evident.  S e l f - r e p o r t , Behavioural, and P h y s i o l o g i c a l Measures of Performance Anxiety i n the Present Study In the present study measures were selected to represent a l l three response systems.  There were two s e l f - r e p o r t of anxiety scales - the  State Anxiety Inventory (Spielberger, Gorsuch,. and Lushene, 1970) and the Subjective Stress Scale (Neufeld and Davidson, 1972) - i n a d d i t i o n to the Performance Anxiety Self-Statement Scale and the Expectations of Personal E f f i c a c y Scale developed f o r use i n t h i s study. Two behavioural measures were obtained. e r r o r count.  The f i r s t was a performance  From her data, Appel (1976) concluded that e r r o r count  "appears to be the most s e n s i t i v e i n d i c a t o r of performance anxiety i n p i a n i s t s " (p. 14).  This observation was i n accord w i t h the f i n d i n g s of  Brozek and Taylor (1954) that motor performance was a f f e c t e d more n e g a t i v e l y under stress than sensory or i n t e l l e c t u a l f u n c t i o n i n g . Wardle (1975) found a close r e l a t i o n s h i p between e r r o r count and a subjective evaluation of q u a l i t y by judges.  Appel (1976) advised that s p e c i f i c and comprehensive  error counts be used f o r most accurate r e s u l t s i n future studies of musical performance anxiety.  31.  The second behavioural measure was a timed c h e c k l i s t of observable i n d i c a t i o n s of performance anxiety ( v i s u a l s i g n s ) .  This measure had been  employed as an anxiety i n d i c a n t by Paul (1966) w i t h speech-anxious c l i e n t s , by Wardle (1975) with performance-anxious brass p l a y e r s , and by Goldstein (1975) w i t h performance-anxious p i a n i s t s .  Although  Paul  and Wardle found s i g n i f i c a n t differences between treatment groups and a no-treatment c o n t r o l on observable behaviour, Goldstein found no such differences on observable signs of musical performance anxiety or on any of the other dependent measures.  Thus the meaningfulness of using  v i s u a l signs as an i n d i c a t i o n of performance anxiety i n p i a n i s t s i s n o t . c l e a r l y e s t a b l i s h e d I n the l i t e r a t u r e .  As the three response systems  are r e l a t i v e l y independent, the usefulness of v i s u a l signs could not n e c e s s a r i l y be assessed by an i n v e s t i g a t i o n of i t s r e l a t i o n s h i p to p h y s i o l o g i c a l and s e l f - r e p o r t . d a t a . However i f v i s u a l signs were compared to a second behavioural measure such as performance e r r o r count, i t s v a l i d i t y might be  assessed.  In order to assess changes i n p h y s i o l o g i c a l responses to performance s t r e s s , a measure of heart rate was obtained.  Mathews (1971) reported  that the most c o n s i s t e n t l y s i g n i f i c a n t e f f e c t s have, been observed using s k i n r e s i s t e n c e or cardiovascular responses, p a r t i c u l a r l y heart r a t e . I t i s recognized that a d d i t i o n a l p h y s i o l o g i c a l measures would be d e s i r a b l e ( L i c k and Katkin, 1976), however, t h i s was surpassed by a concern w i t h minimal i n t e r f e r e n c e from measurement devices during the a c t u a l performance. These seven measures were obtained p r i o r to treatment and f o l l o w i n g treatment, and four of them (the s e l f - r e p o r t measures) were obtained at a five-week I n vivo follow-up.  Behavioural r a t i n g s by s i g n i f i c a n t  others were also gathered at follow-up.  The necessity of follow-up  assessment was h i g h l i g h t e d by J e f f r e y (1974) who reported, a f t e r  32.  reviewing the l i t e r a t u r e , that when follow-up assessments were done, they often revealed a relapse to p r e - i n t e r v e n t i o n l e v e l s .  Additionally,  McFall and Twentyman (1973) recommended that follow-ups be done outside the laboratory.  They noted that although behavioural assessment of  treatment.effects i n the laboratory i s now common, few studies have demonstrated the existence of treatment e f f e c t s outside the context.  experimental  33. STATEMENT OF' THE: PROBLEM'  The present research, had two major, aims:  ( l ) to compare the r e l a t i v e  effectiveness of a t t e n t i o n a l t r a i n i n g and behaviour rehearsal i n reducing musical performance anxiety and (2) to i n v e s t i g a t e whether these treatments would modify the cognitive mediational v a r i a b l e s of s e l f - t a l k and expectations of personal e f f i c a c y .  This second goal n e c e s s i t a t e d the  development of two scales to measure these cognitions. The c r i t i c a l r o l e of a t t e n t i o n i n piano performance and s i m i l a r i t i e s between musical performance anxiety and t e s t anxiety, suggested that a t t e n t i o n a l t r a i n i n g (with a behaviour rehearsal component) would be the most e f f e c t i v e way to modify performance anxiety i n musicians. While behaviour rehearsal had. been an important component of many therapeutic programs, there was l i t t l e evidence to show that i t could.-.be e f f e c t i v e on i t s  own.  I t would be expected that a cognitive treatment designed to a l t e r s e l f - t a l k would be more e f f e c t i v e than behaviour r e h e a r s a l i n a c t u a l l y altering self-talk.  However, Meichenbaum (1977) postulated that a  v a r i e t y of treatments can a l t e r s e l f - t a l k and that t h i s i s a necessary aspect, at some p o i n t , of a l l therapy.  I t was p o s s i b l e then that  behaviour rehearsal alone may a l t e r s e l f - t a l k to some degree. With regard to the second cognitive v a r i a b l e , Bandura et a l . (1977) concluded that behaviourally-based treatments are superior to other types of therapy i n modifying expectations of personal e f f i c a c y .  Since  both treatments i n the present study contained a behaviour r e h e a r s a l component, i n t e r e s t l a y i n whether the cognitive component was  sufficiently  important to r a i s e s e l f - e f f i c a c y beyond the l e v e l reached w i t h behaviour rehearsal alone.  34.  The f o l l o w i n g hypotheses were advanced i n the present 1.  study:  P i a n i s t s who report themselves as h i g h l y anxious about performing  have more negative and fewer p o s i t i v e thoughts surrounding a performance than p i a n i s t s who. report themselves as only m i l d l y anxious. 2.  Both attentional. t r a i n i n g and behaviour rehearsal are more  e f f e c t i v e than a "no-treatment" c o n t r o l i n reducing performance anxiety i n p i a n i s t s as measured by s e l f - r e p o r t , behavioural, and p h y s i o l o g i c a l indices. 3.  A t t e n t i o n a l training, i s more e f f e c t i v e than behaviour rehearsal  i n reducing performance anxiety i n p i a n i s t s as measured by s e l f - r e p o r t , behavioural, and p h y s i o l o g i c a l i n d i c e s . 4.  A t t e n t i o n a l t r a i n i n g can r e s u l t i n changes i n a l l three  response m o d a l i t i e s .  I t can reduce s e l f - r e p o r t e d anxiety, increase  behavioural competence, and decrease p h y s i o l o g i c a l i n d i c e s of anxiety. 5.  A t t e n t i o n a l t r a i n i n g i s more e f f e c t i v e than behaviour rehearsal  i n i n c r e a s i n g positive.and decreasing negative thoughts  surrounding  a musical performance. In a d d i t i o n t o these hypotheses, a number of questions could be answered from the a v a i l a b l e data: 1.  Was there any d i f f e r e n c e between a t t e n t i o n a l t r a i n i n g and  behaviour rehearsal i n r a i s i n g expectations of personal e f f i c a c y ? 2.  Were more successful performances during the program  associated with, higher expectations of personal e f f i c a c y at i t s close? 3.  Were higher expectations of treatment e f f e c t i v e n e s s associated  with a more successful response to treatment? 4.  Were more assignments completed by subjects i n the a t t e n t i o n a l  t r a i n i n g group or by subjects i n the behaviour rehearsal group? completion of home assignments r e l a t e d to therapeutic outcome?  Was  35. THE DEVELOPMENT OF A SCALE TO MEASURE SELF-TALK  The Performance Anxiety Self-Statement Scale was developed t o assess p i a n i s t s ' p o s i t i v e and negative thoughts or self-statements before, during, and a f t e r a musical performance.  Method  Subjects Three groups of subjects were employed i n t h i s study.  Subjects i n  group one were s i x p i a n i s t s known t o the author, ranging i n age from 14 t o 51 (M = 30.50) and i n competence from a grade s i x student- to- a' " prpfessipna.l_musician and teacher. There were f i v e females and one male. Subjects i n group two were 34 musicians (31 of them p i a n i s t s ) from the Music Department at the U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia.  They  ranged i n age from 17 t o 55 (M = 26.00, SD = 10.11), and there were 23 females and 11 males. Subjects i n group three were 101 p i a n i s t s from music departments at two u n i v e r s i t i e s , two music schools, and one high school.  They ranged  i n age from 11 t o 53 (M = 20.12, SD = 8.52), and there were 80 females and 21 males.  For the construct v a l i d i t y measure some subjects were  added t o t h i s group from the main study.  Concurrent v a l i d i t y and t e s t -  r e t e s t r e l i a b i l i t y were determined using subjects from the main study.  Procedure The scale was developed as follows.  I n order t o e s t a b l i s h content  v a l i d i t y , s i x p i a n i s t s (group one) created a pool of 92 items - thoughts which they f e l t a p i a n i s t could have before, during, and a f t e r a performance.  36. These 92 items (see Appendix A) were consensually v a l i d a t e d on an independent sample of 34- musicians (group two). Items were rated as "more h e l p f u l or more i n t e r f e r i n g and as occurring before, during, or a f t e r a performance. Items which were not rated, by 80% of the subjects as c l e a r l y p o s i t i v e or negative ( 6 , 7, o r 1, 2 on a seven-point s c a l e ) i n terms o f h e l p i n g or i n t e r f e r i n g w i t h piano performance, were discarded.  This procedure  eliminated 22 items. The 70 remaining items (see Appendix B) were administered t o an independent sample of 101 p i a n i s t s (group t h r e e ) .  Items were rated  as to how frequently they occurred w i t h reference t o a s p e c i f i c performance and whether before, during, or a f t e r the performance. was then performed.  An item a n a l y s i s  According to Magnusson (1967), an item a n a l y s i s i s  necessary t o choose items which contribute maximally t o the r e l i a b i l i t y and v a l i d i t y of a scale.  The item a n a l y s i s revealed, each item's  c o r r e l a t i o n w i t h the t o t a l score.  From t h i s l i s t the 16 p o s i t i v e and  16 negative items w i t h the highest c o r r e l a t i o n s to the t o t a l score were selected to comprise the f i n a l scale.  The time-period r a t i n g s were  combined w i t h those from the previous test.and 80% agreement was required t o designate an item i n the before, during, and/or a f t e r category. Tests of v a l i d i t y and r e l i a b i l i t y . o n the s c a l e were then performed.  Results  Thirty-two items - 16 p o s i t i v e and 16 negative - comprised the f i n a l scale.  C o r r e l a t i o n c o e f f i c i e n t s i n the item a n a l y s i s ranged from .65  to .38.  I n the f i n a l scale there were 16 before-, 25 during-, and 18  after-performance items, w i t h some items occurring i n more than one category.  Thus each of these subscales was large enough t o be analyzed  37. separately. In obtaining a measure of concurrent v a l i d i t y , the t o t a l scale scores were c o r r e l a t e d w i t h four e x t e r n a l c r i t e r i a i n the main study. The Performance Anxiety Self-Statement Scale (higher score = more p o s i t i v e thoughts) was i n v e r s e l y r e l a t e d to the State Anxiety Inventory ( r = -.4-0, p <. .01, o n e - t a i l e d t e s t ) and the Subjective Stress Scale ( r = -.4-8, p<. .001, o n e - t a i l e d t e s t ) , and to performance e r r o r count ( r = -.34, p <• .01,  o n e - t a i l e d test)~, -but .was^notj-related to heart r a t e .  Subjects scoring, i n the top and bottom t h i r d s (n = 75) on a 15-item anxiety scale (from the Report, of Confidence as a Performer, Appel, 1974 - see Appendix C) were included, i n an a n a l y s i s to assess the construct v a l i d i t y of the self-statement scale.  Two one-way between groups analyses  of variance revealed a s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e between high-anxious and low-anxious subjects on.self-statements surrounding a musical performance. High-anxious subjects reported more negative thoughts, F ( l , 73) = 16.13, p<.0"001, and fewer p o s i t i v e thoughts, F ( l , 73) = 42.45, p <  .0001,  than low-anxious subjects. Two f u r t h e r analyses showed that low-anxious subjects had more p o s i t i v e than negative thoughts, F ( l , 35) = 32.00, p < i .0001, whereas high-anxious subjects d i d not d i f f e r i n t h e i r numbers of p o s i t i v e and negative thoughts, F ( l , 36)<C 1, p >  .05.  While t e s t - r e t e s t r e l i a b i l i t y was not expected to be high because scales were completed w i t h reference to d i f f e r e n t performances, i t was assessed using pre- and post-scores from subjects i n the main study who d i d not receive treatment (n = 18). scores was  .56.  The c o r r e l a t i o n of t o t a l  A measure of the i n t e r n a l consistency of the scale  was also obtained.  A c o e f f i c i e n t alpha was computed ( r = .92)..  38. Discussion  Although the focus of the present research was not the development of the Performance Anxiety Self-Statement  Scale, i t was deemed necessary  to devise a scale with good v a l i d i t y and r e l i a b i l i t y because of i t s importance i n assessing a c o g n i t i v e mediational process of i n t e r e s t i n the main study.  An item a n a l y s i s , consensual, concurrent, and  construct v a l i d i t y , and t e s t - r e t e s t r e l i a b i l i t y and i n t e r n a l consistency were assessed.  The r e s u l t s suggested that the scale was v a l i d and  r e l i a b l e enough to be used i n f u r t h e r studies. The r e s u l t s of the construct v a l i d i t y t e s t also provided support for a t t e n t i o n a l t r a i n i n g as an appropriate treatment f o r musical performance anxiety.  I t was clear.from the r e s u l t s that high-anxious p i a n i s t s had  more negative thoughts and fewer p o s i t i v e thoughts than low-anxious pianists.  In a d d i t i o n , low-anxious p i a n i s t s had more p o s i t i v e than  negative thoughts, whereas high-anxious p i a n i s t s d i d not d i f f e r i n t h e i r numbers of p o s i t i v e and negative thoughts.  This l a t t e r f i n d i n g was  i n t e r e s t i n g as i t p a r a l l e l e d the f i n d i n g s of Schwartz and Gottman (1976) that moderate- and high-assertive subjects had s i g n i f i c a n t l y more p o s i t i v e than negative self-statements,. whereas low-assertive subjects d i d not d i f f e r i n t h e i r numbers of p o s i t i v e and negative self-statements. appears that "an i n t e r n a l dialogue of c o n f l i c t . a n d negative  It  self-statements"  (Meichenbaum, Note 3) characterize i n d i v i d u a l s who are h i g h l y anxious i n i n t e r p e r s o n a l s i t u a t i o n s and musical performances. These r e s u l t s with musical performance anxiety are consistent with the research on t e s t anxiety which has shown that the high t e s t anxious person i s more self-preoccupied and s e l f - d e p r e c a t i n g than a person with low t e s t anxiety (Sarason, I960; Wine, 1971).  39. THE DEVELOPMENT OF A SCALE TO MEASURE EXPECTATIONS OF PERSONAL EFFICACY  The Expectations of Personal E f f i c a c y Scale was developed t o evaluate p i a n i s t s ' expectations as t o t h e i r a b i l i t y t o carry out a v a r i e t y of performance tasks w i t h anxiety under c o n t r o l .  The magnitude, g e n e r a l i t y ,  and strength of expectations were o f i n t e r e s t .  Method  Subjects Two groups of subjects were employed i n t h i s study. Subjects i n group one were 60 musicians from the Music Department at the U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia.  Demographic information was. not gathered; however,  the majority of subjects were between the ages of 17 and 22 and there were more females than males. Subjects i n group two were f i v e p i a n i s t s ranging i n age from 14 to 51 (M = 27.8).  There were three females and two males.  Concurrent v a l i d i t y and t e s t - r e t e s t r e l i a b i l i t y were determined using subjects from the main study.  Procedure In the present study, the scale Bandura et a l . (1977) used t o measure e f f i c a c y expectations i n snake phobics was modified f o r use w i t h musical performance, anxiety. of three categories of items: expectations.  The s c a l e , l i k e Bandura's, was t o be comprised magnitude, g e n e r a l i t y , and strength of  40. In developing a magnitude of expectations subscale, f i v e performance s i t u a t i o n s of varying degrees of threat were i d e n t i f i e d .  Threat value  was based on information c o l l e c t e d i n f o r m a l l y from musicians, who reported that membership and s i z e of the audience and consequences of the performance determined the degree of threat of a p a r t i c u l a r performance s i t u a t i o n . In order t o obtain consensual v a l i d i t y on the rank order'of threat value, these f i v e performance s i t u a t i o n s (see Appendix D) were presented i n 10 p o s s i b l e pair-wise comparisons t o 60 musicians (group one). Subjects were asked t o s e l e c t the s i t u a t i o n which was "more threatening" (that i s , which would make them f e e l more anxious) from each p a i r . The magnitude subscale also provided a measure of " s i t u a t i o n a l g e n e r a l i z a t i o n " of expectations i . e . , whether expectations generalize to each of the f i v e d i f f e r e n t s i t u a t i o n s . In.developing a generalization, of expectations over tasks subscale, f i v e d i f f e r e n t performance tasks were i d e n t i f i e d .  I n t h i s subscale i t  was the a c t u a l task rather than the s i t u a t i o n which v a r i e d .  Again, a l l  p o s s i b l e pair-wise comparisons were presented; t h i s time t o a small sample of f i v e p i a n i s t s (see Appendix E).  This was done t o determine the  magnitude of threat of the items i n t h i s subscale. Strength of expectations was s e t on a seven-point scale from "completely c e r t a i n " t o "very uncertain."  Subjects were asked t o r a t e  how c e r t a i n they were, that they could engage i n the .10 performance s i t u a t i o n s w i t h t h e i r anxiety under c o n t r o l .  Unlike Bandura's snake  phobics, most of whom would not touch a snake, many musicians have engaged i n most or a l l of the 10 tasks a l b e i t w i t h extreme l e v e l s of anxiety.  I t was decided therefore, t o obtain expectations of being able  to perform the various tasks w i t h "anxiety under c o n t r o l , " r a t h e r than expectationsiof being able t o perform the tasks.  41. Results  The consensual v a l i d i t y of rank order of threat of the f i v e magnitude s i t u a t i o n s presented i n 10 pair-wise comparisonswas determined using percentage o f agreement f o r each of the 10 p a i r s followed by a rank ordering of the items.  Agreement ranged from 82% t o 100%.  An attempt was made t o assess the consensual v a l i d i t y of rank order of threat of the f i v e g e n e r a l i z a t i o n t a s k s , presented again i n 10 pair-wise comparisons.  A small survey suggested that i t was not p o s s i b l e  to equate the tasks i n terms of the magnitude of e f f i c a c y expectations. I t might be noted p a r e n t h e t i c a l l y that Bandura et a l . (1977) made no mention of' an attempt t o i n v e s t i g a t e or equate the magnitude of threat of the items i n t h e i r g e n e r a l i z a t i o n subscale. In obtaining a measure of concurrent v a l i d i t y , the t o t a l scale scores were c o r r e l a t e d w i t h four e x t e r n a l c r i t e r i a i n the main study. The Expectations of Personal E f f i c a c y Scale (high score = higher expectations) was i n v e r s e l y r e l a t e d t o the State Anxiety Inventory ( r = -.41, P <^ .01, o n e - t a i l e d t e s t ) and the Subjective Stress Scale ( r = -.33,  p < .01,  o n e - t a i l e d t e s t ) , but was not r e l a t e d t o performance e r r o r count or to heart rate. The t e s t - r e t e s t r e l i a b i l i t y of the scale was assessed using preand post-scores.from s u b j e c t s . i n the,main study who d i d not receive treatment (n = 18).  The c o r r e l a t i o n of t o t a l scores was .88. .  Discussion  As i n the previous study, the focus of the present research was  42. not the development of a scale - i n t h i s case the Expectations o f Personal E f f i c a c y Scale.  Since the scale was t o p l a y an important part i n the main  study, however, an attempt was made t o make i t a v a l i d and r e l i a b l e instrument, although not t o the extent of the previous s c a l e .  The  r e s u l t s of the v a l i d i t y and r e l i a b i l i t y i n v e s t i g a t i o n s , and a comparison w i t h Bandura's work, suggested that the scale was v a l i d and r e l i a b l e enough t o be used i n future studies.  43. A COMPARATIVE EVALUATION OF ATTENTIONAL TRAINING AND BEHAVIOUR-- • REHEARSAL IN TREATING MUSICAL PERFORMANCE ANXIETY  This study c o n s t i t u t e s the main body of the research.  I t was an  attempt t o compare the e f f e c t i v e n e s s of two treatments f o r reducing musical performance anxiety, using the two p r e v i o u s l y described scales t o i n v e s t i g a t e the c o g n i t i v e mediational processes operating i n both therapies.  Method  Subjects Subjects were 53 p i a n i s t s ranging i n age.from 12 t o 53 (M = 18.83, SD - 7.61).  There were 48 females and f i v e males, which i s representative  of the female/male r a t i o studying piano f o r t h i s age group (Reubart, Note 6).  Grade l e v e l s ranged from three t o 12 (M = 8.06, SD = 2.18).  Two c r i t e r i a were a p p l i e d t o select subjects from a l a r g e r pool of p i a n i s t s who reported that they experienced extreme anxiety i n a performing situation..  Subjects had t o be i d e n t i f i e d by t h e i r teachers  as having extreme performance anxiety, and were required t o have a score of f i v e o r higher on 15 items from the Report of Confidence as a Performer (Appel, 1974) (See Appendix F ) .  Only three volunteers f o r the  program were r e j e c t e d because they d i d not meet the s e l e c t i o n c r i t e r i a . Subjects were randomly assigned t o one of three groups:  attentional  t r a i n i n g , behaviour r e h e a r s a l , and w a i t i n g l i s t c o n t r o l .  Experimental Room The two performance assessments were conducted i n a studio i n the  44. Music B u i l d i n g at the U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia.  A l l subjects  performed on a s i x - f o o t Grotrian Steinweg grand piano.  The room a l s o  contained the videotape recording equipment, an audio tape recorder, an FM telemetry r e c e i v e r , and a polygraph.  A drape from c e i l i n g t o  f l o o r concealed the polygraph from subjects when they were seated at the piano.  Experimenters and Therapist The two performance assessment sessions were conducted by three experimenters:  two females (one the author) and one male.  The author was the t h e r a p i s t f o r both treatment groups, a t t e n t i o n a l t r a i n i n g and behaviour r e h e a r s a l , and f o r the afternoon workshops which c o n s t i t u t e d treatment f o r the c o n t r o l subjects.  The t h e r a p i s t had an  M.A. i n c l i n i c a l psychology and s i x months of supervised c l i n i c a l experience immediately p r i o r to.the s t a r t of the. study.  She had also  studied piano over 20 years and h e l d an A.R.C.T. (Associateship of the Royal Conservatory of Music i n Toronto) i n piano performance. Expectation of treatment effectiveness was assessed a f t e r each t r a i n i n g session in. both treatment conditions (see Appendix G).  This  permitted an evaluation of group differences p o t e n t i a l l y r e s u l t i n g from t h e r a p i s t b i a s .  In.addition t o evaluating expectancy differences  between treatment groups, these assessments also provided feedback t o the t h e r a p i s t as t o how w e l l each session had been received by subjects.  Self-r.eport Measures In a d d i t i o n t o the 15 True-False items which were used t o screen subjects f o r the study, four s e l f ^ r e p o r t instruments were administered,  45. three before and one f o l l o w i n g each of the two performances. The State Anxiety Inventory (Spielberger, Gorsuch, and Lushene, 1970) was administered to subjects about 10 minutes p r i o r to t h e i r entering the studio f o r both performances.  This scale i s designed to assess the  l e v e l of s t a t e ( s i t u a t i o n a l ) anxiety on the b a s i s of subjects' s e l f - r e p o r t s . Twenty items require subjects to report on a four-point scale the i n t e n s i t y of t h e i r anxiety at the time the form i s completed. A r e v i s e d form of the Subjective Stress Scale (Neufeld and Davidson, 1972) was administered to subjects a f t e r they entered the studio and immediately before they approached the piano f o r both performances. This scale c o n s i s t s of 14 a d j e c t i v e s scaled f o r connotation of s t r e s s by u n i v e r s i t y undergraduates.  (The o r i g i n a l instrument, K e r l e and B i a l e k ,  Note 7, had been scaled by Thurstone methods on a m i l i t a r y sample. ) Subjects are required to i n d i c a t e which word from the l i s t best describes how they f e e l at the time the form i s completed. The Expectations of Personal E f f i c a c y Scale f o r musicians (Kendrick, 1978) (see Appendix H) was administered to subjects p r i o r to t h e i r entering the studio f o r both performances.  This scale assesses p i a n i s t s '  expectations of being able to complete a number of tasks r e l a t i n g t o musical performance w i t h anxiety under c o n t r o l .  The magnitude, strength,  and g e n e r a l i t y of expectations are evaluated. The Performance Anxiety Self-Statement Scale (Kendrick,  1978)  (see Appendix I ) was administered t o subjects immediately a f t e r they had performed and l e f t the studio f o r both performances.  This scale  i s designed to assess p i a n i s t s ' p o s i t i v e and negative thoughts before, during, and a f t e r a performance.  46.  Behavioural Measures Two behavioural measures of anxiety were obtained f o r each subject. The f i r s t was a performance e r r o r count of each performance.  The  performances were scored by two p i a n i s t s , both of whom held u n i v e r s i t y degrees i n music and A.R.C.T.s i n piano performance.  They worked  independently ( a t d i f f e r e n t times) from copies of the music score and audiotape recordings of the performances, and were b l i n d w i t h respect to subjects' group membership and order of the performances.  Half of the  performances, i n each group were presented i n t h e i r correct order (pre-post); the other h a l f were presented i n reverse.  E r r o r types  were c l a s s i f i e d as those i n p i t c h , omission, rhythm, tempo, dynamics, and touch.(see Appendix J f o r d e f i n i t i o n s , of each term).  The r a t e r s  l i s t e n e d to each complete performance three times. The f i r s t time through, they simply made a p e n c i l mark on the score when they heard a mistake of any type. error.  During the second hearing they i d e n t i f i e d the type of  The t h i r d , hearing provided a chance to check over t h e i r work.  The errors on the score were counted and recorded on an e r r o r t a b u l a t i o n sheet (see Appendix K). The two performances of each subject (pre-post) were presented consecutively i n order t o allow a d i r e c t comparison of o v e r a l l q u a l i t y t o be made.  Each performance was rated on a 10-point  scale from "an extremely poor, u n s a t i s f y i n g performance" t o "an e x c e l l e n t , enjoyable performance." The second behavioural measure was a timed c h e c k l i s t of observable i n d i c a t i o n s of performance anxiety.  The items were derived as f o l l o w s .  Forty p o s s i b l e behaviours representing f i v e categories ( f e e t and l e g s , body, arms and hands, face,, and v o c a l i z a t i o n s ) were acquired from a c h e c k l i s t of observable a n x i e t y - i n d i c a t i n g behaviours f o r brass players  47. (Wardle, 1975) and from a d d i t i o n a l suggestions from four p i a n i s t s .  This  l i s t was administered to 33 musicians w i t h i n s t r u c t i o n s to s e l e c t those which.they f e l t were i n d i c a t i o n s of performance anxiety i n p i a n i s t s , which could he observed by someone other than the p i a n i s t him/herself (see Appendix L ) .  The behaviours were then rank-ordered w i t h i n each  category and the., f i r s t two i n each were s e l e c t e d f o r the f i n a l c h e c k l i s t . This procedure r e s u l t e d i n 10 behaviours:  knees tremble, l i f t s shoulders,  s t i f f back and neck, hands: tremble, s t i f f arms, face deadpan, moistens foot trembles on pedal, counts, and whispers t o s e l f .  lips,  The l a t t e r three  behaviours were omitted because they could not be seen c l e a r l y on videotape. An i n t e r v a l recording method was used to assess these seven observable signs of performance anxiety.  Two r a t e r s (both musicians) worked inde-  pendently from video recordings of the performances  (without sound)  and were b l i n d w i t h respect to subjects', group membership and order of the performances.  H a l f of.the. performances  i n each group were presented  i n t h e i r c o r r e c t order (pre-post); the other h a l f were presented i n reverse.  Raters scored the target responses as having occurred or not  occurred i n each of three 20-second i n t e r v a l s :  one immediately f o l l o w i n g  the f i r s t note of the performance, one i n the middle, and.one immediately before the f i n a l note was played (see Appendix M). In a d d i t i o n , each performance was r a t e d on a 10-point scale from "completely relaxed" to "extremely tense" and on a 10-point scale from "thorough enjoyment" t o "extreme d i s t r e s s " w i t h " i n d i f f e r e n c e " as the mid-point.  P h y s i o l o g i c a l Measure In order to assess changes i n subjects' p h y s i o l o g i c a l responses  48. to performance s t r e s s , a measure of heart rate was obtained.  Use of  a telemetry technique provided a continuous recording of heart rate before, during, and a f t e r the performances.  Seven 10-second samples  of heart rate were selected from each performance at the f o l l o w i n g times:  10 seconds a f t e r the t r a n s m i t t e r was attached, immediately  before the f i r s t note was played, immediately a f t e r the f i r s t note, i n the middle of the performance, immediately before the f i n a l note was played, and two immediately f o l l o w i n g the performance.  The  tachometer  output f o r the b e a t - t o - b e a t . i n t e r v a l was averaged f o r a l l beats occurring wholly or. p a r t i a l l y w i t h i n each 10-second  interval.  Apparatus and Equipment A Sony-matic portable camera, videocorder w i t h one-half i n c h V-30H tapes, and a Sony power supply unit were used t o record subjects' performances.  Tapes were played back on a Sony CVM 115 17-inch portable  t e l e v i s i o n , set during the treatment sessions.  A 21-inch set was used  f o r r a t i n g purposes. A Sony TC 630 stereophonic audio tape recorder was used to o b t a i n a good q u a l i t y sound f o r r a t i n g purposes and to back up the videocorder i n case of mechanical f a i l u r e .  Ampex 291 one-quarter i n c h tapes were  used. Heart rate data were c o l l e c t e d v i a a telemetry technique. subjects' s k i n was f i r s t abraded w i t h Redux paste.  The  Two Beckman one-half  inch.Ag/AgCl electrodes were then attached at the base of the subject's neck and the lower l e f t r i b cage, using Beckman e l e c t r o l y t e paste. An EKG t e l e m e t r i c system t r a n s m i t t e r sent the s i g n a l to an FM r a d i o serving as the r e c e i v e r .  Output was provided to a 7P4A tachograph  49.  p r e a m p l i f i e r on a Grass model 7 polygraph. Colour s l i d e s f o r the four cognitive-modeling sequences were taken w i t h a Nikomat camera using Kodachrome I I and Ektachrome f i l m .  The  audio t r a c k was f i r s t recorded onto an Ampex 291 one-quarter i n c h tape and then rerecorded onto a Telex cassette tape f o r use w i t h the Singer Caramate I I SP p r o j e c t o r .  Procedure S e l e c t i o n of subjects.  One hundred-eighty  l e t t e r s were mailed t o  teachers of piano i n the Greater Vancouver area, asking f o r r e f e r r a l s of students who experienced extreme anxiety when performing (see Appendix N). In response, about 60 persons phoned expressing i n t e r e s t i n the program. A telephone screening procedure was used (see Appendix 6).  Subjects  were v e r b a l l y administered 15 of the 30 True-False items from the Report of Confidence as a Performer (Appel, 1974).  Those subjects w i t h scores  of f i v e or higher were t o l d the program would be appropriate f o r t h e i r type of anxiety. Subjects were then t o l d they would be required t o perform twice before a videocamera and two experimenters on the weekends of March 4th and A p r i l 8th.  Subjects who could not make commitments f o r those  two occasions were not selected f o r the study.  Those subjects who could  attend were t o l d t o choose a piece of music, three t o f i v e minutes i n length, which they had mastered i n a non-performing s i t u a t i o n .  The  piece d i d not have t o be memorized. Subjects were asked which nights of the week they could attend sessions, and were t o l d there would be some choice as t o time and l o c a t i o n of the sessions.  F i n a l l y , subjects were t o l d they would be c a l l e d again  to arrange a d e f i n i t e time f o r t h e i r performances and t o confirm the  50. day and l o c a t i o n of the treatment sessions. F i f t y - t h r e e p i a n i s t s were selected f o r p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n the study. There were 19 i n the a t t e n t i o n a l t r a i n i n g group, 16 i n the behaviour rehearsal group, and 18 i n the w a i t i n g l i s t c o n t r o l group. Several weeks l a t e r , subjects were contacted again and assigned a time f o r t h e i r two performances and a day and l o c a t i o n f o r t h e i r treatment sessions.  Waiting l i s t c o n t r o l subjects were t o l d that t h e i r program  would take the form of an afternoon workshop at the end of A p r i l . They were a l s o given some choice as t o l o c a t i o n and time.  Only two or  three of these subjects questioned coming f o r two performances before the workshop. They were t o l d that the experimenter was i n t e r e s t e d i n seeing how they performed a second time when the s i t u a t i o n was more f a m i l i a r , and when they had played the piano before. In the week before the f i r s t performance, a l l subjects were phoned and reminded of the time f o r t h e i r scheduled performance, and were asked to a r r i v e 15 minutes e a r l y .  They were also, asked t o b r i n g a photocopy of  t h e i r music w i t h them and t o mark on the copy any d e l i b e r a t e changes they were making i n tempo or dynamics.  Subjects were then reminded that the  performance would be videotaped and were t o l d that a measure o f heart rate would also be obtained.  This l a t t e r procedure was described i n  an informal and non-threatening manner: I'm going t o attach two small p l a s t i c discs - one at the base of your neck and one on your lower r i b s . You w i l l have a t i n y box taped on to your l e f t shoulder over your c l o t h e s . I t ' s so l i g h t you won't even n o t i c e i t ' s there. Please wear a two-piece o u t f i t so i t w i l l be e a s i e r t o attach the d i s c s . I n the s e s s i o n ( s ) y o u ' l l have a chance to look at your heartrate. I think you w i l l f i n d t h i s quite interesting. None of the subjects expressed any concern at t h i s time about the procedure.  51. Administration of.pre- and post-treatment assessment sessions. Performances were scheduled at 10-minute i n t e r v a l s s t a r t i n g at 9:00 a.m. and f i n i s h i n g at 6:45 p.m.  This scheduling minimized w a i t i n g periods  f o r subjects and experimenters and the procedure operated  smoothly.  F o r t y - s i x subjects were seen on Saturday, f i v e on Sunday, and two on Monday. When subjects a r r i v e d at the s t u d i o , they were greeted outside by experimenter 1. They f i r s t read and signed a consent.form (see Appendix P) and then the two electrodes were attached.  Subjects wore these electrodes  f o r about 10 t o 15 minutes before they entered the s t u d i o , i n order t o allow h a b i t u a t i o n t o t h i s apparatus. Subjects recorded how long they had studied the t e s t piece and how many times they had performed i t .  They then read the p r a c t i s i n g and  performing r e s t r i c t i o n s f o r the f o l l o w i n g six-week period and were reminded to make any changes i n the photocopy of t h e i r music before b r i n g i n g i t i n t o the studio (see Appendix Q). The State Anxiety Inventory and Expectations of Personal E f f i c a c y Scale were then completed.  These were administered t o subjects i n a  balanced order to c o n t r o l f o r p o s s i b l e carryover e f f e c t s . Subjects were greeted at the door of the studio by experimenter 2 and were asked t o be seated.  Their photocopied music was taken and the  t r a n s m i t t e r and cushioning m a t e r i a l were then securely attached w i t h masking tape.  The polygraphic recording was i n i t i a t e d and the Subjective  Stress Scale was then administered. Subjects were t o l d t o proceed t o the piano and to.announce t h e i r names and the t i t l e s of t h e i r pieces and then t o begin whenever they were ready.  Experimenter 3 s t a r t e d the video equipment and audio recorder  as each subject approached the piano bench.  Experimenter 2 marked on  the polygraph recording paper the beginning and end of the piece.  52. At the conclusion of the performance subjects were handed a reminder s l i p f o r the time and l o c a t i o n of t h e i r sessions and t h e i r second performance. Subjects were asked i f they were aware of the t r a n s m i t t e r while they were playing.  Only two subjects mentioned that they were, but i t d i d not  appear to have bothered them to any extent. out  Subjects were accompanied  the door while the recording of t h e i r heartrate continued. The  t r a n s m i t t e r was then disconnected.  The next subject was w a i t i n g w i t h  electrodes attached (two sets were used) and was accompanied i n t o the studio by experimenter 2. For  the second performance assessment, subjects were again phoned  during the previous week.  They were reminded of the time (same as before  w i t h two or three exceptions) f o r t h e i r performances and were again reminded t o wear a two-piece o u t f i t t o f a c i l i t a t e the attachment of the electrodes. The procedure was i d e n t i c a l t o that of the f i r s t performance assessment w i t h two exceptions.  Before entering the s t u d i o , subjects recorded how  many minutes per day (on the average) they had p r a c t i s e d the t e s t piece and how often they had performed t h i s and other pieces i n the time since t h e i r f i r s t performance s i x weeks previously (see Appendix R). Follow-up assessment.  Before l e a v i n g , subjects were given an  envelope containing i n s t r u c t i o n s and materials necessary t o complete the  follow-up assessment.  Subjects were asked to perform the t e s t  p i e c e ( s ) and t o complete the four enclosed questionnaires i n the same manner as they d i d f o r the two i n i t i a l performance assessments. (see  Appendices S and T f o r i n s t r u c t i o n s ) .  In a d d i t i o n , they were required  to give some information about the performance s i t u a t i o n and to r a t e t h e i r anxiety and the q u a l i t y of t h e i r performance on scales from 1 to 10 (see Appendix U).  53. In order to.have an a d d i t i o n a l r a t i n g by someone other than the performer him/herself, subjects were asked to s o l i c i t r a t i n g s from members of t h e i r audience who had heard them p l a y frequently i n recent months.  This provided an evaluation of v i s u a l signs of anxiety and  q u a l i t y of performance by someone who was f a m i l i a r w i t h subjects' performance behaviour and thus i n a p o s i t i o n to assess any changes since the program had begun (see Appendix V).  Subjects i n the a t t e n t i o n a l t r a i n i n g group  were asked to mail back the information i n the addressed and stamped envelope provided; subjects i n the other two groups were t o l d to b r i n g t h e i r envelopes when they came to the workshops.  A d m i n i s t r a t i o n of A t t e n t i o n a l T r a i n i n g and Behaviour Rehearsal Treatments  Attentional.training.  Subjects were d i v i d e d i n t o two small groups  which met on two evenings i n two d i f f e r e n t l o c a t i o n s over the course of three consecutive weeks. i n the other.  There were 10 subjects i n one group and nine  Each of the three sessions l a s t e d from one and  one-half  to two hours. Treatment was modeled a f t e r Meichenbaum's (Note 4) S e l f - I n s t r u c t i o n a l Training program f o r t e s t anxiety, w i t h the r e l a x a t i o n t r a i n i n g component omitted.  Subjects were f i r s t taught to become aware of t h e i r negative  and t a s k - i r r e l e v a n t thoughts during piano performance.  They viewed  videotapes of t h e i r performances ( i n the assessment session) and were asked to r e c a l l t h e i r thoughts, many of which were negative.  In  a d d i t i o n , s p e c i f i c examples of negative t h i n k i n g were drawn from t h e i r answers on the Performance Anxiety Self-Statement  Scale.  This phase was followed by the presentation of a ..treatment r a t i o n a l e which related, negative t h i n k i n g to performance anxiety and poor performance,  54. which i n t u r n increased negative t h i n k i n g .  I t was suggested that the best  place t o intervene i n t h i s " v i c i o u s c i r c l e " was at the point of negative thinking.  Challenging negative thoughts and s u b s t i t u t i n g w i t h p o s i t i v e  ones was recommended. task-focused,  Four types of p o s i t i v e self-statements (comforting,  technique-oriented, and rewarding) were then described.  A s l i d e - t a p e cognitive-modeling sequence of a p i a n i s t performing f o r a group of f r i e n d s was then shown and discussed.  A coping model was  portrayed i . e . , the model encountered problems, expressed f e e l i n g s of anxiety, and then demonstrated how t o deal w i t h those f e e l i n g s and improve performance. A handout d e s c r i b i n g a home assignment to perform f o r f a m i l y members was then d i s t r i b u t e d .  Group members were asked to r a t e anxiety l e v e l and q u a l i t y  of t h e i r performances and to record p o s i t i v e and negative thoughts.  They  were also asked to make a l i s t of at l e a s t f i v e p o s i t i v e thoughts which they found h e l p f u l i n reducing t h e i r anxiety about performing. The second session began w i t h a review of the r a t i o n a l e and d i s c u s s i o n of the home assignment.  Two  s l i d e - t a p e cognitive-modeling sequences of  p i a n i s t s i n examination and competition situations, were then, shown. coping rather than mastery models were portrayed.  Again  Anxieties specific  to these two types of performances were discussed. In the l a s t part of the session, subjects were required to perform a piece of music and v e r b a l i z e aloud t h e i r thoughts before and a f t e r they played.  Thoughts during the performance were shared a f t e r subjects had  finished playing.  In order to make them more comfortable w i t h t h i s perhaps  unusual task, the t h e r a p i s t modeled, the behaviour beforehand.  Unchallenged .  negative thoughts were discussed and challenged by group members. A handout d e s c r i b i n g a home assignment to perform f o r a small group was then d i s t r i b u t e d .  Again members were asked t o r a t e anxiety l e v e l and p e r f o r -  mance q u a l i t y and t o record p o s i t i v e and negative thoughts.  Changes on these  55. from the f i r s t assignment were also rated.  I n a d d i t i o n , subjects were  asked each day .to p l a y a piece of music, pretending they were performing f o r someone.  They were t o v e r b a l i z e t h e i r thoughts out loud, challenging  negative thoughts and r e p l a c i n g them w i t h p o s i t i v e task-focused ones. The t h i r d session began with a review of the r a t i o n a l e and d i s c u s s i o n of the home assignment.  Subjects were then given f o u r - i n c h by s i x - i n c h  cards w i t h l i s t s of p o s i t i v e self-statements which the t h e r a p i s t had copied from t h e i r home assignments.  Subjects were asked t o add t o the  l i s t p o s i t i v e thoughts which they found e s p e c i a l l y h e l p f u l i n overcoming anxiety and focusing a t t e n t i o n on the task. A cognitive-modeling sequence of a p i a n i s t i n solo r e c i t a l was then shown and discussed.  Again a coping model was used.  During the second  h a l f of the session subjects performed two pieces of music, t h i s time sharing t h e i r thoughts a f t e r the performance was over. F i n a l l y , subjects were asked t o close t h e i r eyes and f o l l o w the t h e r a p i s t through an imaginary sequence d e s c r i b i n g a musical competition. They were t o place themselves i n the p o s i t i o n described by the t h e r a p i s t . At set points the t h e r a p i s t s a i d " I could f e e l my anxiety i n c r e a s i n g but I s a i d t o myself . . . " and then asked i n d i v i d u a l members of the group t o complete the thought out loud. The home assignment was s i m i l a r t o the one f o l l o w i n g session two with one exception.  Subjects were asked t o take themselves through  two imaginary sequences (an exam and a r e c i t a l ) and t o a c t u a l l y perform as part o f the sequence.  This was suggested as a good way t o p r a c t i s e  coping w i t h performance anxiety i n a v a r i e t y of s i t u a t i o n s and s e t t i n g s w i t h out a c t u a l l y being there. A more d e t a i l e d o u t l i n e o f the three treatment sessions i s presented i n Appendix W.  I n order t o ensure standardization of treatment, the  56. t h e r a p i s t followed t h i s o u t l i n e very c l o s e l y .  A l l the m a t e r i a l i n the  o u t l i n e was presented and a d d i t i o n a l comments were made when appropriate to r e i n f o r c e the c e n t r a l themes.  Missed sessions were made up i n d i v i d u a l l y  or i n small groups p r i o r t o the next group session. Behaviour r e h e a r s a l .  Subjects were d i v i d e d i n t o two small groups  which met during an afternoon and an evening i n two d i f f e r e n t l o c a t i o n s over three consecutive weeks.  There were eight subjects i n each group.  Sessions l a s t e d from one and one-half t o two hours. The f i r s t session began w i t h a general d i s c u s s i o n of performance anxiety.  Subjects were asked how long, how much, and i n what s i t u a t i o n s  they had experienced performance anxiety.  They shared anxiety-inducing  moments i n f r o n t of an audience and ways i n which they had attempted t o cope w i t h anxiety i n the past.  Several suggestions were made by the  t h e r a p i s t as t o how performance anxiety i s acquired.  This d i s c u s s i o n  was e s s e n t i a l l y " f i l l e r m a t e r i a l " t o r a i s e the c r e d i b i l i t y of the program and t o match time w i t h the a t t e n t i o n a l t r a i n i n g program. This was followed by the presentation of a treatment  rationale for  undergoing repeated p r a c t i c e before an audience as the way t o reduce performance anxiety.  Subjects were t o l d that they had learned t o be  anxious and so they could r e l e a r n how not t o be anxious by having p o s i t i v e performing experiences i n f r o n t of a small understanding  group.  Support f o r repeated rehearsal came from quotes by well-known musicians such as A r t u r Rubinstein, and by eminent authors i n the musicology f i e l d . In a d d i t i o n , the popular idea that "the more you do i t the e a s i e r i t gets" l e n t credence t o the r a t i o n a l e . Subjects were then asked t o p l a y a piece of music i n f r o n t of the group.  The t h e r a p i s t modeled t h i s behaviour beforehand.  the t h e r a p i s t and group members was p o s i t i v e or at l e a s t  Response, from encouraging,  57. and. the general atmosphere was f r i e n d l y and supportive. A home assignment t o perform f o r f a m i l y members was then d i s t r i b u t e d . Subjects were asked t o rate t h e i r anxiety and the q u a l i t y of t h e i r p e r f o r mances. Sessions two and three were very s i m i l a r t o session one.  At the  beginning of each session the r a t i o n a l e and home assignments were reviewed. Improvements i n anxiety l e v e l and q u a l i t y o f p l a y i n g from previous sessions were noted by the t h e r a p i s t and group members.  At the end of  each session a s i m i l a r home assignment was given with encouragement t o enlarge audience s i z e and include non-family members among those l i s t e n i n g . A more d e t a i l e d o u t l i n e of the three behaviour rehearsal sessions i s presented i n Appendix X. Again, the t h e r a p i s t followed the o u t l i n e c l o s e l y , although a d d i t i o n a l comments were made when appropriate to r e i n f o r c e the c e n t r a l theme.  Missed sessions were made up i n small  groups.  Post-study Workshops f o r Control Subjects Two workshops i n two d i f f e r e n t l o c a t i o n s were held f o r the behaviour rehearsal subjects. subjects.  A workshop was also held f o r the w a i t i n g l i s t c o n t r o l  Of 34 subjects e l i g i b l e to attend, 30 came.  The m a t e r i a l from  the three a t t e n t i o n a l t r a i n i n g sessions was condensed i n t o one four-hour period.  A d e t a i l e d o u t l i n e of the workshops i s presented i n Appendix Y.  Subjects I n the workshops were given a second follow-up assignment, i d e n t i c a l t o the f i r s t , t o take home and r e t u r n by m a i l three weeks l a t e r (see Appendix Z f o r i n s t r u c t i o n s ) .  This second follow-up allowed  a pre- post-workshop comparison t o be made.  58.  Results Analyses to evaluate the adequacy of random assignment of subjects to groups are presented f i r s t .  These include comparability of groups  on demographic and other c l a s s i f i c a t i o n v a r i a b l e s , on s e l f - r e p o r t , behavioural, and p h y s i o l o g i c a l pre-measures, and on process v a r i a b l e s . I n t e r - r a t e r r e l i a b i l i t i e s of the behavioural r a t i n g s are followed by a d e s c r i p t i o n of the major analyses i n the study:  an evaluation of the  d i f f e r e n t i a l e f f e c t i v e n e s s of the three experimental conditions at post-treatment and follow-up.  A b r i e f s u b s i d i a r y evaluation of a post-  study workshop i s followed by c o r r e l a t i o n a l analyses which assess i n t e r r e l a t i o n s h i p s among demographic, process, and dependent measures.  Pre-measures In order to assess the comparability of the a t t e n t i o n a l t r a i n i n g , behaviour . . r e h e a r s a l , and w a i t i n g l i s t c o n t r o l groups p r i o r to i n t e r v e n t i o n , analyses were performed on important demographic and other c l a s s i f i c a t i o n v a r i a b l e s and on s e l f - r e p o r t , behavioural, and p h y s i o l o g i c a l pre-measures. One-way between groups analyses of variance (ANOVA) were computed on age, l e v e l of p r o f i c i e n c y (grade), reported i n i t i a l l e v e l of performance anxiety, length of t e s t piece, and number of months of preparation and number of performances of the t e s t piece.  This conservative approach  to the data a n a l y s i s i n d i c a t e d no s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s among the three experimental conditions on these v a r i a b l e s .  Means, standard d e v i a t i o n s ,  F values, and p r o b a b i l i t y l e v e l s are presented i n Table 1.  There was  z  also no d i f f e r e n c e on use/non-use of musical score, X (6) = 8.84, p > .05.  Table  1  Means, Standard Deviations, and F Values f o r Demographic and other C l a s s i f i c a t i o n Variables WLC  AT  (n = 19)  BR  (n = 16)  M  SD  M  SD  M  (n = 18) SD  Measures 16.74  4.95  18.81  10.13  21.06  7.32  1.49  >;05  Grade  7.79  2.51  7.56  1.90  8.78  2.05  1.54  >.05  Anxiety l e v e l  8.89  3.16  10.44  2.39  9.56  2.96  1.25  >.05  198.21  124.73  145.19  67.12  134.72  66.70  2.52  >.05  Months of preparation of t e s t piece  3.95  2.99  5.19  3.04  6.44  5.96  Number of performances of t e s t piece  1.00  1.49  .50  .63  .50  .79  Age  Length of piece i n seconds  AT = a t t e n t i o n a l t r a i n i n g , BR = behaviour rehearsal, and WLC = waiting l i s t c o n t r o l .  1.59  >.05  1.35  >.05  60. Kaplan and Litrownlk (1977) recommended m u l t i v a r i a t e s t a t i s t i c s when s e v e r a l outcome measures are employed, i n order to reduce the p r o b a b i l i t y of making a Type I e r r o r .  The BMDX69 computer program  (Le, 1972, U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia) was employed i n the present study.to perform the m u l t i v a r i a t e analyses of variance.  This required  the random d e l e t i o n of two. subjects from each of the a t t e n t i o n a l t r a i n i n g and w a i t i n g l i s t c o n t r o l groups.  (One subject f o r whom post-treatment  data were not a v a i l a b l e , was a l s o dropped from the main analyses). A one-way between groups m u l t i v a r i a t e a n a l y s i s of variance (MANOVA) was performed on s i x pre-measures which were to be used i n the evaluation of treatment e f f e c t i v e n e s s .  Means and standard deviations of pre-treatment  dependent measures are presented i n Table 2.  The obtained F value was  s i g n i f i c a n t , approximate F (12, 80) = 2.3.7, p <  -01 i n d i c a t i n g  pre-treatment  differences on some v a r i a b l e s among experimental conditions. In order to i d e n t i f y the v a r i a b l e s c o n t r i b u t i n g to t h i s s i g n i f i c a n c e , s i x u n i v a r i a t e analyses of variance were computed w i t h three of them reaching  or approaching  e f f i c a c y , F (2, 45) = 4-39,  significance: p  expectations of personal  .02, performance e r r o r count, F (2, 45)  = 2.00, p <-l .15, and heart r a t e , F (2, 45) = 2.45, p<: .10.  In order  to adopt a conservative approach i n future analyses, these three v a r i a b l e s were used as covariates. P r i o r to i n t e r v e n t i o n the group as a whole had a mean score of (SD = 12.24) on the State Anxiety Inventory.  51.42  This i s higher than the  average scores reported by Spielberger, Gorsuch, and Lushene (1970) f o r a group of general medical and s u r g i c a l p a t i e n t s (42.38), a group of p s y c h i a t r i c p a t i e n t s (47.74), and a group of young prisoners (45.96). As a group,. subjects obtained a mean score of 2.60 (SD =  1.38)  on the Subjective Stress Scale administered p r i o r to i n t e r v e n t i o n . The word most c l o s e l y associated w i t h t h i s value i s "unsafe. " 1  The  Table  2  Means and Standard Deviations of Outcome Measures  Measures  AT  (n = 16)  BR  (n = 16)  M  SD  M  SD  WLC M  (n = 16) SD  STAI Pre Post Follow-up  49.56 38.38 34.69  10.22 8.88 8.75  49.69 41.63 39.00  52.88 43.44 45.19  11.75  11.81 10.20  SSS Pre Post Follow-up  2.27 1.18 .92  1.36 1.09 .81  2.97 1.44 1.52  1.35 1.35 1.06  2.46 2.09 2.34  1.52 1.44 1.50  PASSS Pre Post Follow-up  200.94 255.63 265.69  64.70 50.99 43.92  203.00 228.50 241.88  49.41 60.58 58.77  193.13 215.19 184.63  63.95 46.85 64.74  EPES Pre Post Follow-up  34.50 40.50 44.88  9. 39 9. 71 7.90  28.56 34.50 35.44  10.49 9.76 9. 51  24.31 27.19 29.88  9.40 12.19 9.59  Pre Post Follow-up  11.37 9.37  69 20  8.62 8.64  5.02 5.29  7.60 7.51  4.60 4.58  Pre Post Follow-up  117.54 109.42  21.12 15.62  109.26 102.75  15.48 14.32  123.93 118.41  19.40 16.25  PEC  HRM  14.25  11.87 13.53  (continued on the next page)  Measures IVSA Pre Post Follow-up  AT  (n=l6)  BR  (n = 16)  M  SD  M  SD  2.38  .62  1.38  1.00  1.56  WLC M  (n = 16) SD  _ -  .96  .06  1.53  - .19  1.72  IQP Pre Post Follow-up  cl  1.94  _  1.15  AT = a t t e n t i o n a l t r a i n i n g , BR = behaviour r e h e a r s a l , and WLC = waiting l i s t c o n t r o l , STAI = State Anxiety Inventory, SSS = Subjective Stress Scale, PASSS = Performance Anxiety Self-Statement Scale ( t o t a l score), EPES = Expectations o f Personal E f f i c a c y Scale ( t o t a l s c o r e ) , PEC = performance e r r o r count, HRM = mean heart r a t e , IVSA = improvement i n v i s u a l signs of anxiety, IQP = improvement i n q u a l i t y of p l a y i n g .  63. average score obtained i s s l i g h t l y belov? that reported f o r subjects who were exposed t o s l i d e s of homicide v i c t i m s (Neufeld and Davidson, 1974). The group as a whole had a mean heart rate of 116.13 beats per minute (SD = 20.63) averaged across the seven time samples.  This compares  to a mean heart rate of 85 beats per minute f o r normals undergoing a s e r i e s of e l e c t r i c shocks ( C r a i g and Prkachin, 1978). found mean pulse rates of 82.60 beats per minute p r i o r to performance.  Appel (1974)  for pianists  immediately  This compares t o 114-44 beats per minute (SD =  18.31) before p l a y i n g f o r subjects i n the present study. The mean number of performance e r r o r s before treatment f o r a l l subjects was 9.73 (SD = 5.98).  On the Expectations of Personal E f f i c a c y  Scale and Performance Anxiety Self-Statement Scale, mean scores were 29.49 (SD = 9.89) and 196.85 (SD = 58.93) r e s p e c t i v e l y f o r the whole group p r i o r t o treatment.  On these s c a l e s , p o s s i b l e scores ranged from  zero t o 60 and zero to 354 r e s p e c t i v e l y , w i t h higher scores i n d i c a t i n g higher expectations and more p o s i t i v e t h i n k i n g .  P r a c t i c e Time and Number of Performances between Pre- and Post-treatment Assessments There were no s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s among the three experimental groups on amount of p r a c t i c e time on the t e s t p i e c e , F (2, 49) = 1.01, p > .05, but there were on number of performances of the t e s t p i e c e , F (2, 49) = 4.93, p < -01, and number of performances of other pieces, F (2, 49) = 75.44, V<  .001. A Newman-Keuls Test applied t o the data  showed that the a t t e n t i o n a l t r a i n i n g and behaviour r e h e a r s a l groups had s i g n i f i c a n t l y more performances of the t e s t piece than the w a i t i n g l i s t  64. c o n t r o l subjects, (p < .05) but d i d not d i f f e r s i g n i f i c a n t l y from each other.  The behaviour rehearsal group had s i g n i f i c a n t l y more performances  of other pieces than the a t t e n t i o n a l t r a i n i n g group (p*£ .05) which had s i g n i f i c a n t l y more than the w a i t i n g l i s t c o n t r o l group (p  .05).  C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of the Follow-up Performance One-way analyses of variance showed no s i g n i f i c a n t differences among the three experimental groups on the f o l l o w i n g c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of the follow-up performance: number of days a f t e r the post-treatment assessment, F ( 2 , 45) = 2.82, p > .05, and audience s i z e , F (2, 45) = < 1, p > .05). A c h i square a n a l y s i s , *X(2) = 1.60, p "> .05 also revealed no s i g n i f i c a n t difference on degree of t h r e a t .  The follow-up  performance took place an average of 20 days f o l l o w i n g the post-treatment performance and there was an average  of 19 members i n the audience.  The follow-up performance was viewed as more threatening than the posttreatment performance by 62.5% of the subjects, and l e s s threatening, by 37.5$ of the subjects. One s i g n i f i c a n t difference occurred on use/non-use of musical score x  during the follow-up performance,X (4) = 10.86, p ^ .05.  More behaviour  rehearsal subjects used the score than d i d a t t e n t i o n a l t r a i n i n g and waiting l i s t c o n t r o l subjects. Expectations of Treatment Effectiveness f o r A t t e n t i o n a l Training and Behaviour: . Rehearsal Groups S i x one-way between groups analyses of variance were computed on expectations of treatment effectiveness on a seven-point s c a l e , as measured by three questions a f t e r each of three treatment sessions.  65. Scores were collapsed across time and across questions f o r the two sets of analyses.  The three questions were:  1.  How l o g i c a l does t h i s type of program seem to you?  2.  How confident are you that t h i s program w i l l tie s u c c e s s f u l i n e l i m i n a t i n g your f e a r of performing?  3.  How  confident would you he i n recommending t h i s program t o  a f r i e n d who was extremely anxious about performing? Mean values f o r each of the three questions f o r both groups c o l l a p s e d across time were 17.09 (SD = 1.07), 1 4 . 2 6 (SD = 1.67), and 16.87 (SD = respectively.  1.42)  Mean values f o r each of the three times c o l l a p s e d across  questions were 15.52  (SD = 1.38), 15.83 (SD = 1.41), and 16.00  (SD =  2.11)  respectively. No s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s between the a t t e n t i o n a l t r a i n i n g and behaviour rehearsal groups were found on any questions at any of the three times.  Inter-rater R e l i a b i l i t i e s I n t e r - r a t e r r e l i a b i l i t i e s were c a l c u l a t e d f o r the a t t e n t i o n a l t r a i n i n g , behaviour r e h e a r s a l , and w a i t i n g l i s t c o n t r o l groups separately at pre- and post-treatment.  This r e s u l t e d i n s i x r e l i a b i l i t y measures  f o r each of the f i v e rated v a r i a b l e s :  performance e r r o r count, o v e r a l l  q u a l i t y , v i s u a l signs of anxiety, o v e r a l l anxiety, and apparent enjoyment during the performance. Observer agreement was computed by d i v i d i n g the smaller t o t a l by the l a r g e r one and multiplying;; by 100 to form a percentage.  Kazdin and  Straw (1976) reported that convention d i c t a t e s agreement should f a l l  Table  3  Inter-rater R e l i a b i l i t i e s i n Percentages  Variable Performance count  error  Group  Pre-treatment  Post-treatment  AT BR WLC  87.3 88.0 94.2  90.2 92.3 95.2  Quality of playing  AT BR WLC  95.4 92.3 95.0  94.5 96.0 99.2  V i s u a l signs of anxiety  AT BR WLC  82.1 84.0 97.6  81.6 96.9 85.2  Overall anxiety  AT BR WLC  83.1 63.3 76.8  78.1 67.5 74.3  Enjoyment  AT BR WLC  85.0 80.2 76.5  88.7 89.7 90.1  AT = attentional t r a i n i n g , BR = behaviour rehearsal, WLC = waiting l i s t control.  between 80% and 100%.  I n t e r - r a t e r r e l i a b i l i t i e s f o r the present study-  are presented i n Table 3.  On the two v a r i a b l e s of primary i n t e r e s t ,  performance e r r o r count and v i s u a l signs of anxiety, agreements e a s i l y reached an acceptable l e v e l .  On other v a r i a b l e s of only minor i n t e r e s t  they were l e s s impressive.  Treatment Outcome In order to evaluate d i f f e r e n t i a l treatment e f f e c t s , two one-way between-groups m u l t i v a r i a t e analyses of covariance (MANCOVA) were performed separately on s i x post and s i x follow-up measures, w i t h pretreatment expectations of personal e f f i c a c y , performance e r r o r count, and heart rate as. covariates. As performance e r r o r count and heart rate measures were not taken at follow-up, two other measures were used instead:  behavioural r a t i n g s by s i g n i f i c a n t others of v i s u a l signs of  anxiety, and q u a l i t y of p l a y i n g . At follow-up, only  pre-treatment  expectations of personal e f f i c a c y was used as a covariate. Means and standard deviations of post- and follow-up-outcome measures are presented i n Table 2. • The r e s u l t i n g F value f o r the post-measures was not s i g n i f i c a n t , approximate F (12, 74) = < 1, p > .05; however, the F value f o r the follow-up measures was s i g n i f i c a n t , approximate F . ( l 2 , 78) = p <.01.  3-05,  This i n d i c a t e d that the experimental conditions d i d not  produce s i g n i f i c a n t l y d i f f e r e n t outcomes at the post-treatment  assessment,  although they d i d f i v e weeks a f t e r the termination of treatment. S i x u n i v a r i a t e analyses of covariance were then computed on the s i x follow-up measures w i t h pre-treatment  expectations of personal  e f f i c a c y as a covariate. With the exception of the State Anxiety Inventory and the Subjective Stress Scale, a l l measures were s i g n i f i c a n t .  Table  4  Analyses of Covariance Summary Tables Measure  Source  sum of squares  d.f.  mean squares  F  P  STAI  covariate groups explained residual  695.67 294.60 1587.05 4758.18  1 2 .3 44  695.67 147.30 529.02 108.14  6.43 1.36 4.89  -c .05  SSS  covariate groups explained residual  5.75 7.62 55.17  1 2 3 44  5.75 3.81 7.34 1.25  4.58 3.04 5.86  ^.05 >.05 <.01  754-83 21516.05 18768.46 3246.81  .23 6.63 5.78  >.05 <T.01 <.01  22.03  PASSS  covariate groups explained residual  754.83 43032.10 56305.38 142859.44  1 2 3 44  EPES  covariate groups explained residual  1167.77 649.59 3007.81 2505.65  1 2 3 44  IVSA  covariate groups explained residual  37.09 43.07 54-41  • 03  1 2 3 44  IQP  covariate groups explained residual  1.58 30.64 42.75 77.73  1 2 3 44  a  > .05 <.01  20.51 5.70 17.61  <.001 < .01 < .001  .03 18.54 14.36 1.24  .03 15.00 11.61  >.05 <^.001 <.001  1.58 15.32 14.25 1.77  .89 8.67 8.07  > .05 < .001 <.001  1167.77 324.80 1002.60 56.95  STAI = State Anxiety Inventory, SSS = Subjective Stress Scale, PASSS = Performance Anxiety Self-Statement Scale ( t o t a l score), EPES = Expectations of Personal E f f i c a c y Scale ( t o t a l score), IVSA = improvement i n v i s u a l signs of anxiety, IQP = improvement i n q u a l i t y of playing.  69. Refer t o Table 4 f o r a summary of these analyses. In order t o determine the nature of the differences among the three groups, Newman-Keuls Tests f o r i n d i v i d u a l comparisons were computed. These, revealed that on the Performance Anxiety Self-Statement Scale and on the q u a l i t y of p l a y i n g r a t i n g , the a t t e n t i o n a l t r a i n i n g and behaviour rehearsal groups were superior t o the waiting l i s t c o n t r o l group (p«< .05) although they d i d not d i f f e r s i g n i f i c a n t l y from each other.  On the  Expectations of Personal E f f i c a c y Scale, a t t e n t i o n a l t r a i n i n g was superior t o behaviour rehearsal and w a i t i n g l i s t c o n t r o l conditions (p-< .05) with no s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e occurring between the l a t t e r two.  On t h e . v i s u a l signs of anxiety r a t i n g , the a t t e n t i o n a l t r a i n i n g ,  behaviour r e h e a r s a l , and waiting l i s t c o n t r o l groups d i f f e r e d s i g n i f i c a n t l y from each other i n that order of e f f i c a c y ( p < .05).  Post-study Workshop f o r Behaviour Rehearsal and. Waiting  List  Control Groups Six  one-way within-subjects analyses of variance were computed t o  evaluate the e f f e c t . o f a b r i e f a t t e n t i o n a l t r a i n i n g program on the s i x outcome measures assessed at follow-up.  Behaviour rehearsal and waiting  l i s t c o n t r o l groups were combined, r e s u l t i n g i n a sample of 20 subjects. Only one v a r i a b l e , r a t i n g of v i s u a l signs of anxiety, was s i g n i f i c a n t l y modified, F ( l , 18) - 9.54, £ <  .01.  Relationships Among Dependent Variables Pearson c o r r e l a t i o n c o e f f i c i e n t s were c a l c u l a t e d t o i n v e s t i g a t e r e l a t i o n s h i p s among the dependent v a r i a b l e s at pre-treatment. presented i n Table 5.  These are  Table  5  I n t e r r e l a t i o n s h i p s among Dependent Measures at Pre-treatment STAI STAI SSS  SSS  1.00***  .52***  .52***  1.00***  PASSS  EPES  - .40**  - .41**  - .14  -  - .33**  .00  .48***  1.00***  PASSS  - .40**  -  EPES  - .41**  - .33**  PEC  - .14  .00  -  HRM  .17  .28*  - .08  a  (n = 4-8)  .48***  .57*** 1.00***  .34**  - .01 .02  PEC  - .34**  HRM .17 .28* - .08 .02  - .01 r.oo***  - .28  - .28  STAI = State Anxiety Inventory, SSS = Subjective Stress Scale, PASSS = Performance Anxiety Self-Statement Scale ( t o t a l score), EPES = Expectations of Personal E f f i c a c y Scale ( t o t a l s c o r e ) , PEC = performance e r r o r count, HRM = mean.heart r a t e . * ** ***  p < .05, o n e - t a i l e d t e s t p < .01, o n e - t a i l e d t e s t p < .001, o n e - t a i l e d t e s t  1.00***  71. P r e d i c t a b l y , the before, during, and a f t e r subscales of the Performance Anxiety Self-Statement Scale were h i g h l y i n t e r r e l a t e d . Before was c o r r e l a t e d w i t h during ( r = .74-, p <• .001) and w i t h a f t e r ( r = .77, p <.001),.and during was c o r r e l a t e d with a f t e r ( r = .91, p<  .001). The pre-treatment r a t i n g of v i s u a l signs of anxiety was not r e l a t e d  to the other behavioural measure, performance e r r o r count (r_ = .08, p •*>•,.05), or t o s e l f - r e p o r t e d anxiety or heart r a t e .  I t was, however,  i n v e r s e l y r e l a t e d to the Performance Anxiety Self-Statement Scale (r_ = - . 3 6 , p < .01, one-tailed t e s t ) . Pearson, c o r r e l a t i o n c o e f f i c i e n t s were also c a l c u l a t e d to i n v e s t i g a t e r e l a t i o n s h i p s among the dependent v a r i a b l e s at follow-up. presented i n Table 6 .  These are  Ratings of. improvement i n v i s u a l signs of anxiety  and q u a l i t y of playing at follow-up were c o r r e l a t e d ( r = .78, p <  .001).  P r e d i c t o r Variables Pearson c o r r e l a t i o n c o e f f i c i e n t s were c a l c u l a t e d t o i n v e s t i g a t e which measures at post-treatment were good p r e d i c t o r s of f i n a l outcome. These are presented i n Table 7. Of p a r t i c u l a r i n t e r e s t was the p r e d i c t i v e power of the two cognitive mediational v a r i a b l e s , s e l f - t a l k and s e l f - e f f i c a c y , i n p r e d i c t i n g future behaviour.  Expectations  of personal e f f i c a c y at post-treatment was  p o s i t i v e l y c o r r e l a t e d to improvements at follow-up i n v i s u a l signs of anxiety (2? = . 3 4 , p < . 0 l ) and q u a l i t y of playing ( r = .29, p < .05). P o s i t i v e t h i n k i n g at post-treatment was associated with greater improvement i n v i s u a l signs of anxiety ( r = .25, p <C.05) but was not s i g n i f i c a n t l y r e l a t e d to q u a l i t y of playing.  Table  6  I n t e r r e l a t i o n s h i p s among Dependent Measures at Follow-up STAI STAI  SSS  (n = 48)  PASSS  EPES  IVSA - .52***  -  _  .57***  - .42***  IQP  1.00***  .68***  - .61***  -  .68***  1.00***  - .58***  - .64***  PASSS  - .61***  - .58***  1.00***  .48***  .68***  .52***  EPES  _  .53***  - .64***  .48***  1.00***  .45***  .42***  IVSA  - .52***  - .57***  .68***  .45***  1.00***  .78***  IQP  -  -  .52***  .42***  .78***  1.00***  SSS  .44***  .42***  .53***  STAI = State Anxiety Inventory, SSS = Subjective Stress Scale, PASSS = Performance Anxiety Self-Statement Scale ( t o t a l score), EPES = Expectations of Personal E f f i c a c y Scale ( t o t a l s c o r e ) , IVSA = improvement i n v i s u a l signs of anxiety, IQP = improvement, i n q u a l i t y of p l a y i n g . * p <C.05, o n e - t a i l e d t e s t ** p <c .01, o n e - t a i l e d t e s t *** p < . 0 0 1 , o n e - t a i l e d t e s t  .44***  Table  7  Post-treatment Measures as P r e d i c t o r s of Outcome  (n = 48)  Follow-up STAI  SSS  PASSS  EPES  IVSA  IQP  3t-treatment STAI  .77***  .54***  - .30*  - .38**  - .33**  - .26*  SSS  .51***  .51***  - .39**  - .36**  -  - .40**  .44***'  PASSS  _ .53***  - .25*  .56***  .31*  .25*  .15  EPES  -  .59***  - .58***  .36**  .81***  .34**  .29*  .07  - .29  .09  .08  .35  .24  .12  .12  - .07  - .22  PEC.  - .28*  - .15-  STAI = State Anxiety Inventory, SSS = Subjective Stress Scale, PASSS - Performance Anxiety Self-Statement Scale ( t o t a l score), EPES = Expectations of Personal E f f i c a c y Scale ( t o t a l score), PEC = performance e r r o r count, HRM = mean heart r a t e , IVSA = improvement i n v i s u a l signs of anxiety, IQP = improvement i n q u a l i t y of p l a y i n g . * ** ***  p <.05, o n e - t a i l e d t e s t p<C.01, o n e - t a i l e d t e s t p < .001, o n e - t a i l e d t e s t  Although performance e r r o r count at post-treatment was not r e l a t e d to e i t h e r of the behavioural measures at follow-up, v i s u a l signs of anxiety at post-treatment was i n v e r s e l y r e l a t e d t o improvement i n v i s u a l signs o f anxiety at follow-up ( r = -.40, p < C . 0 0 1 , o n e - t a i l e d t e s t ) .  Relationship o f Improvement, on the Dependent Measures t o C l a s s i f i c a t i o n and Process Variables C o r r e l a t i o n c o e f f i c i e n t s were c a l c u l a t e d t o assess the r e l a t i o n s h i p of c l a s s i f i c a t i o n and process v a r i a b l e s t o improvement on the s i x dependent measures.  I n order t o avoid the problems i n c u r r e d w i t h pre/  post "change scores" (Glass and Stanley, 1970), r e s i d u a l gain scores were employed and part c o r r e l a t i o n s computed. Age, grade, i n i t i a l l e v e l . o f reported anxiety, and amount of piano p r a c t i c e and number of performances were c o r r e l a t e d w i t h change on the s i x dependent measures.  Age was negatively r e l a t e d t o improvement  i n p o s i t i v e t h i n k i n g ( r = -.35, p<£ .05, t w o - t a i l e d t e s t ) and p o s i t i v e l y r e l a t e d t o an increase i n state anxiety ( r = .36, p < .05, t w o - t a i l e d test).  These f i n d i n g s , however, must be viewed w i t h caution as they  represent only a small proportion of the c o r r e l a t i o n s c a l c u l a t e d and the others were generally low. Subjects' view on treatment e f f e c t i v e n e s s , t h e i r anxiety l e v e l s and q u a l i t y of p l a y i n g during therapy sessions and home assignments, and the number of completed home assignments were g e n e r a l l y not r e l a t e d to improvement i n therapy.  75.  Discussion  The r e s u l t s of t h i s study i n d i c a t e that although d i f f e r e n c e s among the experimental conditions had begun t o occur at post-treatment, these differences were not s i g n i f i c a n t u n t i l a follow-up assessment f i v e weeks a f t e r the termination of treatment.  On four of the s i x outcome  measures at follow-up, the a t t e n t i o n a l t r a i n i n g treatment was superior to a waiting l i s t c o n t r o l condition.  A t t e n t i o n a l t r a i n i n g was more e f f e c t i v e  than no treatment i n reducing v i s u a l signs of anxiety and i n improving the q u a l i t y of p l a y i n g .  I t also had greater impact on the c o g n i t i v e  mediational v a r i a b l e s of s e l f - t a l k and s e l f - e f f i c a c y .  At follow-up,  subjects i n the a t t e n t i o n a l t r a i n i n g group had more p o s i t i v e and fewer negative thoughts and higher perceptions of s e l f - e f f i c a c y than subjects who were awaiting  treatment.  On three of the s i x outcome measures at follow-up, the behaviour rehearsal treatment was more e f f e c t i v e than the w a i t i n g l i s t c o n t r o l condition.  Behaviour rehearsal was superior i n reducing v i s u a l signs  of anxiety, and i n improving q u a l i t y of p l a y i n g and s e l f - t a l k . A t t e n t i o n a l t r a i n i n g was superior t o behaviour rehearsal i n reducing v i s u a l signs of anxiety and enhancing expectations of personal e f f i c a c y . In summary then, subjects i n the cognitive m o d i f i c a t i o n treatment manifested  s i g n i f i c a n t l y greater improvement r e l a t i v e t o w a i t i n g l i s t  c o n t r o l subjects; although i n comparison with behaviour r e h e a r s a l , a t t e n t i o n a l t r a i n i n g was l e s s impressive.  On two of- the four i n d i c e s ,  behaviour rehearsal was as e f f e c t i v e as a t t e n t i o n a l t r a i n i n g i n producing change.  These r e s u l t s p a r t i a l l y corroborated the second and t h i r d  hypotheses of the s u p e r i o r i t y of a t t e n t i o n a l t r a i n i n g over behaviour r e h e a r s a l , and of both these treatments over a waiting l i s t c o n t r o l .  76.  The s u p e r i o r i t y of a t t e n t i o n a l t r a i n i n g over behaviour rehearsal on some measures at follow-up corroborated G o l d f r i e d , Linehan, and Smith's (1978) conclusion that active.attempts to cope with anxiety by means of cognitive r e a p p r a i s a l add to anxiety reduction associated w i t h e x t i n c t i o n or h a b i t u a t i o n and f a c i l i t a t e g e n e r a l i z a t i o n . A f t e r a review of the l i t e r a t u r e , Beck and Mahoney (1979) concluded, more generally that the combination of cognitive and behavioural techniques may be more e f f e c t i v e than behavioural techniques  alone.  The r e s u l t s of the present study contradict Wardle's (1975) conclusion as they i n d i c a t e that r e l a x a t i o n t r a i n i n g i s not necessary to reduce performance anxiety, even when a f i n e motor s k i l l i s involved. The r e s u l t s are consistent with "'Wine's (1970) and Sarason's (1972a, 1975a) p o s i t i o n on t e s t anxiety that treatment should i n v o l v e s u b s t i t u t i o n of task-relevant responses f o r s e l f - o r i e n t i n g ones, and rehearsal of the  behaviour. As may have been expected both treatments, r e l a t i v e to the w a i t i n g  l i s t c o n t r o l c o n d i t i o n , r e s u l t e d i n s i g n i f i c a n t changes on the two behavioural measures of anxiety at follow-up.  A common component of the  two therapies was rehearsal before a small supportive audience.  This  t r a d i t i o n a l behavioural technique was aimed at changing behaviour and i t did help the performers to c o n t r o l body tension (e.g., s t i f f arms, shaking arms and l e g s ) and to improve the q u a l i t y of t h e i r p l a y i n g . More s u r p r i s i n g perhaps was the e f f i c a c y of both a t t e n t i o n a l t r a i n i n g and behaviour rehearsal i n i n c r e a s i n g p o s i t i v e and decreasing t h i n k i n g about performing.  negative  Thus the hypothesis of the s u p e r i o r i t y of  a t t e n t i o n a l t r a i n i n g on t h i s measure was not corroborated.  One would  have a n t i c i p a t e d that a cognitive m o d i f i c a t i o n treatment designed s p e c i f i c a l l y to a l t e r s e l f - t a l k , would be superior to one which focused  77. e n t i r e l y on changing behaviour.  This unexpected outcome may be accounted  f o r by Meichenbaum's (1977) theory of behaviour change that apparently diverse therapies can be equally e f f e c t i v e because they a l l at some point alter clients' self-talk.  Also r e l a t e d to t h i s may be Wilson's (1978) obser-  v a t i o n that directly-produced behaviour change may be the most e f f e c t i v e means of a l t e r i n g the cognitive mechanisms that mediate subsequent Bandura et a l . (1977) found that a performance-based  performance.  treatment  produced higher, stronger, and more generalized expectations of personal e f f i c a c y than a treatment which r e l i e d on v i c a r i o u s experience alone.  Mahoney and Kazdin ( i n press) remarked on the "almost comic  i r o n y " that behavioural procedures may be among the most, powerful methods f o r a c t i v a t i n g cognitive, processes such as expectations of s e l f - e f f i c a c y . In the present study, the a t t e n t i o n a l t r a i n i n g treatment was  significantly  superior to behaviour r e h e a r s a l and t o no treatment i n i n c r e a s i n g e f f i c a c y expectations. Although behaviour r e h e a r s a l subjects surpassed waiting l i s t c o n t r o l subjects on t h i s measure, the difference was not significant.  Results.from the present study therefore do not support  the importance of a performance-based efficacy.  treatment alone i n i n c r e a s i n g s e l f -  They i n d i c a t e instead that supplementing a s t r i c t l y behavioural  technique w i t h a cognitive approach leads to s i g n i f i c a n t l y greater improvement i n s e l f - e f f i c a c y than the behavioural technique alone.  This  i s an aspect which Bandura (1977) has not yet examined but which he predicted would occur.  A f t e r a review of the l i t e r a t u r e , Mahoney and  Kazdin ( i n press) concluded that c o g n i t i v e l y - d i c t a t e d "mastery experiences" appear to enhance the effectiveness of behaviour rehearsal, and p a r t i c i p a n t modeling techniques, and more generally that cognitive parameters  may  enhance e i t h e r the p r e d i c t i v e v a l i d i t y or therapeutic power of t r a d i t i o n a l behavioural procedures.  Meichenbaum and Cameron (1974), f o r example,  78.  found increased e f f e c t i v e n e s s when systematic d e s e n s i t i z a t i o n was supplemented w i t h s e l f - i n s t r u c t i o n a l t r a i n i n g methods. In the present study, the e f f e c t i v e n e s s of the a t t e n t i o n a l t r a i n i n g therapy i n enhancing s e l f - e f f i c a c y may be explained by i t s focus on assuring c l i e n t s that they could gain mastery or c o n t r o l over t h e i r anxiety and as a r e s u l t improve t h e i r p l a y i n g i n a v a r i e t y of performance situations.  On the whole, the philosophy was "You can do i t .  You can  reduce your.anxiety and improve your p l a y i n g . " I n a d d i t i o n , although both treatments r e l i e d on v e r b a l persuasion, v i c a r i o u s experience, and performance accomplishments t o some extent (Bandura, 1977) a t t e n t i o n a l t r a i n i n g made greater use of the former two methods.  And f i n a l l y , subjects  i n the a t t e n t i o n a l t r a i n i n g group were taught a coping s k i l l which they could use when experiencing anxiety i n a performing s i t u a t i o n . Bandura (1977)noted,  As  "having a serviceable coping s k i l l at one's  disposal undoubtedly contributes t o one's sense of personal efficacy", (p. 196). I t i s unfortunate that the often-debated question as t o order of cognitive-behavioural change could not be answered by the present data. I t was not p o s s i b l e t o a s c e r t a i n i f subjects observed an improvement i n t h e i r p l a y i n g , and subsequently changed what they s a i d t o themselves and increased t h e i r e f f i c a c y expectations; or i f they changed t h e i r s e l f - t a l k and s e l f - e f f i c a c y which l e d t o an improvement i n performance. Had the cognitions changed at post-treatment w i t h behaviours a l s o changing at  follow-up (or v i c e v e r s a ) , t h i s question may have.been answered.  However,  n e i t h e r cognitions nor behaviour changed at post-treatment and both changed at follow-up.  An evaluation part-way between the two assessments  may have revealed the order of change. two change simultaneously.  I t may be of course that the  Mahoney (1977) has argued f o r a "causal  c i r c u l a r i t y " or an " i n t e r a c t i v e determinism" between cognitions and a c t i o n s .  79.  The r e l a t i v e l y good showing of behaviour r e h e a r s a l was  unexpected  given the negative f i n d i n g s of s e v e r a l studies examining the e f f e c t i v e n e s s of repeated r e h e a r s a l alone i n reducing performance anxiety (e.g., P a u l , 1966).  A c r i t i c a l f a c t o r which may have accounted f o r t h i s d i f f e r e n c e  i n outcome may be the way i n which the audience was perceived by the performers..  Davidson and K e l l y (1973) corroborated the hypothesis that  when audiences are perceived as a "safety s i g n a l , " c l i e n t s ' a b i l i t y to cope w i t h stress i s f a c i l i t a t e d .  Related to t h i s i s Weiss and M i l l e r ' s  (1971) view t h a t e v a l u a t i o n apprehension i s evoked only when negative outcomes are a n t i c i p a t e d by the performer.  Geen's (1977) f i n d i n g s  i n d i c a t e d that test-anxious subjects who expected that the outcome of an evaluation would be of b e n e f i t to them, showed l e s s anxiety than subjects who were j u s t t o l d they were being evaluated and subjects who were t o l d nothing.  The l a t t e r two conditions are comparable to Paul's  (1966) c o n t r o l group i n which speech-anxious  subjects performed before an  audience which made no response - p o s i t i v e or negative.  I t may  be  that i n order f o r e x t i n c t i o n to take p l a c e , both a n t i c i p a t i o n o f , and a c t u a l occurrence of, p o s i t i v e consequences are important.  This bears  further investigation. I t seems very p l a u s i b l e that i n the behaviour r e h e a r s a l sessions i n the present study, the group members were perceived as a " s a f e t y s i g n a l " or as being of p o t e n t i a l b e n e f i t to the performer.  Although  perception of the audience was not assessed, anecdotal evidence and t h e r a p i s t opinion provide some support f o r t h i s view.  A l e t t e r from one  of the group members, f o l l o w i n g treatment, best exemplifies t h i s group attitude.  She wrote:  " I t was j u s t l i k e Weight-Watchers w i t h each of  us cheering the others on."  80.  Related t o t h i s are reports by Johnson et a l . (1971) i n a study which demonstrated that systematic d e s e n s i t i z a t i o n and repeated p r a c t i c e were equally e f f e c t i v e i n reducing speech anxiety.  These authors  reported that i n the p r a c t i c e group, subjects were i n i t i a l l y r e l u c t a n t to speak before the others and were even r e l u c t a n t t o attend the sessions. The t h e r a p i s t found that i f he l e f t the group members alone to "chat" f o r a few minutes, the subjects were more w i l l i n g . t o attend sessions and to give speeches before the others.  The group sessions were described  as "informal," w i t h t h e r a p i s t and subjects t a l k i n g c a s u a l l y about g i v i n g speeches and problems of anxiety.  The authors expressed s u r p r i s e  at the outcome of the study but acknowledged that i t offered support f o r an approach which was commonly used by classroom teachers as a way of reducing speech anxiety. This study by Johnson et a l . p a r a l l e l s to some extent the design and outcome i n the present study.  I n both i n v e s t i g a t i o n s a technique  developed and recommended by p s y c h o l o g i s t s , was found t o be s i m i l a r i n effectiveness t o a technique i n common.use by teachers i n v o l v e d w i t h the students.  I n a d d i t i o n , I t was f e l t i n both studies that a casual  atmosphere which permitted i n t e r a c t i o n among group members f a c i l i t a t e d the behaviour rehearsal, therapy.  The diminished structure and extra  time i n the behaviour rehearsal sessions i n the present study, allowed f o r greater interchange among group members.  They had more time t o get to  know each other and the atmosphere was f r i e n d l y and relaxed.  In  a t t e n t i o n a l t r a i n i n g , the sessions were, h i g h l y s t r u c t u r e d and time was short r e s u l t i n g i n much l e s s casual i n t e r a c t i o n among group members and a more formal atmosphere.  An increase i n the number of a t t e n t i o n a l  t r a i n i n g sessions, allowing more time f o r casual interchange among group members, may increase perceptions of the audience as a "safety  81. signal."  Future studies should include the assessment of performers'  perceptions of the audience, as t h i s may be a c r i t i c a l f a c t o r i n the effectiveness of anxiety-reduction treatments when evaluative s i t u a t i o n s are  involved.  Modeling E f f e c t s The e f f e c t i n therapy sessions of group members' performance on the i n d i v i d u a l performer was not assessed i n the present study. The p o s s i b i l i t y was acknowledged, however, that i f some systematic modeling influence were o p e r a t i n g , . i t might enhance the more e f f e c t i v e treatment and/or detract from the l e s s e f f e c t i v e one. I f subjects i n the a t t e n t i o n a l t r a i n i n g group were improving t h e i r performing s k i l l s t o a greater degree than those i n the behaviour r e h e a r s a l group, for example, there might be even more improvement among the former subjects as a r e s u l t of observation of more competent models.  Modeling e f f e c t s ,  however, may d i f f e r from one type of problematic behaviour t o another. For  example, successful and unsuccessful models may have a d i f f e r e n t  e f f e c t on small-animal phobics than on i n d i v i d u a l s i n performing situations.  I t was decided therefore t o gather information about p o s s i b l e  modeling e f f e c t s on performing musicians. A survey was taken of musicians' expectations as t o how a "success" and a " f a i l u r e " model would a f f e c t t h e i r own performance•(see Appendix AA). An independent sample of 50 musicians was asked what e f f e c t i f any, a poor performance by a s o l o i s t p l a y i n g immediately before them would have on t h e i r own performance.  F i f t e e n subjects s a i d i t would cause them t o  play b e t t e r , 18 s a i d i t would cause them t o play worse, and 17 s a i d i t would have no e f f e c t on t h e i r performance.  When asked about the e f f e c t  of an e x c e l l e n t performance by a s o l o i s t ahead of them, 20 s a i d i t would  82.  cause them t o play b e t t e r , 14- worse, and 16 s a i d i t would have no e f f e c t on t h e i r playing.  Although the r e s u l t s were generally i n the expected  d i r e c t i o n , the large v a r i a t i o n among responses suggested that a number of d i f f e r e n t f a c t o r s might be operating.  Of i n t e r e s t i n t h i s regard  was some subjects' sense of "competition" w i t h the model i . e . , that a " f a i l u r e " model would make them play b e t t e r because they gained confidence that they could give a superior performance, and that a "success" model would make them perform more poorly because they f e l t they could never match that performance.  This l a t t e r view i s s i m i l a r  to the r a t i o n a l e f o r the use of coping rather than mastery models. I t does not appear from t h i s survey that systematic modeling e f f e c t s are operating when musicians observe other musicians perform.  The  usual favourable e f f e c t s of a "success" model and-adverse e f f e c t s of a " f a i l u r e " model (Bandura, 1971) may not always hold among performing musicians.  I n a d d i t i o n , a sense of competition w i t h the model may be a  f a c t o r i n reversing the usual modeling e f f e c t s f o r some subjects. Although t h i s survey r e f l e c t s expected rather than a c t u a l performance, the r e s u l t s are i n t e r e s t i n g and the area of modeling e f f e c t s i n the competitive world o f musicians, dancers, actors, and a t h l e t e s warrants further investigation. Sarason (1972a, b) has i n v e s t i g a t e d the e f f e c t s o f success and f a i l u r e models on test-anxious subjects.  He found that when a person  observes f a i l u r e i n . another, subsequent performance depends on the l e v e l of anxiety.  The high-anxious observer performed at a r e l a t i v e l y low  l e v e l whereas the low-anxious observer performed w e l l .  Sarason suggested  that f o r the l a t t e r group, f a i l u r e i n another person may r e s u l t i n heightened a t t e n t i o n , motivation, and e f f o r t .  I t may a l s o have been  p o s s i b l e that these low-anxious subjects, l i k e some of the musicians  83.  i n the survey, gained even more confidence from a f a i l u r e model because they f e l t they could give a superior performance and wanted to demonstrate t h i s to the examiner.  In future studies of modeling e f f e c t s among  musicians, the l e v e l of anxiety of observers should be assessed as t h i s may be-important i n determining the e f f e c t s of modeling on subsequent performance.  Expectancy E f f e c t s The importance of monitoring the c r e d i b i l i t y of placebo conditions i n outcome research was stressed by Borkovec and Nau (1972) and Mahoney (1978).  Although behaviour rehearsal was not considered as a  placebo c o n t r o l i n the present study, i t served as a c o n t r o l f o r expect a t i o n s of therapeutic outcome and p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n a study.  As w i t h  most placebo c o n d i t i o n s , behaviour r e h e a r s a l was c l e a r l y l e s s complex than the cognitive m o d i f i c a t i o n treatment and therefore l i k e l y to be perceived as l e s s e f f e c t i v e .  Every e f f o r t was made to present the behaviour  rehearsal therapy i n a manner which would l e a d to equivalent expectancies of treatment e f f e c t i v e n e s s to those of the a t t e n t i o n a l t r a i n i n g treatment. The data r e v e a l that t h i s goal was achieved.  The s u p e r i o r i t y of the  cognitive treatment therefore cannot be a t t r i b u t e d to higher expectations of treatment e f f e c t i v e n e s s by subjects. This k i n d of conclusion cannot be drawn i n studies i n which expectancy f a c t o r s have been ignored. Future research should employ post-session questionnaires of the type used i n the present study as t h e i r use consumes very l i t t l e time and provides important information. In a d d i t i o n to assessing expectancy f a c t o r s , such questionnaires can help toward c o n t r o l l i n g experimenter b i a s , a problem which Mahoney (1978)  84.  has noted i s o f t e n ignored and i s p a r t i c u l a r l y d i f f i c u l t to c o n t r o l .  If  researchers and t h e r a p i s t s know that expectations of treatment e f f e c t i v e n e s s w i l l be assessed, they may. be. more l i k e l y to make the presentations of treatments equally c r e d i b l e , . r a t h e r than favouring one which supports the experimental hypothesis.  Follow-up The question of whether improvements i n behaviour i n the l a b o r a t o r y generalize to the " r e a l world" has plagued therapy, outcome research f o r many years.  Evidence suggests that g e n e r a l i z a t i o n does not a u t o m a t i c a l l y  occur (e.g., Rosen, Glasgow, and Barrerg, 1977) but should be programmed (Baer, Wolf, and R i s l e y , 1968), and assessed. (Mahoney, 1978).  McFall  and Twentyman (1973) followed t h i s recommendation i n t h e i r use of i n vivo follow-ups as a way of assessing i f g e n e r a l i z a t i o n across time and s e t t i n g s occurred.  They devised a set of ingenious telephone follow-up  assessments i n which experimental confederates c a l l e d c l i e n t s i n a s s e r t i v e ness t r a i n i n g programs and made a v a r i e t y of unreasonable  requests.  The suggestion of i n vivo follow-ups was taken up i n the present research w i t h subjects being asked to m a i l i n s e l f - and s i g n i f i c a n t otherevaluations of  l e v e l s . .. of anxiety and q u a l i t y of p l a y i n g associated  w i t h a performance i n the community.  For these performances subjects  used music f e s t i v a l s , competitions, a u d i t i o n s , exams, and s p r i n g r e c i t a l s . Those subjects not involved i n these performances set-up t h e i r recitals.  own  Some teachers arranged s p e c i a l r e c i t a l s and i n v i t e d f a m i l y  members and f r i e n d s .  With a lowering of anxiety and improved q u a l i t y  of p l a y i n g o c c u r r i n g . i n follow-up performances such as these, one could f e e l more confident that the r e s u l t s of therapy extended to s i t u a t i o n s i n  85.  which p i a n i s t s most commonly perform (Kazdin, 1978).  This was,  after  a l l , the ultimate goal o f the treatment program. In a d d i t i o n t o evaluating t r a n s f e r of therapeutic e f f e c t s across s e t t i n g s , follow-ups are a l s o recommended t o evaluate maintenance of e f f e c t s across time.  The follow-up assessment i n the present study was  important, not because i t evaluated maintenance of therapeutic e f f e c t s , but because i t i d e n t i f i e d d i f f e r e n t i a l improvement which was not y e t s i g n i f i c a n t at post-treatment.  I t would have been worthwhile t o do a  three- or six-month follow-up assessment t o evaluate whether the trend of improvement over time continued f o r both groups.  For p r a c t i c a l reasons,  t h i s was not c a r r i e d out i n the present study.  Post-study Workshop Results o f an a n a l y s i s assessing pre/post changes suggested that a four-hour a t t e n t i o n a l t r a i n i n g workshop;.was only minimally e f f e c t i v e i n t r e a t i n g performance anxiety i n p i a n i s t s .  Of s i x v a r i a b l e s only one,  v i s u a l signs o f anxiety, was s i g n i f i c a n t l y modified.  Although the same  m a t e r i a l i n condensed form was presented as i n the three-session a t t e n t i o n a l therapy, the l a t t e r format was a more e f f e c t i v e way of designing the program.  I t i s probable that the week between sessions, the a d d i t i o n a l  performances, and the home assignments contributed t o the greater e f f e c t i v e ness of the three-session program, although the r e l a t i v e importance of these components was not assessed.  Home Assignments The i n c l u s i o n of w r i t t e n home assignments i n both treatment programs was designed t o t r a n s f e r some of the r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r change from  86.  therapist to client.  This procedure also r e s u l t e d i n a reduction o f  t h e r a p i s t time which i s d e s i r a b l e from a cost-benefit perspective. N i n e t y - f i v e percent o f assignments i n the a t t e n t i o n a l t r a i n i n g group and seventy-five percent o f assignments i n the behaviour rehearsal group were completed. Bowman (1977) recommended that future research should more systema t i c a l l y c o l l e c t information on c l i e n t s ' a p p l i c a t i o n o f treatment techniques. The use o f home assignments enabled the present i n v e s t i g a t o r t o respond i n part t o t h i s recommendation. exercises  Subjects' f u l f i l l m e n t of homework  ( i n c l u d i n g p o s i t i v e and negative thoughts f o r a t t e n t i o n a l  t r a i n i n g subjects) were recorded and i n t h i s way subjects' compliance with suggestions i n therapy could t o some extent be assessed. Number of completed home assignments and anxiety l e v e l and q u a l i t y of p l a y i n g during home assignments were, not r e l a t e d t o therapeutic outcome.  However, the f a c t that only three sessions of. therapy  could  r e s u l t i n s i g n i f i c a n t improvements at follow-up, suggested that the home assignments may have played an important r o l e i n supplementing the sessions with the t h e r a p i s t .  I n order t o assess s p e c i f i c a l l y the value of home  assignments i n a therapeutic program, future research should  evaluate  treatment programs with and without the a d d i t i o n o f home assignments.  Measures Although i n the p r e d i c t e d d i r e c t i o n , the State Anxiety  Inventory  and Subjective Stress Scale d i d not d i s c r i m i n a t e s i g n i f i c a n t l y among the three groups at post-treatment  or at follow-up.  A f u r t h e r evaluation of  s e l f - r e p o r t e d anxiety at a l a t e r time may have revealed a s i g n i f i c a n t difference.  L i c k and K a t k i n (1976) noted that several studies have  demonstrated that c l i e n t s may make behavioural changes before  evidencing  87.  reductions i n c o g n i t i v e d i s t r e s s . R e l i a b i l i t y and v a l i d i t y t e s t s of the Performance Anxiety S e l f Statement Scale and the Expectations of Personal E f f i c a c y S c a l e , i n d i c a t e d that they can j u s t i f i a b l y be used i n future research.  As they are  s p e c i f i c t o p i a n i s t s i n performance s i t u a t i o n s , transformations would have to be made f o r use w i t h other populations. necessitate a l t e r a t i o n s i n format.  Such transformations u s u a l l y  This was the case i n adopting  Bandura's scale f o r snake phobics for.anxious musicians.  The magnitude sub-  scale, which i n Bandura's scale consisted l a r g e l y of expectations about making c l o s e r approaches t o a snake, was changed t o expectations about performing i n i n c r e a s i n g l y threatening s i t u a t i o n s .  I t was simply  not meaningful t o ask p i a n i s t s about expectations o f being able t o approach a piano!  I n addition,, as many subjects had engaged i n one o r  several of the tasks i n the magnitude s c a l e , a l b e i t w i t h extreme anxiety, i t was deemed important t o have them r a t e t h e i r expectations of being able t o engage i n tasks w i t h t h e i r anxiety under c o n t r o l .  Revisions of  the scale f o r other types of target behaviours may n e c e s s i t a t e a l t e r a t i o n s of other aspects of the scale. One of the advantages of the use of such scales t o assess c o g n i t i o n s , i s that i t may be p o s s i b l e t o determine whether a change i n cognitions i s followed by a change i n behaviour or v i c e versa, or whether they both change concurrently.  Unfortunately, there were not a s u f f i c i e n t number  of assessments i n the present study t o make t h i s k i n d of e v a l u a t i o n . The d i v i s i o n of the Performance Anxiety Self-Statement Scale i n t o three time periods coincides w i t h Sarason and Stoops's (1978) recommendation of obtaining measures o f c o g n i t i v e i n t e r f e r e n c e at several p o i n t s during a performance.  These, authors expressed a p a r t i c u l a r i n t e r e s t i n c o g n i t i v e  a c t i v i t y during w a i t i n g periods and noted the process of incubation  88.  ( B r e z n i t z , 1971) by which the s t r e s s value e f a stimulus or s i t u a t i o n i s enhanced during a w a i t i n g period.  I n order to obtain a more v a l i d  measure of cognitions during t h i s w a i t i n g p e r i o d , the before  subscale  could be administered t o subjects immediately p r i o r t o p l a y i n g as i t would eliminate a tendency f o r post-performance r a t i o n a l i z a t i o n (Meichenbaum, Note 2 ) . The r a t i n g of v i s u a l signs of anxiety from the videotape was not r e l a t e d to a second behavioural measure, a r a t i n g of performance q u a l i t y (performance e r r o r count), or to s e l f - r e p o r t s of anxiety.  At follow-up,  however, the r a t i n g s by s i g n i f i c a n t others o f v i s u a l signs of anxiety were r e l a t e d t o r a t i n g s of the q u a l i t y of p l a y i n g and t o s e l f - r e p o r t e d anxiety.  This discrepancy may have been caused by the d i f f i c u l t y of  seeing some of the more subtle behaviours on the t e l e v i s i o n screen (e.g., shaking arms, shaking l e g s ) .  These behaviours, which had been observed  on some performers and noted during the a c t u a l performance, d i d not appear on the videotape.  This suggested that although the videotaped  performances were valuable during therapy sessions f o r "cognitive r e c a l l , " they were l e s s u s e f u l f o r r a t i n g purposes.  Future studies of  performance anxiety should employ observers at the time of the performance i f v i s u a l signs of anxiety are t o be rated most accurately. In contrast, the sound q u a l i t y o f the audiotapes from which performance error counts were taken was e x c e l l e n t and subtle e r r o r s i n notes, rhythm, and dynamics were e a s i l y detected.  The use of audiotaped p e r f o r -  mances i s superior t o i n vivo r a t i n g s as the tapes can be reviewed s e v e r a l times enabling a more accurate count of e r r o r s . A telemetry technique was employed i n the present study t o obtain a continuous recording of heart rate before, during, and a f t e r the performance.  Although the equipment i s expensive, t h i s i s a v a s t l y  89.  superior method t o the commonly-used p r a c t i c e of t a k i n g pulse rate immediately p r i o r t o the performance. A "pounding heart" was one of the major complaints of subjects both i n the assessment and treatment sessions.  This concurred w i t h an  elevated heart rate (M = 116.13) as assessed by the telemetry system during the pre-treatment performance.  Heart r a t e was not a l t e r e d ' ... ...  by e i t h e r of the two treatments at post-treatment.  Thus the hypothesis  that a t t e n t i o n a l t r a i n i n g can r e s u l t i n changes i n a l l three response modalities was not supported. At the follow-up performances,-it'was  not p o s s i b l e to- -.^  obtain a measure of heart rate using telemetry equipment, as had been done i n the previous two assessments.  Thus conclusive evidence on the  e f f i c a c y of the two treatments i n reducing p h y s i o l o g i c a l arousal i s not a v a i l a b l e .  Future researchers employing  such, follow-ups could  ask subjects t o do a s e l f - e v a l u a t i o n of heart r a t e (pulse r a t e p r i o r t o and f o l l o w i n g performance);  however, the r e a c t i v i t y of such a measure would  make i t s value questionable.  I n a d d i t i o n , as many of these performances  have important i m p l i c a t i o n s f o r subjects (e.g., exams and a u d i t i o n s ) self-assessment requests should be kept t o a minimum.  I n t e r r e l a t i o n s h i p s among Indices At pre-treatment, the behavioural and p h y s i o l o g i c a l measures were not c o r r e l a t e d with each other or w i t h s e l f - r e p o r t of s t a t e anxiety. Heart rate was moderately r e l a t e d t o a s u b j e c t i v e report of s t r e s s immediately p r i o r t o p l a y i n g ; however, the l a t t e r measure was not r e l a t e d to performance e r r o r count.  At follow-up, both behavioural measures  were r e l a t e d t o s e l f - r e p o r t s of state anxiety and s u b j e c t i v e s t r e s s .  90.  In summary, no c l e a r p a t t e r n i n g of r e l a t i o n s h i p s among s e l f - r e p o r t , behavi o u r a l , and p h y s i o l o g i c a l measures can be discerned from these data, and the discrepancy between pre-treatment  and follow-up c o r r e l a t i o n s  cannot be unambiguously i n t e r p r e t e d . In terms of p r e d i c t i n g behavioural response to treatment, of personal e f f i c a c y at post-treatment  expectations  were p o s i t i v e l y c o r r e l a t e d w i t h  improvement i n v i s u a l signs of anxiety and q u a l i t y of p l a y i n g at follow-up.  P o s i t i v e s e l f - t a l k at post-treatment  was associated w i t h a  reduction i n v i s u a l signs of anxiety but not to improved performance at follow-up.  The best p r e d i c t o r of improvement i n behaviour  . was  subjects' report of s u b j e c t i v e s t r e s s immediately p r i o r to p l a y i n g .  Subject A t t r i t i o n Several f a c t o r s may study.  account f o r the zero a t t r i t i o n r a t e i n the present  Treatment sessions were o f f e r e d i n four d i f f e r e n t l o c a t i o n s i n  the Greater Vancouver area.  This meant that subjects d i d not have to  t r a v e l f a r each week to attend the program.  Frequent contact was made  by phone w i t h subjects to remind them of the assessment and sessions.  therapy  When subjects were not able to attend a therapy session, i t  was made up w i t h i n the f o l l o w i n g week with the t h e r a p i s t d r i v i n g to a l o c a t i o n convenient f o r subjects.  The l a r g e s t drop-out r a t e o f t e n occurs  i n w a i t i n g l i s t c o n t r o l groups, which i s understandable  i n view of the  f a c t that these subjects are u s u a l l y promised therapy at some u n s p e c i f i e d future time.  In the present study, w a i t i n g l i s t c o n t r o l subjects  were given a time and l o c a t i o n f o r t h e i r therapy session.  The f a c t that 3 0  of 34 subjects attended the post-study workshops a t t e s t s to maintenance of i n t e r e s t i n the program by c o n t r o l subjects.  91.  In some s t u d i e s , an i n c e n t i v e t o attend sessions i s provided by o f f e r i n g a reward f o r completing treatment (e.g., money) or punishment f o r dropping out' (e.g., no refund of deposit).  The l a t t e r was recommended by Goldstein  (Note 8) who encountered a s i z a b l e drop-out r a t e i n h i s program f o r performance-anxious  musicians (1975).  I n the present study no such  incentives were used - w i t h the exception perhaps of refreshments which were served at the end of each therapy session. Continued telephone contact was f e l t t o be \a?' major f a c t o r i n :  preventing subjects from l e a v i n g the program.  I t i s u s e f u l t o know  that a few evenings on the telephone could be a c r i t i c a l f a c t o r i n reducing subject a t t r i t i o n .  Implications f o r the Musical Community .Up t o t h i s p o i n t , the d i s c u s s i o n has p r i m a r i l y focused on i m p l i c a t i o n s of the present study f o r p s y c h o l o g i s t s engaging i n future research. The r e s u l t s a l s o have i m p l i c a t i o n s f o r the musical community.  The  popular use of behaviour r e h e a r s a l as a method o f reducing performance anxiety gains some support from the present data.  Behaviour r e h e a r s a l  was more e f f e c t i v e than no treatment i n reducing v i s u a l signs of a n x i e t y , improving the q u a l i t y of p l a y i n g , and i n c r e a s i n g p o s i t i v e t h i n k i n g about performing.  Music teachers can be advised that t h e i r student r e h e a r s a l  gatherings before important performances are probably r e s u l t i n g i n some b e n e f i t t o t h e i r students, provided that a p o s i t i v e perception of audience members i s fostered. I f time were allowed f o r the students t o converse among themselves, t a l k about t h e i r anxiety, and share personal experiences, t h i s perception would more l i k e l y be promoted.  I n the present study  many subjects expressed r e l i e f t o know that others shared s i m i l a r f e e l i n g s .  92.  They had b e l i e v e d they were the only ones who anxiety about performing.  suffered from d e b i l i t a t i n g  With regard to more experienced performers,  even they, can be assured that gathering some f r i e n d s together t o rehearse a program may be a u s e f u l way of a i d i n g anxiety reduction. The a d d i t i o n of a t t e n t i o n a l t r a i n i n g , however, would add even more to such rehearsals.  Several teachers who p a r t i c i p a t e d i n the present  program reported using the a t t e n t i o n a l t r a i n i n g ideas on an informal basis w i t h t h e i r students.  I t would be p o s s i b l e . t o develop a. structured  "package" f o r teachers with, a manual and the four slide-tape sequences.  cognitive-modeling  The e f f i c a c y of non-professionals  out a wide v a r i e t y of treatments (Karlsruher, 1974)  i n carrying  suggests that  therapists,,- w i t h extensive backgrounds i n psychology are not required f o r the e f f e c t i v e administration of many treatments.  The  effectiveness  of music teachers i n using an a t t e n t i o n a l t r a i n i n g program, such as that i n the present study, remains to be evaluated.  It i s f e l t ,  however, that t h i s i s the way we should proceed i n disseminating a t t e n t i o n a l t r a i n i n g program.  the  Aside from obvious cost-benefit advantages,  i t would be e a s i e r to teach musib teachers what they need to know about a t t e n t i o n a l t r a i n i n g than to teach psychologists what they would need to know about music.  93. Footnotes  1.  I t should also be noted that i t i s not l e g i t i m a t e t o make.generalizations from research using subjects w i t h small-animal or other types o f non-evaluative phobias.  I n these cases the i n d i v i d u a l i s simply  asked t o complete a required task such as touching a snake, c r o s s i n g a bridge, or f l y i n g i n a plane.  Success depends on completing the  task, and ongoing q u a l i t y of performance i s not a f a c t o r .  A person  could report being t e r r i f i e d but i f s/he completes the task then behavioural change has been achieved.  In performance anxiety, p a r t i -  c u l a r l y musical performance anxiety, improving the q u a l i t y of the performance i s e s s e n t i a l i n order to report behavioural change. A second l i m i t a t i o n of g e n e r a l i z i n g from small-animal research was noted by Kazdin (1978).  He reported that fears of small animals  i n college students t y p i c a l l y habituate more q u i c k l y i n response to anxiety-provoking s i t u a t i o n s and are more i n f l u e n c e d by suggestion than are fears i n s o c i a l s i t u a t i o n s such as heterosexual and speech anxiety.  94.  Reference Notes 1.  Meichenbaum, D. Cognitive-behavior m o d i f i c a t i o n newsletter. Unpublished manuscript, U n i v e r s i t y of Waterloo, 1975.  2.  Meichenbaum, D. Cognitive-behavior, m o d i f i c a t i o n newsletter. Unpublished manuscript, U n i v e r s i t y of Waterloo, 1976.  3.  Meichenbaum, D. Cognitive-behavior m o d i f i c a t i o n newsletter. Unpublished manuscript, U n i v e r s i t y of Waterloo, 1977.  4.  Meichenbaum, D. Therapist manual f o r c o g n i t i v e behavior m o d i f i c a t i o n . Unpublished manuscript, U n i v e r s i t y of Waterloo, 1973.  5.  Bruch, M. Type of cognitive modeling, observers' i m i t a t i o n of modeled s t r a t e g i e s , and m o d i f i c a t i o n of t e s t anxiety. Unpublished manuscript, Bradley U n i v e r s i t y , 1976.  6.  Reubart, D.  7.  K e r l e , R.H., and B i a l e k , H.M. The construction, v a l i d a t i o n and a p p l i c a t i o n of a Subjective Stress Scale. Presido of Monterey, C a l i f . : S t a f f memorandum, U.S. Army Leadership Human Research Unit, February 1958. '  8.  Goldstein, J . Personal communication, January 28, 1977.  Personal communication, February 14, 1979.  95. References  Appel, S.S. Modifying solo performance anxiety i n adult p i a n i s t s (Doctoral d i s s e r t a t i o n , Columbia U n i v e r s i t y , 1974-). D i s s e r t a t i o n Abstracts I n t e r n a t i o n a l , 1974-, 35, 3503A. ( U n i v e r s i t y M i c r o f i l m s No. 74-26, 580J Appel, S.S. Modifying solo performance anxiety i n adult p i a n i s t s . The Journal of Music Therapy, 1976, 13, 2-16. Baer, D., Wolf, M., and R i s l e y , T. Some current dimensions of applied behavior a n a l y s i s . Journal of Applied Behavior A n a l y s i s , 1968, 1, 91-97. Bandura, A. P r i n c i p l e s of behavior m o d i f i c a t i o n . Rinehart and Winston, 1969.  New York:  Holt,  Bandura, A. Psychotherapy based upon modeling p r i n c i p l e s . In A.E. Bergin.and S..L. G a r f i e l d (Eds.), Handbook of psychotherapy and behavior change: An e m p i r i c a l a n a l y s i s . New York: John Wiley and Sons, 1971. Bandura, A. S e l f - e f f i c a c y : Toward a u n i f y i n g theory of b e h a v i o r a l change. P s y c h o l o g i c a l Review, 1977, 84, 191-215. Bandura, A., Adams, N.E., and Beyer, J . Cognitive processes mediating behavioral change. Journal of P e r s o n a l i t y and S o c i a l Psychology, 1977, 35, 125-139. Beck, A.T. Cognitive therapy: Nature and r e l a t i o n to behavior therapy. Behavior Therapy, 1970, 1, 184-200. Beck, A.T. Cognitive therapy and the emotional disorders. I n t e r n a t i o n a l U n i v e r s i t i e s Press, 1976. Beck., A.T., and Mahoney, M.J. 1979, 34, 93-98.  Schools of "thoughts"  B e l l a c k , A.S., and Hersen, M. Behavior m o d i f i c a t i o n . Williams and W i l k i n s , 1977.  New  York:  American P s y c h o l o g i s t , Baltimore:  Bergin, A.E. Cognitive therapy and behavior therapy: Foci f o r a multidimensional approach t o treatment. Behavior Therapy, 1970, 1, 205-212. Bergin, A.E.,-.and Suinn, R.M. I n d i v i d u a l psychotherapy and behavior therapy. In M.R. Rosenzweig and L.W. P o r t e r (Eds. ), Annual Review of Psychology ( V o l . 26). Palo A l t o , C a l i f . : Annual Reviews Inc., 1975. Borkovec, T., and Nau, S. C r e d i b i l i t y of analogue therapy r a t i o n a l e s . Journal of Behavior Therapy and Experimental P s y c h i a t r y, 1972, 3, 257-260. !  96.  Bowman, R.G. S e l f - i n s t r u c t i o n a l t r a i n i n g i n s t r e s s management. Unpublished doctoral d i s s e r t a t i o n , U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia, 1977. (Microfiche No. 34-765, Ottawa: N a t i o n a l L i b r a r y of Canada, 1977) B r e z n i t z , S.A. A study of worrying. B r i t i s h Journal of S o c i a l and C l i n i c a l Psychology, 1971, 10, 271-279. Brozek, J . , and Taylor, H.L. Tests of motor functions i n i n v e s t i g a t i o n s on f i t n e s s . American Journal of Psychology, 1954, 67, 590-611. Casas, J.M. A comparison of two mediational s e l f - c o n t r o l techniques f o r the treatment of speech anxiety (Doctoral d i s s e r t a t i o n , Stanford U n i v e r s i t y , 1975). D i s s e r t a t i o n Abstracts I n t e r n a t i o n a l , 1975, 36, 4681B. ( U n i v e r s i t y M i c r o f i l m s No. 76-5701) Craig, K.D., and Prkachin, K.M. S o c i a l modeling i n f l u e n c e s on sensory d e c i s i o n theory and psychophysiological indexes of pain. Journal of P e r s o n a l i t y and S o c i a l Psychology, 1978, 36, 805-815. Davidson, P.O., and K e l l e y , W.R. S o c i a l f a c i l i t a t i o n and coping w i t h s t r e s s . B r i t i s h Journal of S o c i a l and C l i n i c a l Psychology, 1973, 12,  130-136":  Davison, G.C. process.  :  ~  ~  Systematic d e s e n s i t i z a t i o n as a counterconditioning Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 1968, 73, 91-99.  D e r i , 0. S t a g e f r i g h t : Music enemy number one. 20, pp. 94; 114-115.  Music J o u r n a l , 1962,  Doctor, R.M., land Altman, F. Worry and emotionality as components of t e s t anxiety: R e p l i c a t i o n and f u r t h e r data. P s y c h o l o g i c a l Reports, 1969, 24, 563-568.  E l l i s , A. Reason and emotion i n psychotherapy. 1962.  New York:  Lyle Stuart,  Finger, R., and G a l a s s i , J.P. E f f e c t s of modifying c o g n i t i v e versus emotionality responses i n the treatment of t e s t anxiety. Journal of Consulting and C l i n i c a l Psychology, 1977, 4_5, 280-286. F o l k i n s , C.H., Lawson, K.D., Opton, E.M., and Lazarus, R.S. D e s e n s i t i z a t i o n and the experimental reduction of t h r e a t . Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 1968, 73, 100-113. Foreyt, J.P., and Rathjen, D.P. Plenum Press, 1978.  Cognitive behavior therapy.  New York:  Fremouw, W.J., and Harmatz, M.G. A helper model f o r behavioral treatment of speech anxiety. Journal of Consulting and C l i n i c a l Psychology, 1975, 43, 652-660.  97.  G a m b r i l l , E.D. B e h a v i o r m o d i f i c a t i o n : Handbook o f assessment, and e v a l u a t i o n . San F r a n c i s c o : J o s s e y - B a s s , 1977.  intervention,  Ganzer, V . J . E f f e c t s o f audience presence and t e s t a n x i e t y on l e a r n i n g and r e t e n t i o n i n a s e r i a l l e a r n i n g s i t u a t i o n . J o u r n a l of P e r s o n a l i t y and S o c i a l P s y c h o l o g y , 1968, 8, 194-199. Geen, R.G. E f f e c t s o f a n t i c i p a t i o n o f p o s i t i v e and n e g a t i v e outcomes on audience a n x i e t y . J o u r n a l o f C o n s u l t i n g and C l i n i c a l P s y c h o l o g y , 1977, 45, 715-716. G l a s s , G.V., and S t a n l e y , J.C. S t a t i s t i c a l methods i n e d u c a t i o n and p s y c h o l o g y . Englewood C l i f f s , N.J.: P r e n t i c e - H a l l , 1970. G o l d f r i e d . , M.R., Decenteceo, E.T., and Weinberg, L. S y s t e m a t i c r a t i o n a l r e s t r u c t u r i n g as a s e l f - c o n t r o l t e c h n i q u e . B e h a v i o r Therapy, 1974, 2 , 247-254. G o l d f r i e d , M.R., L i n e h a n , M.M., and S n a t h , J.L. R e d u c t i o n o f t e s t a n x i e t y through c o g n i t i v e r e s t r u c t u r i n g . J o u r n a l o f C o n s u l t i n g and C l i n i c a l P s y c h o l o g y , 1978, 46, 32-39. G o l d f r i e d , M.R., and T r i e r , C.S. E f f e c t i v e n e s s o f r e l a x a t i o n as an a c t i v e coping s k i l l . J o u r n a l o f Abnormal P s y c h o l o g y , 1974, 83, 348-355. G o l d s t e i n , J . S y s t e m a t i c r a t i o n a l r e s t r u c t u r i n g and s y s t e m a t i c d e s e n s i t i z a t i o n as t r e a t m e n t s of m u s i c a l performance a n x i e t y . U n p u b l i s h e d master's t h e s i s , U n i v e r s i t y o f C i n c i n n a t i , 1975. G r o s s b e r g , J.M. S u c c e s s f u l b e h a v i o r t h e r a p y i n a case o f speech p h o b i a ("stage f r i g h t " ) . J o u r n a l o f Speech and H e a r i n g D i s o r d e r s , 1965, 30, 285-288. Henshaw, D. C o g n i t i v e mediators i n c r e a t i v e problem s o l v i n g . d o c t o r a l d i s s e r t a t i o n , U n i v e r s i t y o f W a t e r l o o , 1977.  Unpublished  H o l r o y d , K. C o g n i t i o n and d e s e n s i t i z a t i o n i n t h e group t r e a t m e n t o f t e s t a n x i e t y . J o u r n a l o f C o n s u l t i n g and C l i n i c a l P s y c h o l o g y , 1976, 44, 991-1001. I s c o e , I . Community p s y c h o l o g y and t h e competent community. P s y c h o l o g i s t , 1974, 29, 607-613.  American  James, I.M., G r i f f i t h , D.N.W., P e a r s o n , R.M., and Newbury, P. E f f e c t o f o x p r e n o l o l on s t a g e - f r i g h t i n m u s i c i a n s . The L a n c e t , 1977, 2, 952-954. J e f f r e y , D.B. S e l f - c o n t r o l : M e t h o d o l o g i c a l i s s u e s and r e s e a r c h t r e n d s . I n M.J. Mahoney and C.E. Thoresen ( E d s . ), S e l f - c o n t r o l : Power t o t h e p e r s o n . Monterey, C a l i f . : B r o o k s / C o l e , 1974-  98.  Johnson, S.M., and Sechrest, L. Comparison of d e s e n s i t i z a t i o n and progressive r e l a x a t i o n i n t r e a t i n g t e s t anxiety. Journal o f Consulting and C l i n i c a l Psychology, 1968, 32, 280-286. Johnson, T., T y l e r , V., J r . , Thompson, R., and Jones, E. Systematic d e s e n s i t i z a t i o n and a s s e r t i v e t r a i n i n g i n the treatment of speech anxiety i n middle-school students. Psychology i n the Schools, 1971, 8, 263-267. Kaplan, R.M., and L i t r o w n i k , A.J. Some s t a t i s t i c a l methods f o r the assessment of multiple.outcome c r i t e r i a i n behavioral research. Behavior Therapy, 1977, 8, 383-392. Karlsruher, A.E. The nonprofessional as a psychotherapeutic agent. American Journal of Community Psychology, 1974-, 2, 61-77. Kazdin, A.E. Behavior m o d i f i c a t i o n i n applied s e t t i n g s . Homewood, 111.: Dorsey Press, 1975. Kazdin, A.E. Research issues i n covert c o n d i t i o n i n g . and Research, 1977, 1, 45-58.  Cognitive Therapy  Kazdin, A.E. Evaluating the g e n e r a l i t y of f i n d i n g s i n analogue therapy research. Journal of Consulting, and C l i n i c a l Psychology, 1978, 46, 673-686^ Kazdin, A.E., and Straw, M.K. I n M. Hersen.and A.S. B e l l a c k (Eds.), Behavioral assessment: A p r a c t i c a l handbook. New York: Pergamon Press, 1976. Lang, P.J., and Lazovik, A.D. Experimental d e s e n s i t i z a t i o n of a phobia. Journal of Abnormal and S o c i a l Psychology, 1963, 66_, 519-525. Lang, P.J., Lazovik, A.D., and Reynolds, D.J. D e s e n s i t i z a t i o n , suggestib i l i t y , and pseudotherapy. Jouranl of Abnormal Psychology, 1965, 70, 395-402. '. ; Ledwidge, B. Cognitive behavior m o d i f i c a t i o n : A step i n the wrong direction?. Psychological B u l l e t i n , 1978, 85, 353-375. Leitenberg, H., Agras, S., Butz, R., and Wincze, J . R e l a t i o n s h i p between heart rate and behavioral change during the treatment o f phobias. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 1971, 78, 59-68. Lewando, R.  I n and out of tune.  Music J o u r n a l , 1968, 26, 64.  L i c k , J.R., and Katkin,. E.S. Assessment of anxiety and fear. I n M. Hersen and A.S. B e l l a c k (Eds. ), Behavioral assessment: A p r a c t i c a l handbook. New York: Pergamon Press, 1976.  L i e b e r t , R.M., and M o r r i s , L.W. Cognitive and emotional components of t e s t anxiety: A d i s t i n c t i o n and some i n i t i a l data. Psychological Reports, 1967, 20, 975-978. Locke, E.A. Behavior m o d i f i c a t i o n i s not cognitive - and other myths: A r e p l y to Ledwidge. Cognitive Therapy and Research, i n press. Lomas, C.W. A study o f stage f r i g h t . a s measured by Student r e a c t i o n s . Unpublished master's t h e s i s , Northwestern U n i v e r s i t y , 1934-. Lund, D.R. A comparative study of three therapeutic techniques i n the m o d i f i c a t i o n of anxiety behavior i n instrumental music performance (Doctoral d i s s e r t a t i o n , U n i v e r s i t y of Utah, 1972). D i s s e r t a t i o n Abstracts I n t e r n a t i o n a l , 1972, 33, 1189A. ( U n i v e r s i t y M i c r o f i l m s No. 72-23,026) Magnusson, D.  Test theory.  Reading, Mass.:  Addison-Wesley,  1967.  Mahoney, M.J. R e f l e c t i o n s on the c o g n i t i v e - l e a r n i n g trend i n psychotherapy. American Psychologist, 1977, 32, 5-13Mahoney, M.J. Experimental methods and outcome evaluation. Journal of Consulting and C l i n i c a l Psychology, 1978, ^6, 660-672. Mahoney, M.J., and Arnkoff, D. Cognitive and s e l f - c o n t r o l therapies. In S.L. G a r f i e l d and A.E. Bergin (Eds. ), Handbook of psychotherapy and behavior change (2nd ed. ). New York: Wiley, 1978. Mahoney, M.J., and Kazdin, A.E. Cognitive behavior m o d i f i c a t i o n : Misconceptions and premature evacuation. Psychological B u l l e t i n , i n press. Mandler, G., and Sarason, S.B. A study of anxiety and l e a r n i n g . of Abnormal and S o c i a l Psychology, 1952, 4_7, 166-173.  Journal  Mandler, G., and Watson, D.L. Anxiety and the i n t e r r u p t i o n of behavior. In C.D. Spielberger (Ed.), Anxiety and behavior. New York: Academic Press, 1966. M a r l e t t , N.J., and Watson, D. Test anxiety and immediate or delayed feedback i n a t e s t - l i k e avoidance task. Journal of Personality-.and S o c i a l Psychology, 1968, 8, 200-203. Mathews, A. Psychophysiological approaches to the i n v e s t i g a t i o n of d e s e n s i t i z a t i o n and r e l a t e d procedures. Psychological B u l l e t i n , 1971, 76, 73-91. M c F a l l , R.M., and Twentyman, C.T. Four experiments on the r e l a t i v e c o n t r i b u t i o n s of r e h e a r s a l , modeling, and coaching to a s s e r t i o n t r a i n i n g . Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 1973, 81, 199-218.  100.  McNabb, G.  Get r i d o f your stage f r i g h t .  Etude, 1951, 69, pp. 11; 56.  Meichenbaum, D. Cognitive m o d i f i c a t i o n of t e s t anxious college students. Journal of Consulting and C l i n i c a l Psychology, 1972, 39, 370-380. Meichenbaum., D. Cognitive behavior m o d i f i c a t i o n . General Learning Press, 1974-.  Morristown, N.J..:  Meichenbaum, D. 1977.  New York:  Cognitive-behavior  modification.  Plenum Press,  Meichenbaum, D. Cognitive behavior m o d i f i c a t i o n : The need f o r a f a i r e r assessment. Cognitive Therapy and Research, i n press. Meichenbaum, D., and Cameron, R. The c l i n i c a l p o t e n t i a l of modifying what c l i e n t s say t o themselves. I n M.J. Mahoney and C.E. Thoresen (Eds.), S e l f - c o n t r o l : Power t o the person. Monterey, C a l i f . : Brooks/Cole, 1974. Meichenbaum, D., Gilmore, J.B., and Fedoravicius, A. Group i n s i g h t versus group d e s e n s i t i z a t i o n i n t r e a t i n g speech anxiety. Journal of Consulting and C l i n i c a l Psychology, 1971, 36, 410-421. M i l l s , D. P r e - f r i g h t t r a i n i n g . The American Music Teacher, 1972, 21, PP. 33; 44. M o r r i s , L.W., and L i e b e r t , R.M. The e f f e c t s o f anxiety on timed and untimed i n t e l l i g e n c e t e s t s . Journal of Consulting and C l i n i c a l Psychology, 1969, 33, 240-244. M o r r i s , L.W., and L i e b e r t , R.M. Relationship o f c o g n i t i v e and emotional components o f t e s t anxiety t o p h y s i o l o g i c a l arousal and academic performance. Journal o f Consulting and C l i n i c a l Psychology, 1970, 35, 332-337. ' Musante, G., and Anker, J . Cognitive, p h y s i o l o g i c a l and motor e f f e c t s of systematic d e s e n s i t i z a t i o n on complex stimulus g e n e r a l i z a t i o n . Behavior Therapy, 1974, 5_, 365-380. Neale, J.M., and Katahn, M. Anxiety choice and stimulus Journal o f P e r s o n a l i t y , 1968, 36, 235-245.  uncertainty.  Neufeld, R.W.J., and Davidson, P.O. S c a l i n g o f the Subjective Stress Scale with a sample of u n i v e r s i t y undergraduates. Psychological Reports, 1972, 3 1 , 821-822. Neufeld, R.W.J., and Davidson, P.O. Sex d i f f e r e n c e s i n s t r e s s response: A m u l t i v a r i a t e a n a l y s i s . Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 1974, 83, 178-185.  101.  Novaco, R.W. Anger c o n t r o l : The development and evaluation of an experimental treatment. Lexington, Mass.: D.C. Heath, 1975. Paul, G.L. Insight versus d e s e n s i t i z a t i o n i n psychotherapy: An experiment i n anxiety reduction. Stanford: Stanford U n i v e r s i t y Press, 1966. Rimm, D.C, and Masters, J.C. Behavior therapy: f i n d i n g s . New York: Academic Press, 1974-.  Techniques and e m p i r i c a l  Rosen, G.M., Glasgow, R.E., and Barrera, M., J r . A two-year follow-up . on systematic d e s e n s i t i z a t i o n w i t h data p e r t a i n i n g to the e x t e r n a l v a l i d i t y of laboratory f e a r assessment. Journal of Consulting and C l i n i c a l Psychology, 1977, 45_, 1188-1189"! Sanders, B.D. Behavior rehearsal and imaginal d e s e n s i t i z a t i o n i n reducing p u b l i c speaking anxiety ( D o c t o r a l . d i s s e r t a t i o n , Stanford U n i v e r s i t y , 1967). D i s s e r t a t i o n Abstracts I n t e r n a t i o n a l , 1968, 28, 3065-3066B. ( U n i v e r s i t y M i c r o f i l m s No. 67-17,474) Sanford, N. Is the concept of prevention necessary or useful? In S.T. Golann and C. E i s d o r f e r (Eds. ), Handbook of Community-Mental Health. New York: Appleton-Century C r o f t s , 1972. Sarason, I.G. E m p i r i c a l f i n d i n g s and t h e o r e t i c a l problems i n the use of anxiety s c a l e s . Psychological B u l l e t i n , I960, 57, 403-415. Sarason, I.G. Experimental approaches to. t e s t anxiety: A t t e n t i o n and the uses of information. In CD. Spielberger (Ed. ), Anxiety: Current trends i n theory and research ( V o l . 2). New York: Academic Press, 1972. (a) Sarason, I.G. Test anxiety and the model who f a i l s . and S o c i a l Psychology, 1972, 22, 410-413. (b) Sarason, I.G. Test anxiety and cognitive modeling. and S o c i a l Psychology, 1973, 28, 58-61.  Journal of P e r s o n a l i t y Journal of P e r s o n a l i t y  Sarason, I.G. Anxiety and self-preoccupation. In I.G. Sarason and CD. Spielberger (Eds. ), Stress and anxiety ( V o l . 2). Washington: Hemisphere, 1975. (a) Sarason, I.G. Test anxiety and the s e l f - d i s c l o s i n g coping model. • Journal of Consulting and C l i n i c a l Psychology, 1975, 4v3, 148-153-  (h)  Sarason,. I.G. The Test-Anxiety Scale: Cbncept and research. In CD. Spielberger and I.G. Sarason (Eds.), Stress and anxiety ( V o l . 5). Washington: Hemisphere, 1978. Sarason, I.G., and Stoops, R. Test anxiety and the passage of time. Journal of Consulting and C l i n i c a l Psychology, 1978, 46, 102-109.  102.  Schwartz, R., and. Gottman, J . Toward a task a n a l y s i s of a s s e r t i v e behavior. Journal of Consulting and C l i n i c a l Psychology, 1976, 44, 910-920. S p i e g l e r , M.D., M o r r i s , L.W., and L i e b e r t , R.M. Cognitive and emotional components of t e s t anxiety: Temporal f a c t o r s . P s y c h o l o g i c a l Reports, 1968, 22, 451-456. Spielberger, CD., Gorsuch, R.L., :.and Lushene, R.E. Manual f o r the S t a t e - T r a i t Anxiety Inventory. Palo A l t o , C a l i f . : Consulting Psychologists Press, 1970. Suinn, R.M. Behavior r e h e a r s a l t r a i n i n g f o r s k i r a c e r s . 1972, 3, 519-520.  Behavior Therapy,  Wade, A., and Reynolds, J.E.F. (Eds.). Martindale:. The., e x t r a pharmacopoeia. London: Pharmaceutical Press, 1977. Wardle, A. Behavior m o d i f i c a t i o n by r e c i p r o c a l i n h i b i t i o n of instrumental music performance anxiety. In C.K. Madsen, R.D. Greer, and CH. Madsen, J r . (Eds. ), Research i n music behavior: Modifying music behavior i n the classroom. New York: Teachers College Press, 1975. Weiss, R.F., and M i l l e r , F. The d r i v e theory of s o c i a l f a c i l i t a t i o n . ^ P s y c h o l o g i c a l Review, 1971, 78, 44-57. Wilson, G.T. Cognitive behavior therapy: Paradigm s h i f t or passing phase? In J.P. Foreyt and D.P. Rathjen (Eds. ), Cognitive behavior therapy. New York: Plenum Press, 1978. Wine, J . I n v e s t i g a t i o n s of an a t t e n t i o n a l i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of t e s t anxiety. Unpublished d o c t o r a l d i s s e r t a t i o n , U n i v e r s i t y of Waterloo, 1970. Wine, J . Test anxiety and d i r e c t i o n of a t t e n t i o n . B u l l e t i n , 1971, 76, 92-104. Woodworth, R.S., and Schlosberg, H. H o l t , 1954.  Psychological  Experimental psychology.  New  York:  Zax, M. , and Specter, G.A. An i n t r o d u c t i o n to community psychology. New York: Wiley and Sons, 1974.  103.  APPENDIX A Consensual V a l i d i t y Test on the Performance Anxiety Self-Statement Scale  (Form l )  I am a Ph.D. student i n c l i n i c a l psychology at the U n i v e r s i t y of B.C., and am undertaking a research p r o j e c t to evaluate a number of techniques.for reducing performance anxiety i n musicians. Part of my study i s concerned w i t h assessing the thoughts people have b e f o r e , during, and a f t e r they perform i n f r o n t of an audience. I am asking you as a musician to give me your opinions as t o whether the thoughts which appear on the f o l l o w i n g pages would, cause a p i a n i s t to give a b e t t e r or poorer performance. Take f o r example the thought: " I was a f r a i d that I would make a. l o t of mistakesV" Do you think t h i s thought would cause a p i a n i s t to give a b e t t e r or worse musical performance? For each thought or statement please choose a point along a sevenpoint scale which expresses your opinion. For example: I was a f r a i d that I would make a l o t of mistakes.  a ) l 2 3 4 - 5 6 7  I f you f e e l that having t h i s thought would i n general be extremely h e l p f u l to a performing p i a n i s t , c i r c l e 7. I f you f e e l that the thought would s e r i o u s l y i n t e r f e r e w i t h a performance, c i r c l e 1. I f your opinion l i e s between these two extremes, s e l e c t a point along the scale which accurately r e f l e c t s your view. You w i l l f i n d that some of the thoughts could only occur a f t e r the performance i s f i n i s h e d . In t h i s case, base your d e c i s i o n on whether that thought would help or hinder future performances. F i n a l l y , I would l i k e you to decide whether each thought would be most l i k e l y t o occur before (before the f i r s t note i s played), during, or a f t e r a performance. For example: I was worrying about the reactions of the audience,  b) before  during  after  C i r c l e your answer. I f you f e e l that t h i s thought would be equally l i k e l y to occur before as a f t e r , then you may c i r c l e both "before" and "after:'" In summary, please rate each thought according to the a) s c a l e , and i n d i c a t e on the b) scale when the thought would be most l i k e l y to occur. Thank you f o r your help.  GENERAL INFORMATION SHEET age sex number of years of piano experience Toronto or Western Board grade completed and/or number of years i n a college or u n i v e r s i t y music program What musical instruments do you p l a y and how long have you played them?  105.  seriouslyinterfering 1.  2.  3.  4.  5.  extremely helpful 1  I was t h i n k i n g about the music I was going to p l a y - i t s mood, tempo, and f e e l i n g .  •1  a ,  8.  9.  10.  I was t h i n k i n g that everyone was expecting me t o have a memory lapse and now I'd done j u s t that. I was t h i n k i n g that t h i s was i t - there was no second chance i f I messed i t up.  I f e l t i t was my unlucky day.  2  I was reminding myself t o focus on the present s i t u a t i o n and not allow my mind to wander onto other things.  3  before 2  1  2  3  3  before 1  2  3  before a ,  1  2  3  before 1  2  3  before 1  2  3  before 1  2  before 11.  3  before  I f e l t that the people i n the audience enjoyed my p l a y i n g .  ;  1  1  I decided that I'd never again p l a y i n front of other people.  I was j u s t concerned w i t h p l a y i n g the notes c o r r e c t l y and not having any memory lapses.  2  1  2  before  4  5 6  during  before  6. My f i n g e r s f e l t paralyzed - I couldn't make them move.  7.  3  before  I was a f r a i d that I wouldn't p l a y as w e l l as I knew I could. I was t h i n k i n g that I wasn't incompetent or a f a i l u r e j u s t because I didn't p l a y w e l l .  2  3  4' 5. 6  7 after 7  during  after  4  7  5 6  during  after  4  7  5 6  during  after  4  7  5 6  during  after  4  7  5 6  during  after  4  7  5 6  during  after  4  7  5 6  during  after  4  7  5 6  during  after  4  7  5 6  during 3 4  5 6  during  after 7 after  106. 3  seriously interfering 12.  4  5.6 extremely helpful  I was concerned that the other performers would p l a y much b e t t e r than I would.  13.  The piano f e l t strange - I wished I were p l a y i n g on my own piano.  14-.  I remembered that a problem l i k e t h i s had happened before and I'd mastered i t .  15.  I was reminding myself not t o t h i n k about my anxiety but about what I was there to do.  16.  I was t h i n k i n g I didn't p l a y as w e l l as I would have l i k e d t o .  17.  I was concentrating on a l l the things I'd been p r a c t i s i n g - the r i g h t tempo, touch, and dynamics.  18.  I was t h i n k i n g about how disappointed my r e l a t i v e s or my teacher would be about the way I'd played.  1  2  before 1  2  1  2  2  1  2  2  1  2  2  1  22.  I was wondering what people would t h i n k of me i f I made a mistake or forgot. I was t h i n k i n g that I could hardly wait t i l l i t was over.  3  2  3  2  3  2  before  5 6  4  4  4  3  4  5 6  4  5 6  4  6  5 6  5 6  during 3  4  5 6  during 3  4  5 6  during  7 after  during 3  7 after  during 3  7 after  5 6  5  7 after  during  before 1  4  7 after  during  before 1  5 6  during  before 1  4  7 after  during  before  20.  21.  3  before 1  5 6  during  before  before  I was wondering whether I could make i t to the end without f o r g e t t i n g .  3  before 1  4  during  before  19. I was t h i n k i n g i t wasn't as bad as I'd expected. 1  3  7 after 7 after 7 after 7 after 7 after  107. 4 seriously interfering 23.  24-.  25.  26.  27.  28.  29.  30.  31.  32.  33-  6 extremely helpful  I was t h i n k i n g that the whole t h i n g was a complete d i s a s t e r . I f e l t that the people i n the audience v.: weren't that c r i t i c a l and they'd probably enjoyed my p l a y i n g even though I made mistakes. I f e l t that I'd t r i e d to communicate something t o the audience and wasn't j u s t concerned with p l a y i n g c o r r e c t l y . I was t h i n k i n g that i t wasn't the end of the world. I was worried about disappointing my r e l a t i v e s or my teacher. My stomach f e l t as i f i t were " t i e d i n knots." I was glad that I was able to c o n t r o l my anxiety. I was concentrating on p l a y i n g the music w i t h f e e l i n g and on communicating that f e e l i n g to the audience. I knew that my mistakes were only a small part of the whole performance. I was reminding myself to take deep breaths through my mouth. I was f e e l i n g happy.  1  2  3  before 1 2  3  2  2  3  2  3  2  3  2  3  2  3  2  3  2  3  2  3  I was t h i n k i n g that I had t r i e d my best and that even to get up and p l a y i n f r o n t of others was an achievement I n i t s e l f .  1  2  before  5  6  4  5  4  5  4  5  4  5  4  5  4  5  3  4  5  6  4  5  during  7 after  6  7 after  6  7 after  6  7 after  6  7 after  6  7 after  6  during 3  7 after  during  before 34.  4  7 after  during  before 1  6  during  before 1  5  during  before 1  4  7 after  during  before 1  6  during  before 1  5  during  before 1  4  7 after  during  before 1  6  during  before 1  5  during  before  1  4  7 after  6  7 after  108.  7 extremely helpful  seriously interfering. 35.  36.  37.  38.  39-  40.  1  I was thinking, that worrying about making mistakes wouldn't help anything.  1  I was not t h i n k i n g of the past or too f a r ahead, but was focusing on what I was p l a y i n g at the moment.  2  1  2  3 4  3 4  1  2  3  before 1  2  I couldn't b e l i e v e that I was making mistakes a i n front of a l l . those people. I was so ^ embarrassed and was wondering what people thought of me.  before  I was aware that I was running out of breath, a  1  2  1  2  I l o s t i n t e r e s t in.what I was  doing.  1  2  before 43.  44.  45.  46.  I was disturbed by r e s t l e s s or noisy members of the audience. I f e l t as i f everything were unreal - as i f I were i n a dream. I had a f e e l i n g that I wasn't going to play w e l l . I f e l t the audience was or h o s t i l e towards me.  disinterested  1  2  before 1  2  before 1  2  before 1  2  before  after  5 6  after  4  7  5 6  5  after  6  during  3 4  5 6  during  3 4  3  7  during  3 4  before 42.  5 6. 7  during  before  7 after  during  before  I was t h i n k i n g that I was i n c o n t r o l and could meet t h i s challenge.  5 6  during  before  I was sure that I wasn't p l a y i n g as w e l l as the other performers.  I f e l t I was p l a y i n g w e l l .  3 4  before  b 41.  2  5 6  7 after  7 after  7  during  after  4  7  5 6  during  3 4  5 6  during  3 4  5 6  during  3 4  5 6  during  3 4  5 6  during  after  7 after  7 after  7 after  7 after  109. 3 seriouslyinterfering 47.  48.  49.  50.  51.  52.  53.  54.  55.  56.  57.  58.  7  4  extremelyhelpful  I f e l t that I had been i n c o n t r o l of things throughout the performance. I was t h i n k i n g that the audience seldom notices mistakes. I was f e e l i n g as i f I'd l i k e t o get up and walk o f f the stage. I knew that my r e l a t i v e s and teacher would understand so I didn't have t o be ashamed i n f r o n t of them. I was t h i n k i n g that I was crazy t o be up there i n front of a l l those people. I was wishing I hadn't come. I was t h i n k i n g that I'd had memory lapses before and i t would probably happen again. I was r e c a l l i n g a place i n the music where I could s t a r t again a f t e r a memory lapse. I was glad the ordeal was over.  I f e l t i t was my lucky day.  I f e l t I had l e t myself down.  I was a f r a i d I wouldn't be able t o get through the d i f f i c u l t parts I'd had trouble w i t h before. I knew I could p l a y b e t t e r the next time.  a  1  2 ..3 4  b  before  a  1  b  before  a  1  b  before  a  1  b  before  a  1  b  before  a  1  b  before  a  1  b  before  a  1  b  before  a  1  b  before  a  1  b  before  a  1  b  before  a  1  b  before  2  2  2  2  2  2  2  2  2  6  7  during 3  4  5  after 6  7  during 3  3  3  3  4  5  after 6  7  during  after  4  7  5 6  during  after  4  7  5 6  during  after  4  7  5 6  during 3  4  5  after 6  during  2 ' 3  2  5  4  5  after 6  during 3  4  5  4  5  6  3  4  5  7 after  6  during 3  7 after  -during 3  7  7 after  6  7  during  after  4  7  5 6  during  after  110. 1 2  3  4  5  seriously interfering 59.  I was remembering to breathe  6  7.  -extremely helpful deeply.  1  2  3 4  before 60.  61.  1  2  I was reasoning that I was w e l l prepared, my fingers were i n good shape, and that I was going t o do the best I could.  before  I f e l t that probably no-one was l i s t e n i n g .  1  2  during 3 4  3 4  63.  64.  65.  66.  67.  68.  69.  I was wondering what the people i n the audience were t h i n k i n g of me f o r making so many mistakes. I wished t h i s performance were t a k i n g place at another time. I was f o r g e t t i n g past mistakes and t r y i n g to concentrate on what I was p l a y i n g at the moment. I was t h i n k i n g that the people i n the audience weren't as c r i t i c a l as I was, but were j u s t there t o enjoy the performance. I was t h i n k i n g that no performance i s perfect so i f I made one or two mistakes i t didn't r e a l l y matter. I f e l t the audience was receptive t o my performance.  1  2  before 1  2  3 4  2  before 1  2  3 4  2  before 1  2  1  2  before  I f e l t incompetent.  1  2  3 4  3 4  I was sure that none of the other performers would play so badly.  1  2  before  5 6  4  5 6  4  6  5 6  5 6  5 6  5 6  during  7 after  during 3  7 after  during 3  7 after  during  before 70.  5 6  5  7 after  during  before  I was r e a l l y enjoying myself - t h i n k i n g I was glad t o have the chance t o share t h i s music with, the audience.  5 6  during 3 4  7 after  during  before 1  5 6  during 3 4  7 after  during  before 1  5 6  during 3 4  7 after  during  before 62.  5 6  7 after 7 after 7 after 7 after 7 after  111. 1 2  3  4  5  seriously interfering 71.  6  7  extremely helpful 1  I was confident I would p l a y w e l l .  2  3 4  before 72.  73.  74.  1  I was wondering i f people were enjoying my p l a y i n g o r i f they were bored.  2  during 3 4  before 1  2  I was panicking and f e e l i n g completely out of c o n t r o l .  before  I f e l t l i k e a complete f a i l u r e .  1  2  76.  77.  78.  79.  80.  81.  82.  83.  1  2  I knew that I could overcome my d i f f i c u l t i e s and continue on w i t h the music.  a ,  before  I r e a l i z e d that I was s t a r t i n g t o f e e l sick.  a  1  b  before  a  1  b  before  a  1  b  before  a  1  b  before  a  1  b  before  a  1  b  before  a  1  b  before  a  1  b  before  I was a f r a i d of some e x t e r n a l mishap over which I had no.control - l i k e a s t r i n g breaking i n the piano. I was j u s t r e l i e v e d that I hadn't had any memory lapses. I was t h i n k i n g that the other performers were p l a y i n g b e t t e r than I had. I was aware that my heart was pounding f a s t e r and faster.. I was ashamed of myself and didn't want to face anyone. I was uncertain whether I could maintain the q u a l i t y of the performance. I was aware.that I f e l t relaxed and comfortable.  2  2  2  2  2  2  2  2  5  3 4  6  5 6  3 4.5  7 after  6  7  during  after  4  7  5 6  during 3 4  after  5 6  during 3 4  3 4  5 6  5 6  5 6  5  6  5 6  during 3 4  7 after  during 3 4  7 after  during 3 4  7 after  during 3 4  7 after  during  3  7 after  during  3  7 after  during  before 75.  5 6  5 6  7 after 7 after 7  during  after  4  7  5 6  during  after  112. 3 seriouslyinterfering 84.  85.  86.  87.  88.  89.  90.  91.  92.  7  4  extremelyhelpful  I was f e e l i n g pleased w i t h the way. I'd played. I was hoping that I wouldn't have t o go through that again too soon. I was wondering.if people l i k e d what I was wearing. I was concerned that no-one l i k e d what I was p l a y i n g . I was t h i n k i n g how much I l i k e d the piece of music I had chosen t o play and I was looking forward t o sharing i t w i t h the audience. I was remembering that other people make mistakes t o o - t h a t I wasn't the only one. I was reminding myself that I was able t o c o n t r o l the s i t u a t i o n and not f a l l apart. I noticed that my mind was s t a r t i n g t o wander and I wasn't able t o c o n t r o l i t . I r e a l l y enjoyed, performing and was k i n d of sorry i t was over.  a  1  2  b  before  a  1  b  before  a  1  b  before  a  1  b  before  a  1  b  before  a  1  b  before  a  1  b  before  a  1  b  before  a  1  b  before  2  2  2  2  2  2  2  2  3  3  3  3  3  3  3  3  3  4  5 6  7  during  after  4  7  5 6  during  after  4  7  5 6  during  after  4  7  5 6  during  after  4  7  5 6  during  after  4  7  5 6  during  after  4  7  5 6  during  after  4  7  5 6  during  after  4  7  5 6  during  after  113.  APPENDIX B Item A n a l y s i s Test on the Performance Anxiety Self-Statement Scale  (Form 2)  I am a Ph.D. student i n c l i n i c a l psychology at the U n i v e r s i t y of B.C. I am planning t o undertake a research p r o j e c t which would evaluate a number of techniques f o r reducing performance anxiety i n musicians. As part of my study I am assessing the thoughts p i a n i s t s have before, during, and a f t e r they perform i n f r o n t of an audience. I t i s obvious that people t h i n k a v a r i e t y of things during the course of a musical performance. I b e l i e v e that these thoughts may have an important e f f e c t on how a person performs. On the f o l l o w i n g pages are a number of thoughts which you may have had before, during, or a f t e r a musical performance. I would l i k e you t o think back to your most recent solo performance. Read each item c a r e f u l l y and decide when and how f r e q u e n t l y you were t h i n k i n g that p a r t i c u l a r thought during that performance. For Example: I was a f r a i d I was going t o make a l o t of mistakes.  before (  )  during (  after  )  (  )  Please f o l l o w these i n s t r u c t i o n s very c a r e f u l l y : 1.  F i r s t read the statement.  2.  Then c i r c l e whether the thought occurred before, during, or a f t e r the performance. I f you can't decide on one time p e r i o d alone, you may choose more than one.  3.  Next decide on how frequently the thought occurred during each of the periods of time, and provide that information by entering one o f the numbers from the f o l l o w i n g s c a l e : 0  1  2  3  4  never  5  6  almost continuously  I f the thought d i d not occur to you at any time, place zeros i n a l l three parentheses as f o l l o w s : I was a f r a i d I was going to make a l o t of mistakes.  before (o)  during  after (o)  (o)  The f o l l o w i n g example provides an i l l u s t r a t i o n . o f a thought that occurred quite frequently both before and during a performance, but more frequently during. I t d i d not occur a f t e r . I n o t i c e d that my knees were shaking.  (before) (during) (4)  (5)  after (0)  Please t r y to answer as accurately as p o s s i b l e . Don't answer the way you f e e l you should, but the way you a c t u a l l y b e l i e v e t o be the case. This information i s completely c o n f i d e n t i a l and w i l l not be made known to anyone except myself.  Thank you f o r your help.  GENERAL INFORMATION SHEET  age sex number of years of piano experience Toronto or Western Board grade completed and/or number of years i n a college or u n i v e r s i t y music program What musical instruments do you p l a y and how long have you played them?  116. 6 never  1.  2.  3.  A.  5.  6.  7.  8.  9.  almost continuously  I was t h i n k i n g about the music I was going to play - i t s mood, tempo, and f e e l i n g .  before  I was t h i n k i n g that I wasn't incompetent or a f a i l u r e j u s t because I didn't p l a y w e l l .  before  I decided that I'd never again play i n f r o n t of other people.  before  I f e l t that the people i n the audience enjoyed my p l a y i n g .  before  My f i n g e r s f e l t paralyzed - I couldn't make them move.  before  I was t h i n k i n g that t h i s was i t - there was no second chance i f I messed i t up.  before  I was t h i n k i n g that everyone was expecting me t o have a memory lapse and now I'd done just that.  before  I remembered that a problem l i k e t h i s had happened before and I'd mastered i t .  before  I f e l t i t was my unlucky day.  before  (  (  (  (  (  (  (  (  ( 10.  11.  12.  )  )  )  )  )  )  )  )  )  I was remembering t o focus on the present s i t u a t i o n and not allow my mind t o wander onto other things.  before  I was concerned that the other performers would play much b e t t e r than I would.  before  The piano f e l t strange - I wished I were p l a y i n g on my own piano.  before  (  (  (  )  )  )  during (  )  during (  )  during (  )  during (  j  during (  )  during (  )  during (  )  during (  )  during (  )  durin g (  )  during (  )  during (  )  after (  )  after (  )  after (  )  after (  )  after (  )  after (  )  after (  )  after (  )  after (  )  after (  )  after (  )  after (  )  117. 4 never  13.  14.  15.  16.  17.  6 almost continuously  I was reminding myself not t o t h i n k about my anxiety but about what I was there t o do.  before  I was concentrating on a l l the things I'd been p r a c t i s i n g - t h e r i g h t tempo, touch, and dynamics.  before  I was t h i n k i n g about how disappointed my r e l a t i v e s or my teacher would be about the way I'd played.  before  I was wondering whether I could make i t t o the end without f o r g e t t i n g .  before  I was f e e l i n g happy.  before  (  (  (  (  (  )  )  )  )  )  during (  )  during (  )  during (  )  during (  )  during (  )  (  )  after (  )  after (  )  after (  )  after (  )  18. .  I was wondering what.people would t h i n k of me i f I made amistake or forgot.  before  19.  I was t h i n k i n g that I could hardly wait t i l l i t was over.  before  I was t h i n k i n g that the whole t h i n g was a complete d i s a s t e r .  before  I f e l t that I'd t r i e d t o communicate something to the audience and wasn't j u s t concerned w i t h playing correctly.  before  I was t h i n k i n g that i t wasn't the end of the world.  before  23.  I was worried about disappointing my r e l a t i v e s or my teacher.  before ( )  during ( )  after ( )  24.  My stomach f e l t as i f i t were " t i e d i n knots;.'"  before  during  after  20.  21.  22.  (  (  (  (  (  (  )  )  )  )  )  )  during  after  (  )  during (  )  during (  )  during (  )  during (  (  )  )  after (  )  after (  )  after (  )  after (  )  after (  (  )  )  118.  0  1  never  25.  26.  27.  almost continuously  I was glad that I was able to c o n t r o l my anxiety.  before  I was t r y i n g , to play the music w i t h f e e l i n g and communicate that f e e l i n g t o the audience.  before  I l o s t i n t e r e s t i n what I was  before  doing.  (  (  ( 28.  29.  30.  32.  33.  34-.  35.  36.  )  )  I knew that my mistakes were only a small part of the. whole performance.  before  I was t h i n k i n g that I had t r i e d my best and that even to get up and p l a y i n f r o n t of others was an achievement i n i t s e l f .  before  I was aware that I was running out of breath.  before  (  (  ( 31.  )  )  )  )  during (  )  during (  )  during • (  )  during (  )  during (  )  during (  )  I was t h i n k i n g that, worrying about making mistakes wouldn't help anything.  before  I was not t h i n k i n g of the past or too f a r ahead, but was focusing on what I was p l a y i n g at the moment.  before  I was sure that I wasn't p l a y i n g as w e l l as the other performers.  before  I was t h i n k i n g that I was i n c o n t r o l and could meet t h i s challenge.  before . during  I couldn't b e l i e v e that I was making mistakes i n f r o n t of a l l . t h o s e people. I was so embarrassed and was wondering what people thought of me.  before  I f e l t I was p l a y i n g w e l l .  before  (  (  (  (  (  (  )  )  )  )  )  )  during (  )  during (  )  during (  (  )  )  during (  )  during (  )  after (  )  after (  )  after (  )  after (  )  after (  )  after (  )  after  ( after (  )  after (  )  after (  )  after (  )  after (  )  119.  0  1  never  37.  38.  39.  4-0.  41.  42.  43-  5  6  almost continuously  I was disturbed by r e s t l e s s o r noisy members of the audience.  before  I f e l t as i f everything were unreal - as i f I were i n a dream.  before  I had a f e e l i n g that I wasn't going t o p l a y well.  before  I f e l t that I had been i n c o n t r o l of things throughout the performance.  before  I was f e e l i n g as i f I'd l i k e t o get up and walk o f f the stage.  before  I was t h i n k i n g that I'd had memory lapses . before and i t would probably happen again.  before  I f e l t . i t was my lucky day.  (  (  (  (  (  (  45.  46.  )  )  )  )  before  A f t e r having a memory lapse, I was r e c a l l i n g a place i n the music where I could s t a r t again.  before  I f e l t I had l e t myself down.  before  (  (  I knew I could p l a y b e t t e r the next time.  I was a f r a i d I wouldn't be able t o get through the d i f f i c u l t parts I'd had trouble w i t h before.  )  )  )  before (  48.  )  I was t h i n k i n g that I was crazy t o be up there i n front o f a l l those people. I was wishing I hadn't come.  ( 47.  )  before (  44.  )  )  before (  )  during (  )  during (  )  during (  )  after '(  j  after (  )  after (  )  ' during  after  (  (  )  during (  )  during (  )  during (  )  during (  )  during (  )  during (  )  during (  )  during (  )  )  after (  )  after (  )  after (  )  after (  )  after (  )  after (  )  after (  )  after (  )  120. 0  .  1  2  3  4  never  49.  I was remembering t o breathe  5  6  almost continuously deeply.  before (  50.  51.  52.  53.  54.  I was reasoning that I was w e l l prepared, my f i n g e r s were i n good shape, and that I was going t o do the best I could.  before.  I wished t h i s performance were t a k i n g place at.another time.  before  I was f o r g e t t i n g past mistakes and t r y i n g to concentrate on what I was p l a y i n g at the moment.  before  I was t h i n k i n g that the people i n the audience weren't as c r i t i c a l as I was, but were j u s t there t o enjoy the performance.  before  I f e l t incompetent.  before  (  (  (  (  ( 55.  57.  59.  60.  )  )  )  )  )  I was t h i n k i n g that no performance i s p e r f e c t so i f I made one o r two mistakes i t didn't r e a l l y matter.  before  I f e l t l i k e a complete f a i l u r e .  before  (  ( 58.  )  before  I was confident I would p l a y w e l l .  ( 56.  )  )  )  I was r e a l l y enjoying myself - t h i n k i n g I was glad t o have the chance t o share t h i s music w i t h the audience.  before  I was sure that none of the other would play so badly.  before  performers  I was panicking and f e e l i n g completely out of c o n t r o l .  (  (  )  )  before (  )  during (  )  during (  )  during (  )  during (  )  during (  )  during (  )  during (  )  during (  )  during (  )  during (  )  during (  )  during (  )  after. (  )  after (  )  after (  )  after (  )  after (  )  after (  )  after (  )  after (  )  after (  )  after (  )  after (  )  after (  )  121.  0  61.  62.  1 2  3  4  never  almost continuously  I knew' that I could overcome my and continue on w i t h the music.  difficulties  I r e a l i z e d that I was s t a r t i n g t o f e e l s i c k .  before (  before (  63.  64.  65.  66.  67.  68.  69.  70.  )  )  I was aware that,my heart was pounding f a s t e r and f a s t e r .  before  I was ashamed of myself and didn't want t o face anyone.  before  I was aware that I f e l t relaxed and comfortable.  before  I was f e e l i n g pleased w i t h the way I'd played.  before  I was concerned that no-one l i k e d what I was p l a y i n g .  before  I was t h i n k i n g how much I l i k e d the piece o f music I had chosen to play and I was l o o k i n g forward t o sharing i t w i t h the audience.  before  I n o t i c e d that my mind was s t a r t i n g t o wander and I wasn't able t o c o n t r o l i t .  before  I r e a l l y enjoyed performing and was kind o f sorry i t was over.  before  (  (  (  (  (  (  (  (  )  )  )  )  )  )  )  )  during (  )  during (  )  during (  )  during (  )  during (  )  during (  )  during (  )  during (  )  during (  )  during (  )  after (  )  after (  )  after (  )  after (  )  after (  )  after (  )  after (  )  after (  )  after (  )  after (  )  122. APPENDIX C F i f t e e n Items from the Report o f Confidence as a Performer (from Appel, 1974)  I'd l i k e t o ask you some s p e c i f i c questions which w i l l give me some information about your confidence as. a performer. Read each . statement and t h e n . c i r c l e whether i t i s true or f a l s e f o r you. 1.  I look forward to. an opportunity t o perform i n p u b l i c .  T  F  2.  My legs tremble when I reach f o r the pedal.  T  F  3.  I am i n constant fear of f o r g e t t i n g the music.  T  F  4.  At the conclusion of a performance I f e e l that I have had a pleasant experience.  T  F  T  F  Although I am nervous j u s t before g e t t i n g up, I soon forget my fears and enjoy the experience.  T  F  I f e e l that I am i n complete possession of myself while performing.  T  F  I forget the music.  T  F  I f e e l relaxed and comfortable while performing.  T  F  10.  I always avoid p l a y i n g solos i n p u b l i c i f p o s s i b l e .  T  F  11.  I enjoy preparing f o r a solo performance.  T  F  12.  My hands f e e l cold and weak before performing.  T  F  13.  I p e r s p i r e and tremble j u s t before performing.  T  F  14.  I am f e a r f u l and tense a l l the while I am performing before an audience. At the conclusion o f my performance I f e e l that I would l i k e t o continue performing.  T  F  T  F  5. 6. 7. 8.  9.  15.  My thoughts become jumbled and confused when I perform before an audience.  •  I p r e f e r t o have the notes on the piano i n case  123.  APPENDIX D Threat Value of Magnitude Items from the Expectations of P e r s o n a l . E f f i c a c y Scale Please s e l e c t from each p a i r o f performances the one which i s more threatening ( t h a t i s , which makes you more anxious). Place a check beside i t . You should make t e n checks i n t o t a l . 1.  p l a y i n g your f a v o u r i t e piece of music f o r family members p l a y i n g three pieces i n an exam w i t h one examiner present  2.  p l a y i n g a s i n g l e piece i n competition f o r a scholarship i n a music f e s t i v a l p l a y i n g a piece of music f o r a small group of f r i e n d s  3.  performing f i v e pieces of music f o r memory i n a one-person r e c i t a l t o a f u l l house. This r e c i t a l i s t o be reviewed i n the l o c a l newspapers. p l a y i n g your f a v o u r i t e piece of music f o r family members  4.  p l a y i n g three pieces i n an exam w i t h one examiner present "  5.  performing f i v e pieces of music f o r memory i n a one-person r e c i t a l t o a f u l l house. This r e c i t a l i s t o be reviewed i n the l o c a l newspapers.  p l a y i n g your f a v o u r i t e piece of music f o r family members p l a y i n g a s i n g l e piece i n competition f o r a scholarship i n a music f e s t i v a l  6.  p l a y i n g a piece of music f o r a small group o f f r i e n d s p l a y i n g your f a v o u r i t e piece of music f o r f a m i l y members  124.  7.  p l a y i n g a piece of music f o r a small group of f r i e n d s p l a y i n g three pieces i n an exam w i t h one examiner present  8.  p l a y i n g a s i n g l e piece i n competition.for a scholarship i n a music f e s t i v a l  ~ ~  9.  performing f i v e pieces'of music f o r memory i n a one-person r e c i t a l . t o a f u l l house. This r e c i t a l i s t o be reviewed i n the l o c a l newspapers.  p l a y i n g three pieces i n an exam w i t h one examiner present p l a y i n g a s i n g l e piece i n competition f o r a scholarship i n a music f e s t i v a l  10.  performing f i v e pieces of music f o r memory i n a one-person r e c i t a l t o a f u l l house. This r e c i t a l i s t o be reviewed i n the l o c a l newspapers. p l a y i n g a piece of music f o r a small group of f r i e n d s  APPENDIX E Threat Value of Generalization Items from the Expectations  of Personal E f f i c a c y Scale  Please s e l e c t from each p a i r of performances the one which i s more threatening (that i s , which makes you more anxious). Place a check beside i t . You should make t e n checks i n t o t a l . 1.  sightreading a piece of music playing  2.  i n a piano duet  p l a y i n g i n a chambre group of three - v i o l i n , c e l l o , and y o u r s e l f at the piano p l a y i n g music from a d i f f e r e n t period ( f o r example, Baroque, Romantic, Modern, e t c . )  3.  accompanying a small choir of twenty members p l a y i n g i n a piano duet  4..  p l a y i n g music from a d i f f e r e n t period ( f o r example, Baroque, Romantic, Modern, e t c . ) sightreading a piece of music  5.  accompanying a small c h o i r of twenty members p l a y i n g i n a chambre group of three - v i o l i n , c e l l o , and y o u r s e l f at the piano  6.  p l a y i n g i n a piano duet p l a y i n g music from a d i f f e r e n t period, ( f o r example, Baroque, Romantic, Modern, e t c . )  sightreading a piece of music accompanying a small c h o i r of twenty members  p l a y i n g i n a chamibre group of three - v i o l i n , c e l l o and y o u r s e l f at the piano sightreading a piece of music  p l a y i n g music from a d i f f e r e n t period ( f o r example, Baroque, Romantic, Modern, etc. )  accompanying a small c h o i r of twenty members  p l a y i n g i n a piano duet p l a y i n g i n a chambre group o f three - v i o l i n , c e l l o and y o u r s e l f at the piano  127. APPENDIX F Subject S e l e c t i o n C r i t e r i o n (from Report of Confidence as a Performer, Appel, 1974-) I'd l i k e t o ask you some s p e c i f i c questions which w i l l give me some information about your confidence as a performer. I w i l l read a statement and you t e l l me whether i t i s true or f a l s e f o r you. 1.  I look forward t o an opportunity t o perform i n p u b l i c .  T  F  2.  My legs tremble when I reach f o r the pedal.  T  F  3.  I am i n constant f e a r of f o r g e t t i n g the music.  T  F  T  F  My thoughts become jumbled and confused when I perform before an audience.  T  F  Although I am nervous j u s t before g e t t i n g up, I soon forget my fears and enjoy the experience.  T  F  I f e e l that I am i n complete possession of myself while performing.  T  F  I forget the music.  T  F  I f e e l r e l a x e d and comfortable while performing.  T  F  10.  I always avoid p l a y i n g solos i n p u b l i c i f p o s s i b l e .  T  F  11.  I enjoy preparing f o r a solo performance.  T  F  12.  My  T  F  13.  I p e r s p i r e and tremble j u s t before performing.  T  F  14.  I am f e a r f u l and tense a l l the while I am performing before an audience. At the conclusion of my performance I f e e l that I would l i k e t o continue performing.  T  F  T  F  ,  .1  4-. At the conclusion of a performance I f e e l that I have had a pleasant experience. 5. 6. 7. 8.  9.  15.  I p r e f e r t o have the notes on the piano i n case  hands f e e l cold and weak before performing.  APPENDIX G Expectations of Treatment Effectiveness (from Goldstein, 1975) Please respond t o these questions by c i r c l i n g the number which i n d i c a t e s your a t t i t u d e at t h i s time: 1.  How l o g i c a l does t h i s type of program seem t o you? not at a l l 0  2.  1 2  3  4  5  6  very much so  How confident are you that t h i s program w i l l be successful i n e l i m i n a t i n g your fear of performing? not at a l l 0  1 2  3  4  5  6  very much so  3. How confident would you be in'recommending t h i s program to a f r i e n d who was extremely anxious about performing? not at a l l 0  1 2  3  4  5  6  very much so  129. APPENDIX H Expectations of Personal E f f i c a c y Scale Name Date PART A How c e r t a i n a r e y o u t h a t y o u c o u l d now p e r f o r m t h e f o l l o w i n g t a s k s w i t h y o u r a n x i e t y under c o n t r o l ? F o r each t a s k , p l e a s e c i r c l e t h e a p p r o p r i a t e number: (1)  p l a y i n g y o u r f a v o u r i t e p i e c e f o r f a m i l y members  very uncertain (2)  (3)  (4)  3 4 - 5  6  completely * J  certain  0  1 2  3  4  5  6  completely * J  certain  0  1  2  3  4  5  6  completely  certain  p l a y i n g a s i n g l e p i e c e o f music i n c o m p e t i t i o n f o r a s c h o l a r s h i p i n a music f e s t i v a l  ,. uncertain r  2  p l a y i n g t h r e e p i e c e s i n an exam w i t h one examiner p r e s e n t  very uncertain  e  1  p l a y i n g a p i e c e o f music f o r a s m a l l group o f f r i e n d s  very uncertain  v  0  y  (5)  0  1  2  3  4  5  6  completely  certain  p e r f o r m i n g f i v e p i e c e s o f music f o r memory i n a one-person r e c i t a l t o a f u l l house. T h i s r e c i t a l i s t o be r e v i e w e d i n t h e l o c a l newspapers.  very uncertain  0  1 2  3  4  5 6  completely  certain  PART B How c e r t a i n a r e y o u t h a t y o u c o u l d now p e r f o r m t h e f o l l o w i n g t a s k s b e f o r e an a u d i e n c e w i t h y o u r a n x i e t y under c o n t r o l ? On t h e f i r s t f o u r t a s k s , assume y o u have l e a r n e d t h e music. F o r each t a s k , p l e a s e c i r c l e t h e a p p r o p r i a t e number: (1)  p l a y i n g i n a p i a n o duet  . uncertain y  0  1 2  3  4  5  6  completely  certain  130.  (2)  accompanying a small choir of twenty members  very uncertain (3)  1  2  3  4-5  6  completely  certain  p l a y i n g i n a chamber group of three - v i o l i n , c e l l o , and y o u r s e l f at the piano  . uncertain  v e r y  x  (4)  0  1  2  3  4  5  6  completely  certain  p l a y i n g a piece of music from a d i f f e r e n t period ( f o r example, Baroque, Romantic, Modern, etc. ) from that which you have chosen t o play today.  . uncertain v e r y  x  (5)  0  0  1  2  3  4  5  6  completely  certain  sightreading a piece of music  very uncertain  0.1  2  3  4  5  6  completely * J  certain  131.  APPENDIX I . Performance Anxiety Self-Statement Scale  ( F i n a l Form)  Name Date On the f o l l o w i n g pages are a number of thoughts which you may have had before, during, or a f t e r the performance you j u s t gave. Read each item c a r e f u l l y and decide how frequently you were t h i n k i n g that p a r t i c u l a r thought. For Example: I was a f r a i d I was going t o make a l o t of mistakes.  before (  )  during (  )  Please f o l l o w these i n s t r u c t i o n s very c a r e f u l l y : 1.  F i r s t read the statement.  2.  Next decide on how frequently the thought occurred during each of the periods of time, and provide that information by entering one of the numbers from the f o l l o w i n g s c a l e : 0  never  1 2  3  4  5  6  almost continuously  I f the thought d i d not occur t o you at any time, place zeros i n a l l the parentheses as f o l l o w s : I was a f r a i d I was going t o make a l o t of mistakes.  before (0  )  during (0 )  The f o l l o w i n g example provides an i l l u s t r a t i o n of a thought that occurred quite f r e q u e n t l y both before and during a performance, but more frequently during. I t d i d not occur after. I n o t i c e d that my knees were shaking.  before  U Please t r y t o answer as accurately as p o s s i b l e .  )  during  after  ( 5 )  (0 )  132.  never  almost continuously  I was reasoning that I was w e l l prepared, my f i n g e r s were i n good shape, and that I was going t o do the best I could.  before  I was confident I would play w e l l .  before  (  ( I l o s t i n t e r e s t i n what I was doing.  11.  12.  )  before (  10.  )  )  I had a f e e l i n g that I wasn't going to play w e l l .  before  I was t h i n k i n g that I could hardly wait t i l l i t was over.  before  I was t h i n k i n g about the music I was going t o p l a y - i t s mood, tempo and feeling.  before  I was t h i n k i n g that I was crazy t o be up there i n f r o n t of those people. I was wishing I hadn't come.  before  I was panicking and f e e l i n g out of c o n t r o l .  before  completely  (  (  (  (  (  )  )  )  )  )  I wished t h i s performance were taking place at another time.  before  I was t h i n k i n g that I was i n c o n t r o l and could meet t h i s challenge.  before  (  (  )  )  during (  )  during (  )  during (  )  during (  )  during (  )  during (  )  during (  )  I was not t h i n k i n g of the past or too f a r ahead, but was focusing on what I was p l a y i n g at the moment.  during  I f e l t as i f everything were unreal - as i f I were i n a dream.  during  (  (  )  )  133.  0  1  2  3  4  never  13.  14.  5  6  almost continuously  I was f e e l i n g as i f I'd l i k e t o get up and leave.  during  I f e l t I was p l a y i n g w e l l .  during  (  ( 15.  16.  17.  18.  I was r e a l l y enjoying myself - t h i n k i n g I was glad t o have the chance t o share t h i s music w i t h those l i s t e n i n g .  before  I was aware that I f e l t relaxed and comfortable.  before  I was worried about disappointing my r e l a t i v e s or my teacher.  before  I was f e e l i n g happy.  before  (  (  (  ( 19.  20.  21.  22.  23.  24.  25.  )  )  )  )  I was t h i n k i n g how much I l i k e d the piece of music I had chosen t o play.  before  I was concerned that the other performers would p l a y much b e t t e r than I .  before  )  )  during (  )  during (  )  during (  )  during (  )  during  ( * ) • ( )  (  )  )  I f e l t that I had been i n c o n t r o l of things throughout the performance.  during  I was t h i n k i n g that the whole t h i n g was a complete d i s a s t e r .  ' during  I f e l t that I never again wanted t o p l a y i n f r o n t of other people.  during  I knew that my mistakes were only a small part of the whole performance.  during  I f e l t l i k e a complete f a i l u r e .  during  (  (  (  (  (  (  )  after (  )  after (  )  after (  )  after  ( )  during (  after  )  )  )  )  )  after (  )  after (  )  after (  )  after (  )  after (  )  after (  )  134.  0  1  never  26.  27.  28.  29.  almost continuously  I couldn't b e l i e v e that I was making mistakes i n front o f those people. I was so embarrassed and was wondering what people would t h i n k of me.  during  I f e l t that I'd t r i e d t o communicate something and wasn't j u s t concerned with playing correctly.  during  I f e l t that the people i n the audience enjoyed my p l a y i n g .  during  I f e l t I had l e t myself down.  (  (  (  )  V  )  after (  )  after (  )  after (  )  after (  30.  31.  32.  )  I was f e e l i n g pleased w i t h the way I'd played.  after  I was ashamed of myself and didn't want to face anyone.  after  I r e a l l y enjoyed performing and was k i n d of sorry i t was over.  after  (  (  (  )  )  )  APPENDIX J I n s t r u c t i o n s f o r Performance E r r o r Tabulation (from Appel,  1974)  Please l i s t e n t o each performance three times while f o l l o w i n g the score. Mark type of e r r o r on score as you hear i t . Count number of errors from the score and record them on the e r r o r t a b u l a t i o n sheet. D e f i n i t i o n s of error types f o l l o w : P  =  p i t c h e r r o r - wrong note, wrong i n v e r s i o n of chord, b l u r r e d note.  0  =  omission error - note or chord l e f t out.  R  =  rhythm e r r o r - i n c o r r e c t time value of note or r e s t , unco-ordinated attack (both hands not together).  T  =  tempo e r r o r - unsteadiness of tempo (mark an e r r o r f o r every two measures), unusual speed of passage, inconsistent speeds.  D  =  dynamics e r r o r - lack or m i s i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of i n d i c a t e d ( i n score) dynamics, or accents.  TO  =  touch e r r o r - lack of i n d i c a t e d staccato, or phrasing.  legato,  136.  APPENDIX K Performance E r r o r Tabulation Sheet  Subject's Name Rater Date  1.  p i t c h errors  total  2.  omission errors  total  3-  rhythm errors  total  4.  tempo errors  total  5.  dynamics errors  .  total  6. touch errors  total  GRAND TOTAL  O v e r a l l Q u a l i t y o f Performance an extremely poor, u n s a t i s f y i n g performance.  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9  10  an e x c e l l e n t , enjoyable performance  137.  APPENDIX L Consensual V a l i d i t y Test on V i s u a l Signs of Performance Anxiety i n P i a n i s t s I am i n t e r e s t e d i n your opinions as a musician on whether the f o l l o w i n g items are observable i n d i c a t i o n s of performance anxiety i n p i a n i s t s . I would l i k e you t o check those items which you f e e l are i n d i c a t i o n s of performance anxiety which can be observed by someone other than the p i a n i s t him/herself. F e e l free to add to the l i s t s any observable behaviours which I have omitted. feet and l e g s :  knees tremble taps toe or foot foot trembles on pedal paces back and f o r t h before p l a y i n g s h u f f l e s up to piano walks slowly t o piano  body:  moves bench back and f o r t h e x c e s s i v e l y before p l a y i n g sways body breathes h e a v i l y l i f t s shoulders crouches over piano s t i f f back and neck  arms and hands:  clenches hands wipes hands on towel f i d d l e s w i t h hands clutches bench hands tremble l i f t s hands a b r u p t l y to keyboard extraneous arm or hand movement touches face adjusts clothes puts hands through h a i r s t i f f arms  face:  deadpan pale blushes moistens l i p s swallows c l e a r s throat perspires moves head winks blinks rapidly  vocalizations:  hums whistles counts whispers t o s e l f groans grunts  138. APPENDIX M Timed Behavioural Checklist f o r Piano Performance Subject's Name Rater Date  .  .  BEHAVIOUR  TIME PERIOD. 1  1.  face deadpan  2.  moistens l i p s  3.  l i f t s shoulders  4.  s t i f f back and neck  5.  hands tremble  6.  s t i f f arms  7.  knees tremble  completely relaxed  extreme distress  3  -  1 2  1  2  2  3  4  5  3  4  5  6  7  6 7 ^ indifference  8  9  8  10  9  10  extremely tense  thorough enjoyment  sum  139.  APPENDIX N L e t t e r t o Piano Teachers  Dear I am a psychologist and have studied piano f o r over 20 years. In March I w i l l be o f f e r i n g a f r e e program f o r p i a n i s t s who are s u f f e r i n g from performance anxiety which prevents them from demonstrating t h e i r s k i l l s and musicianship, and makes the performing experience unpleasant f o r them. As a piano teacher, I'm sure you are aware that t h i s i s a common d i f f i c u l t y among many music students. The program i s d i r e c t e d toward p i a n i s t s who p l a y w e l l at home or f o r t h e i r teachers, but i n performance s i t u a t i o n s tend to p l a y at a l e v e l below t h e i r own standard. I am not attempting t o reduce anxiety completely, as that would r e s u l t i n a d u l l l i f e l e s s performance. I am concerned w i t h reducing i t to the point where i t i s under c o n t r o l and enhances rather than i n t e r f e r e s w i t h the performance. The behavioural sciences have s u c c e s s f u l l y demonstrated ways of reducing anxiety i n other areas, f o r example, w i t h t e s t and speech anxiety. I b e l i e v e that these same techniques could prove e f f e c t i v e i n reducing musical performance anxiety. In designing the program, I have had input from, p i a n i s t s of a l l ages and l e v e l s . I hope t h i s has r e s u l t e d i n a program which w i l l meet the i n d i v i d u a l needs of the p a r t i c i p a n t s . The program consists of three 1 and 1/2 hour evening sessions over the course of three weeks, s t a r t i n g the week of March 6th - 10th. P a r t i c i p a n t s may choose the night which they would l i k e to attend. In order t o assess the b e n e f i t s of the program, p a r t i c i p a n t s w i l l be asked f o r a pre-program and post-program performance of a s i n g l e piece of music. This should require no more than 15 minutes at each of those two times. This program could be o f f e r e d at several convenient s i t e s w i t h i n Greater Vancouver, subject t o geographical response. There has been considerable i n t e r e s t shown by several teachers at music schools i n the lower mainland, and by the Board of the Registered Music Teachers? A s s o c i a t i o n . I have agreed, t h e r e f o r e , a f t e r the program i s over, t o discuss i t at the music schools and at a meeting of the R.M.T.A. In a d d i t i o n , I w i l l make the i n s t r u c t i o n a l m a t e r i a l a v a i l a b l e so that you may use i t w i t h your students. I f you have any students ages 14- and older who could b e n e f i t from t h i s program, please discuss i t w i t h them and c a l l me, or ask them to c a l l me at 224-1219. I w i l l be home most evenings from 7 - 1 1 p.m. A f t e r February 14th, I can be reached at that number during days as w e l l .  MO.  me.  I f you would l i k e f u r t h e r information do not h e s i t a t e to c a l l Thank you for'your i n t e r e s t .  Sincerely,  Margaret Kendrick  Hi. APPENDIX 0 Telephone Screening Procedure 1. name 2.  age  3.  telephone number  4.  address  5. number of years of piano study 6.  l e v e l or grade  7.  can attend sessions Monday 1  8.  9.  _, Wednesday  , or Thursday  evenings  or Sunday afternoon  can attend pre-performance  (March 4)  post-performance  ( A p r i l 8)  Now I'd l i k e t o ask you some s p e c i f i c questions which w i l l give me some information about your confidence as a performer. I w i l l read a statement and you t e l l me whether i t i s true or f a l s e f o r you. 1.  I look forward to an opportunity t o perform i n public.  T  F  2.  My legs tremble when I reach f o r the pedal.  T  F  3.  I am i n constant fear of f o r g e t t i n g the music.  T  F  4.  At the conclusion of a performance I f e e l that I have had a pleasant experience.  T  F  5. My thoughts become jumbled and confused when I perform before an audience.  T  F  Although I am nervous j u s t before g e t t i n g up, I soon forget my fears and enjoy the experience.  T  F  I f e e l that I am i n complete possession of myself while performing.  T  F  case I forget the music.  T  F  I f e e l r e l a x e d and comfortable w h i l e performing.  T  F  I always avoid p l a y i n g solos i n p u b l i c i f possible.  T  F  6. 7. 8.  9. 10.  I p r e f e r t o have the notes on the piano i n  142.  11.  I enjoy preparing f o r a solo performance.  T  F  12.  My hands f e e l c o l d and weak before performing.  T  F  13.  I perspire and tremble j u s t before performing.  T  F  14.  I am f e a r f u l and tense a l l the while I am performing before an audience.  T  F  At the conclusion of my performance I f e e l that I would l i k e to continue performing.  T  F  15.  143.  APPENDIX P Consent Form  I have been informed about the requirements of p a r t i c i p a t i n g i n t h i s program f o r reducing my musical performance anxiety. I have made a commitment to attend the two performances (today and on A p r i l 8th or 9th) and a l l a d d i t i o n a l sessions. I am aware that my two performances w i l l be video-taped and that a measure of my heart rate w i l l be taken. I know that t h i s and a l l other information gathered from me i n the course of the program i s c o n f i d e n t i a l . I t w i l l be used to assess the b e n e f i t s of the program and, w i t h my permission, the tapes w i l l be shown during the group session when I am present. I f f o r some reason I wish t o terminate my p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n the program, I know that I am free to do so. Signature Date  144.  APPENDIX Q Pre-treatment P r a c t i c e and Performance Information and I n s t r u c t i o n Sheet  a)  How long have you been studying t h i s piece of music?  b)  How many times have you performed t h i s piece of music?  c)  Between now and the beginning o f A p r i l when you r e t u r n f o r your second performance, t r y t o r e s t r i c t your p r a c t i c i n g of t h i s piece t o no more than 15 minutes a day. I n a d d i t i o n , i f p o s s i b l e do not perform t h i s piece of music again u n t i l you r e t u r n i n A p r i l .  Please b r i n g the copy of your music i n t o the studio w i t h you. I f you p l a y anything d i f f e r e n t l y from the way i t i s w r i t t e n , ( f o r example, d i f f e r e n t tempo, expression, e t c . ) , be sure t o make those changes on the copy.  APPENDIX R Post-treatment P r a c t i c e and Performance Information Sheet  Estimate the average amount of time spent per day p r a c t i s i n g t h i s piece ( o r these p i e c e s ) of music since March 4-th/5th. How often have you performed t h i s piece ( o r these p i e c e s ) of music before an audience since March 4-th/5th? I f you have performed, describe the circumstances ( f e s t i v a l , r e c i t a l , f o r f r i e n d s , e t c . ). How o f t e n have you performed other pieces of music before an audience since March 4 t h / 5 t h ? I f you have performed other pieces, describe the circumstances.  146. APPENDIX S Follow-up Performance I n s t r u c t i o n s f o r A t t e n t i o n a l T r a i n i n g Subjects  There i s one f i n a l stage of p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n t h i s program f o r reducing your musical performance anxiety. I am i n t e r e s t e d i n knowing what b e n e f i t s the program has f o r you. a month a f t e r the sessions have f i n i s h e d . I would l i k e you to perform the same piece or pieces of music which you played f o r the video-tape. Some of you w i l l be p a r t i c i p a t i n g i n music f e s t i v a l s or r e c i t a l s over the next few weeks. I f so, you may use the piece or pieces you are planning to p l a y f o r those occasions. For those of you who aren't, I'd l i k e you t o arrange a small " r e c i t a l " i n the same way as you d i d i n the home assignments e a r l i e r . Have at l e a s t s i x people there to hear you p l a y (more i f you can!). Perhaps several of you who know each other could get together and arrange something. About 10 minutes before you p l a y (or j u s t before you leave home f o r the performance i f i t ' s more convenient), complete the f i r s t two questionnaires (#1 and #2). Just before you are about t o p l a y , p i c k one word from the t h i r d questionnaire (#3) which describes how you are f e e l i n g at that moment. And w i t h i n a short time a f t e r you've f i n i s h e d ( p r e f e r a b l y w i t h i n one or two hours), complete the fourth questionnaire (#4) d e s c r i b i n g the thoughts you had while you were performing. In a d d i t i o n , rate your l e v e l of anxiety and the q u a l i t y of your performance i n the same way you've been doing e a r l i e r i n the sessions and home assignments (#5). As you can see, I'm asking you f o r a " d o - i t - y o u r s e l f assessment" of the thoughts and f e e l i n g s you have when you perform i n p u b l i c . In a d d i t i o n to t h i s , I'd l i k e you to ask a member of your audience (someone who has heard you play often i f p o s s i b l e - teacher, parent, f r i e n d , etc. ) to r a t e changes i n l e v e l of anxiety and q u a l i t y of your performance on the paper provided f o r t h i s (#6). Use the back of one of the pages f o r any comments you might have about the program. P o s i t i v e and negative self-statements are both h e l p f u l ! I f you have any questions, don't h e s i t a t e t o c a l l me at 224-1219. Please mail a l l t h i s information back to me i n the addressed and stamped envelope, by A p r i l 30th. Thank you f o r p a r t i c i p a t i n g i n the program. I enjoyed the sessions we had together and hope that they have been and w i l l continue to be h e l p f u l i n reducing your performance anxiety.  147.  . APPENDIX T Follow-up Performance I n s t r u c t i o n s f o r Behaviour-.'. Rehearsal and Waiting L i s t Control Subjects  There i s something I'd l i k e you t o do before you come t o the workshop on A p r i l 29th or 30th. I would l i k e you t o perform the same piece o r pieces of music which you played f o r the video-tape. Some of you w i l l be p a r t i c i p a t i n g i n music f e s t i v a l s or r e c i t a l s over.the next few weeks. I f so, you may use the piece or pieces you are planning t o play f o r those occasions. For those o f you who aren't, I'd l i k e you t o arrange a small "recital!.'" Have at l e a s t s i x people there t o hear you p l a y (more i f you can! ). Perhaps several of you who know each other could get together and arrange something. About 10 minutes before you p l a y (or j u s t before you leave home f o r the performance i f i t ' s more convenient), complete the f i r s t two questionnaires (#1 and #2). Just before you are about t o p l a y , p i c k one word from the t h i r d questionnaire (#3) which describes how you are f e e l i n g at that moment. And w i t h i n a short time a f t e r you've f i n i s h e d ( p r e f e r a b l y w i t h i n one or two hours), complete the f o u r t h questionnaire (#4) d e s c r i b i n g the thoughts you had while you were performing. I n a d d i t i o n , rate your l e v e l of anxiety and the q u a l i t y of your performance (#5). As you can see, I'm asking you f o r a " d o - i t - y o u r s e l f assessment" of the thoughts and f e e l i n g s you have when you perform i n p u b l i c . In a d d i t i o n t o t h i s , I'd l i k e you t o ask a member of your audience (someone who has heard you p l a y o f t e n i f p o s s i b l e - teacher, parent, f r i e n d , etc. ) t o r a t e changes i n l e v e l of anxiety and q u a l i t y of your performance on the paper provide f o r t h i s (#6). I f you have any questions, don't h e s i t a t e t o c a l l me at 224-1219. Please put a l l t h i s information i n the envelope provided, and b r i n g i t w i t h you when you come t o the workshop. I'm l o o k i n g forward t o seeing you then.  APPENDIX U Information on Follow-up  Performance  Name date of performance piece or pieces of music Did you p l a y from memory?  or w i t h music?  Describe the circumstances i n which you performed r e c i t a l , for friends, etc.).  (festival,  How many people were i n your audience ( i f l a r g e , estimate)? A few months ago would you have considered t h i s to be a more threatening or l e s s threatening performance s i t u a t i o n than p l a y i n g f o r a videotape w i t h two people i n the room? Please check your answer: a)  more threatening than videotape  b)  l e s s threatening than videotape  Please c i r c l e the number which best describes your: a)  o v e r a l l l e v e l of anxiety  completely "relaxed b)  1 2 3 4 - 5 6 7 8 9  10  extremely tense  q u a l i t y of performance  worst you've ever played 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 this piece(s) '  10  best you've ever played this piece(s)  H9.  APPENDIX V S i g n i f i c a n t Other Ratings of V i s u a l Signs of Anxiety and Q u a l i t y of P l a y i n g during Follow-up Performance  Name  I would l i k e you t o rate the change over the l a s t two months i n 's l e v e l of anxiety and the q u a l i t y of h i s or her p l a y i n g . Use v i s u a l signs to help you a r r i v e at a l e v e l of anxiety (e.g., shaking arms, shaking knees, s t i f f arms, tense shoulders, etc. ). Use accuracy i n notes, tempo, dynamics, rhythm, etc. and communication of mood and f e e l i n g t o a r r i v e at a r a t i n g of q u a l i t y . C i r c l e the number which best describes the change i n : a)  v i s u a l signs of anxiety much more tense  -1  -3  0  +1  +2  +3  much more relaxed (0 = no d i f f e r e n c e )  b)  q u a l i t y of performance much worse  -2  +1  +2  +3  much better  Please place t h i s sheet i n the envelope provided, s e a l , and give i t to . Thank you f o r your help.  150. APPENDIX W Therapist Manual f o r A t t e n t i o n a l T r a i n i n g Sessions Session One 1.  attendance  2.  i n t r o d u c t i o n of t h e r a p i s t as a psychologist and also a p i a n i s t  3.  i n t r o d u c t i o n of group members  4.  discussion of performance anxiety: a)  How long have you experienced performance anxiety?  When d i d  i t f i r s t become a problem f o r you? b)  How much does your anxiety i n t e r f e r e with your p l a y i n g (sometimes/ every time, able to continue/have to stop)?  c) What s i t u a t i o n s are most anxiety-arousing f o r you? d)  How do you know when you're anxious?  I f I were, l i s t e n i n g t o  you how would I know you were anxious? 5.  cognitive r e c a l l : I'm going to ask you to think back to the performance you gave• • i n f r o n t of the videocamera. I'm going to show you the videotapes of your performances and ask you to share the thoughts and f e e l i n g s you were experiencing. Therapist shows videotaped performances (from pre-treatment assessment) and asks: What were you t h i n k i n g here? What were you t e l l i n g y o u r s e l f or saying to y o u r s e l f here? Did you f i n d that your thoughts took the form of things you were saying to yourself?  6.  presentation of treatment r a t i o n a l e : In l i s t e n i n g - t o you t a l k about your performance anxiety and i n reading over the questionnaires which you completed a f t e r your performance (pre-treatment assessment) I n o t i c e that a l o t of you }  have d i f f i c u l t y focusing on the task before you - i . e . , on p l a y i n g the music.  Somehow your a t t e n t i o n seems to wander away from the music  to something else l i k e *•  151. I wonder what people w i l l think of me i f I make mistakes. I'm sure I'm p l a y i n g worse than anyone e l s e . My gosh my knees are shaking. I'm a f a i l u r e . Your thoughts, or the things you are saying to yourselves i n your heads, seem to get i n the way of what you are there to do - which i s of course to play the music as b e a u t i f u l l y as you can. right?  Is that  I'm going t o c a l l these thoughts or things we say to ourselves  i n our heads, our self-statements. We now know that there i s a strong r e l a t i o n s h i p between what people are t h i n k i n g and how anxious they f e e l .  The anxiety you  experience when.you are performing i s caused by the kinds of thoughts you have.  I f you expect to do poorly, e.g.,."I know I ' l l have a  memory lapse" or i f you s t a r t t o wonder about what people are t h i n k i n g of you e.g.,  " T h e y ' l l think I'm t e r r i b l e " then your a t t e n t i o n i s  taken away from the music and focused onto something e l s e .  These  negative thoughts r a i s e your anxiety and a f f e c t the way you are playing.  It's a vicious c i r c l e .  (Therapist draws on blackboard):  negative thoughts anxiety  ; problems w i t h your p l a y i n g Does t h i s make sense? During our three sessions together we w i l l explore and share the thoughts and f e e l i n g s we have as we are performing.  F i r s t of a l l  you w i l l t r y to become aware of the negative things you are saying to yourselves.  The r e c o g n i t i o n that you are i n f a c t doing t h i s i s  the f i r s t step forward i n changing.  Second, you w i l l l e a r n to  challenge your negative thoughts, and t h i r d , l e a r n to replace them w i t h p o s i t i v e self-statements.  In short, you w i l l l e a r n how to gain  c o n t r o l over your t h i n k i n g and not allow i t to take over and l e a d you to a state of anxiety.  We are not helpless v i c t i m s of our thinking.'  The p o s i t i v e self-statements can be of several d i f f e r e n t types:  152. a)  they can be comforting self-statements: e.g., "I'm w e l l prepared f o r t h i s performance so there's no reason, f o r me to be worried."  b)  they can be task-focused self-statements: e.g.,  "Don't worry about that d i f f i c u l t part on the next page.  Concentrate c)  More examples?  on what you're doing r i g h t now."  More examples?  they can be technique-oriented self-statements: e.g.,  "Now  what did my teacher t e l l me to do at t h i s point?  Oh yes, I'm supposed to play very s o f t l y and gradually increase the tone."  Or "I'm supposed to play from my shoulders  here."  More examples? d)  they can be rewarding e.g.,  self-statements:  "I f e e l pleased w i t h the.way I played - and I'm glad I  was able to c o n t r o l my anxiety."  More examples?  Over time you w i l l gradually f i n d that you w i l l have more p o s i t i v e self-statements and fewer negative ones.  Don't expect,  however, that you w i l l always be able to have only p o s i t i v e  thoughts.  We know that m i l d l y anxious people do not think only p o s i t i v e thoughts.  The d i f f e r e n c e , however, i s that they are able to challenge  the negative thoughts they do have and replace them with p o s i t i v e self-statements. Are there any  Very anxious people don't do t h i s a l l that w e l l . questions?  7.  d i s t r i b u t i o n of S e l f - I n s t r u c t i o n a l T r a i n i n g handouts (see Page 155)  8.  modeling s l i d e - t a p e presentation and d i s c u s s i o n : The p i a n i s t i n the f o l l o w i n g s l i d e s i s Judy. She was together w i t h some f r i e n d s at a party one evening, and a couple of them asked her to p l a y the piano. I'm sure a l l of.you have been i n that same situation. A few weeks ago I asked Judy i f she would go back and r e - l i v e that experience as i t happened and share w i t h us her thoughts and f e e l i n g s i n the same way that you d i d w i t h the videotapes e a r l i e r . Note the kinds of a n x i e t i e s which she has and the way i n which she copes w i t h them. Pay p a r t i c u l a r a t t e n t i o n to the negative things she says to h e r s e l f and the way i n which she challenges them and i s able to replace the negative, thoughts w i t h p o s i t i v e self-statements. Therapist shows s l i d e - t a p e sequence.  153.  Questions: a)  How many of you f i n d you are anxious performing i n f r o n t of f r i e n d s or family?  b)  What kinds of a n x i e t i e s are s p e c i a l t o that s i t u a t i o n ?  c)  What p o s i t i v e self-statements could you make t o overcome those negative thoughts? Therapist gives an example from her own personal  experience:  I often worry that my f r i e n d s expect to hear a popular piece l i k e something by E l t o n John or the Beatles or Fleetwood Mac, and instead they hear Bach or Beethoven. I f e e l anxious that they w i l l be bored. What could I say to myself t o overcome that anxiety? d)  A problem which I t h i n k many of us fear when we perform was demonstrated here - the memory lapse.  What do you do when you  have a memory lapse - are you able t o get back on the track again, forget about i t , and concentrate on doing your best f o r the r e s t of the piece?  Or do you l e t - i t devastate you and  make you f e e l l i k e a f a i l u r e and make you play poorly f o r the r e s t of the piece? e)  How d i d Judy cope w i t h i t ? What p o s i t i v e statements could you say t o y o u r s e l f t o help you cope with a memory lapse?  f)  Do any of you remember what Judy s a i d t o h e r s e l f a f t e r she had f i n i s h e d playing?  Why do you think that i s important?  What could you say i f you played well?  What could you say  i f you didn't play as w e l l as you would have l i k e d ? 9.  homework assignment: There are a couple of things I'd l i k e you t o do before you come back next week. I'd l i k e you t o perform a piece of music f o r some family members. Have at l e a s t two people l i s t e n i n g t o you and make i t l i k e a performance. Play something other than the piece which you played f o r the videotape. You can use your music i f you l i k e .  154. A f t e r you've f i n i s h e d , I'd l i k e you to r a t e your anxiety from 1 (completely relaxed) t o 10 (extremely anxious). A l s o , rate the q u a l i t y of your performance from 1 (the worse you've ever played that piece) t o 10 (the best you've ever played that p i e c e ) . In a d d i t i o n , I'd l i k e you to w r i t e down the negative and p o s i t i v e thoughts which you had during that performance. The second t h i n g I'd l i k e you to do i s l i s t at l e a s t f i v e p o s i t i v e thoughts or self-statements which you f e e l would be h e l p f u l to you i n overcoming your performance anxiety. Be sure to;include at l e a s t one 'before,' one 'during,' and one 'after' self-statement. These sheets w i l l summarize these i n s t r u c t i o n s f o r you and you can w r i t e the information on the sheets and bring, them back next week. 10.  questions on expectancy: The.last t h i n g I'd l i k e you to do today i s answer three questions which I ' l l pass out to you now.  11.  closing  12.  re fre shments  SELF-INSTRUCTIONAL TRAINING HANDOUT  I f you f e e l anxious about a performance: STEP 1  Explore what you are saying to yourself.  You w i l l probably  f i n d i t ' s something negative. NOTE: Your anxiety i s not a bad s i g n , but a cue t o s t a r t the coping process which you have learned. STEP 2  Challenge those  negative  thoughts or self-statements. STEP 3  Replace the negative thoughts or self-statements w i t h p o s i t i v e self-statements: a)  comforting o r reassuring  b)  task-focused - focus your a t t e n t i o n on p l a y i n g the music and not on the audience, a d i f f i c u l t spot two pages ahead, etc.  c)  technique-oriented - concentrate on the touch, expression, and a l l the other things you have been practising  d) rewarding - say something good to y o u r s e l f a f t e r you have played ( i f you did w e l l and even i f you didn't do as w e l l as you would have l i k e d )  156.  HOME ASSIGNMENT #1  Name  PART A 1.  date of performance  2.  piece of music  3.  Did you play from memory?  4.  How many people were l i s t e n i n g ?  5.  Please c i r c l e the number which best describes your: a)  o v e r a l l l e v e l of anxiety  completely relaxed b)  or w i t h music?  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9  10  extremely tense  10  best you've ever played  q u a l i t y of performance  worst you've ever played  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9  >. Please l i s t . a l l the negative thoughts or self-statements you had.  7.  Please l i s t a l l the p o s i t i v e self-statements you made.  PART B Please l i s t at l e a s t f i v e p o s i t i v e self-statements which you f e e l would be h e l p f u l t o you i n overcoming your p a r t i c u l a r performance a n x i e t i e s . Be sure t o include i n your l i s t at l e a s t one comforting, one task-focused, one technique-oriented, and one rewarding thought. A l s o , remember t o include thoughts f o r before, during, and a f t e r performing.  157.  Session Two 1.  attendance  2.  b r i e f restatement  3.  d i s c u s s i o n of homework assignment: a)  How many of you found you were saying some negative things t o yourselves?  b)  of r a t i o n a l e  What kinds of things were you saying?  Did you n o t i c e a r e l a t i o n s h i p between what you were saying to y o u r s e l f and how you were f e e l i n g ?  c)  Were you able t o challenge those negative thoughts and replace them w i t h p o s i t i v e task-oriented self-statements?  d)  Turn now t o the second part of the assignment. . I ' d l i k e t o hear some of the p o s i t i v e self-statements you came up with. What self-statements did you think would be h e l p f u l before you are about t o play? - during your performance? - a f t e r i t ' s over?  -4.  modeling s l i d e - t a p e presentation and d i s c u s s i o n : A.  The p i a n i s t i n the f o l l o w i n g s l i d e s i s Denise. Just before Christmas, Denise was p l a y i n g f o r an exam at u n i v e r s i t y . I t h i n k most of you have taken Toronto Conservatory or Western Board exams. I asked Denise i f she would go back and r e - l i v e that experience as i t happened, and share her thoughts and f e e l i n g s w i t h us i n the same way that Judy d i d i n the s l i d e s l a s t week. I asked Denise t o p l a y j u s t one of the three pieces she played - a Bach Toccata i n C Minor. Note the kinds of a n x i e t i e s which she has and the way i n which she copes w i t h them. Pay p a r t i c u l a r a t t e n t i o n t o the negative things she says to h e r s e l f and the way i n which she challenges them and replaces them w i t h p o s i t i v e task-oriented self-statements. Therapist shows s l i d e - t a p e sequence.  Questions: a)  How many of you f i n d you are anxious when you play i n an exam?  b)  What kinds of a n x i e t i e s are s p e c i a l t o the exam s i t u a t i o n ?  158.  c)  What p o s i t i v e self-statements could you make to overcome those negative thoughts? Therapist gives an example from her own personal  experience.  When I was t a k i n g exams I worried that my teacher and my parents would be disappointed i n me i f I didn't do w e l l . Do any of you ever have that f e e l i n g ? What could I have s a i d to myself t o overcome that worry? d)  What techniques d i d Denise use t o overcome her a n x i e t i e s ? What p o s i t i v e things d i d she say t o h e r s e l f ?  e)  What d i d Denise say t o h e r s e l f a f t e r she had f i n i s h e d  performing?  Remember l a s t week we decided i t was important t o say something p o s i t i v e a f t e r a performance because what we say t o ourselves influences how we w i l l f e e l the next time we play. B.  The model i n the next s l i d e s i s Denella. Last year Denella was competing f o r a scholarship i n a m u s i c . f e s t i v a l i n Burnaby. I imagine that a l o t o f you have p a r t i c i p a t e d i n some of the music f e s t i v a l s throughout the c i t y . I asked Denella I f she would go back and r e - l i v e that experience as i t happened and share w i t h us h e r thoughts and f e e l i n g s . She i s p l a y i n g the same piece of music.as she d i d i n the f e s t i v a l - two Spanish dances from a. s u i t e by Ginastera. Note the kinds of a n x i e t i e s which she has and the way i n which she copes w i t h them. Pay p a r t i c u l a r a t t e n t i o n t o the negative things she says t o h e r s e l f , the way she challenges these, and the way she replaces them w i t h p o s i t i v e task-oriented self-statements. Therapist shows s l i d e - t a p e sequence.  Questions: a)  How many of you f i n d that a music f e s t i v a l s i t u a t i o n makes you very  b)  anxious?  What kinds of a n x i e t i e s are s p e c i a l t o that s i t u a t i o n (compet i t i o n , audience, etc. )?  c)  What p o s i t i v e self-statements could you make t o overcome those negative thoughts? Therapist gives an example from her own personal  experience:  When I played i n f e s t i v a l s I sometimes looked at the trophy on ..the adjudicators' desk and thought about how much I would l i k e t o win i t . During my performance, i f I made a few mistakes I would t h i n k about l o s i n g that trophy. Now that's an example of a t a s k - i r r e l e v a n t thought. What could I have s a i d t o myself t o push that thought out of my head and get back on the task? d)  Did you n o t i c e the p o s i t i v e kinds of things Denella was saying to h e r s e l f while she was playing?  What d i d she say a f t e r she  had finished? rehearsal: Okay now f o r t h i s part of the session I'm going t o ask you to . play a piece or part of a piece of music and use the technique we've been t a l k i n g about. I w i l l go f i r s t and show you what I mean. Today we're going t o t h i n k our thoughts out loud. As I am t h i n k i n g a p o s i t i v e or negative thought I w i l l share i t with you. Notice how I challenge my negative thoughts, push them aside, and replace them w i t h p o s i t i v e self-statements. Therapist models: approaching piano: "I'm sure t h e y ' l l t h i n k t h i s piece i s too simple f o r .me t o be p l a y i n g . . . What am I t h i n k i n g l i k e that f o r i I t ' s a l o v e l y l i t t l e piece and I enjoy p l a y i n g i t . s i t t i n g at piano: " I f e e l nervous . . . Now j u s t r e l a x . . . Think o f the f i r s t phrase of the music. Sing i t i n your head." p l a y i n g : "Here comes that f a s t part. My f i n g e r s sometimes get tangled up . . . Stop worrying and t h i n k i n g ahead and j u s t play. Make i t s i n g . " a f t e r f i n i s h i n g : " I was able t o c o n t r o l my anxiety and I f e e l good about that. I a c t u a l l y enjoyed p l a y i n g . " I t ' s k i n d of d i f f i c u l t t o play and t a l k at the same time so save those thoughts and share them w i t h us afterwards. A l s o , rate your anxiety and q u a l i t y of p l a y i n g on scales from 1 t o 10 as you d i d i n your home assignment. Each group member performs. homework assignment: Before you come back next week there's something I'd l i k e you t o do. Each day when you p r a c t i s e I'd l i k e you t o take one of your pieces and pretend that you're about t o perform i t f o r someone.  160. You could even sightread a piece i f you want t o . Go through i t j u s t the way we d i d today, v e r b a l i z i n g your thoughts out loud. Try t o focus on p o s i t i v e thoughts. I f you do have negative ones, challenge them and replace them w i t h p o s i t i v e thoughts. I f mum or dad or brothers and s i s t e r s comment on the f a c t that you're t a l k i n g t o y o u r s e l f , t e l l . t h e m that research shows that people who t a l k t o themselves p o s i t i v e l y when they're performing a task do b e t t e r on that, task and f e e l l e s s anxious than people who don't t a l k t o themselves! One time during the week I'd l i k e you to.do the same as you d i d l a s t week. Perform a piece f o r f a m i l y members or f r i e n d s . Try to increase the number of people i n your audience and make i t l i k e a. performance. A f t e r you've f i n i s h e d , rate the q u a l i t y of your performance and the l e v e l of your anxiety. Write down your p o s i t i v e thoughts. Also w r i t e any negative thoughts which you had, the way you challenged them, and the p o s i t i v e thoughts which replaced them. Therapist hands out sheets. Each day place a check i f you have done the v e r b a l i z i n g aloud exercise. Please respond accurately as i t w i l l be most h e l p f u l i f you do. I f you don't p r a c t i s e the piano every day or i f you forget to do the exercise one day, leave the square blank. 7.  questions on expectancy  8.  closing  9.  refreshments  161. HOME ASSIGNMENT #2  Name  PART A 1.  date of performance  2.  piece of music  3.  Did you p l a y from memory?  4.  How many people were l i s t e n i n g ?  5.  Please c i r c l e the number which best describes your: a)  o v e r a l l l e v e l of anxiety  completely relaxed b)  o r w i t h music? '  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9  10  extremely tense  10  best you've ever played  q u a l i t y of performance  worst you've ever played  1 2  3 4 5 6 7 8 9  6. Please l i s t a l l the negative thoughts or self-statements you had.  7.  Please l i s t a l l the p o s i t i v e self-statements you made.  8.  Has there been a change since l a s t week: Yes a)  Has your anxiety decreased?  b)  Has the q u a l i t y of your playing improved?  c)  Do you have fewer negative thoughts or self-statements?  d)  Do you have more p o s i t i v e s e l f statements?  No  PART B Each day when you p r a c t i s e , take one of your pieces and pretend that you are about t o perform i t . You can even sightread a piece  Page 2  Home Assignment #2  i f you want t o . Go through i t j u s t the way we d i d i n the session, t h i n k i n g your thoughts out loud. I f you have negative thoughts or self-statements, challenge them and replace them w i t h p o s i t i v e self-statements. Place a check a f t e r each day that you complete the think aloud exercise. Please respond accurately as i t w i l l be most h e l p f u l i f you do. I f you don't p r a c t i s e the piano every day, or i f you don't do the exercise one or two days, leave the square(s) blank. Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday Saturday  _____  163.  Session Three 1.  attendance  2.  b r i e f restatement of r a t i o n a l e  3.  discussion of homework assignment: a)  How many of you rated yourselves as l e s s anxious than l a s t week?  b)  How many of you rated the q u a l i t y of your performance higher that l a s t week?  c)  Did you have more p o s i t i v e thoughts than l a s t week?  Did you  f i n d you could challenge your negative thoughts? d) 4.  How d i d the verbal!zing-aloud exercise go?  modeling s l i d e - t a p e presentation and d i s c u s s i o n : The p i a n i s t i n the s l i d e s which you're going to see tonight i s Vancev: ' Vance i s a teacher and concert p i a n i s t . I asked him to share the kinds of.thoughts and f e e l i n g s which he has while g i v i n g a r e c i t a l , because often we think that people who have reached that l e v e l never have any performance anxiety at a l l . This i s not the case. Notice, however, that Vance's a n x i e t i e s are not focused on himself and what people w i l l think of him,, but whether he w i l l be able to play the music i n a way that w i l l communicate something to the audience. As I mentioned e a r l i e r , a c e r t a i n amount of anxiety i s necessary to give excitement and l i f e to a performance. I f there were no anxiety at a l l i t would be d u l l and l i f e l e s s . I t h i n k Vance has j u s t the r i g h t amount of performance anxiety. Therapist shows s l i d e - t a p e sequence. Questions: a)  What kinds of a n x i e t i e s are s p e c i a l to a r e c i t a l s i t u a t i o n ? You're not being given a mark, you're not competing against anyone, why would you s t i l l f e e l anxious? the  b)  Why have people i n  audience come to hear you play?  Did you n o t i c e how Vance was almost completely focused on the  music and how he was p l a y i n g i t ?  s a i d j u s t before s t a r t i n g ?  Did you n o t i c e what he  Just a f t e r f i n i s h i n g ?  164.  c)  You may remember that when he came on stage he searched f o r h i s mother's face.  That was very comforting f o r him.  Some of  you may l i k e to l o c a t e a f a m i l i a r face i n the audience.  Others  of you may p r e f e r not to look at the faces but i n s t e a d t o look at the back w a l l . rehearsal: Now I'd l i k e each of you to play two pieces of music and do the same as l a s t week only t h i s time say your thoughts s i l e n t l y to y o u r s e l f . Again t r y to focus on p o s i t i v e task-oriented thoughts. I f you have negative thoughts challenge them and replace them with p o s i t i v e self-statements. A f t e r you f i n i s h p l a y i n g share w i t h us how s u c c e s s f u l you've been at c o n t r o l l i n g your thoughts. And again I'd l i k e you to rate your anxiety and q u a l i t y of p l a y i n g on scales from 1 to 10. music f e s t i v a l imagination sequence: For the next part of the session I'd l i k e you to a c t i v a t e your imaginations. Do you think you can do that? I'm going to describe a scene t o you. Each time I come t o a negative self-statement I w i l l pause and I'd l i k e you to challenge i t and replace i t with a p o s i t i v e coping statement. Now close your eyes and relax. Imagine that you are p a r t i c i p a t i n g i n a music f e s t i v a l . You a r r i v e at the h a l l where you're going t o p l a y and while standing at the door you can hear someone p l a y i n g the piano i n s i d e . You show your competitor's card to the woman at the desk and s l i p i n s i d e as the audience i s applauding the p i a n i s t who i s j u s t l e a v i n g the stage. You walk slowly down to the f r o n t and take a seat r i g h t at the a i s l e . You n o t i c e from your program that there i s one more person to perform before i t ' s your t u r n . The next performer i s walking up to the stage. She s i t s at the piano and.waits f o r a s i g n a l from the adjudicator to begin. She s t a r t s t o play. I t ' s a piece which i s much more d i f f i c u l t than the one you have chosen to play. And she plays b e a u t i f u l l y her technique i s flawless and she plays m u s i c a l l y too. You are wondering how you w i l l measure up to her - you are t h i n k i n g you couldn't p o s s i b l y beat her but then you say to y o u r s e l f . She i s f i n i s h e d p l a y i n g and returns to the audience. You get up and ascend the f i v e s t a i r s to the stage. The l i g h t i s so b r i g h t and everything f e e l s strange. You s i t down at the bench and move i t i n t o a p o s i t i o n which f e e l s comfortable f o r you. You look out towards the audience. I t ' s f a i r l y dark, you can't see much, but towards the back of  165.  the h a l l you see the adjudicator s i t t i n g at a long t a b l e . He seems to be reading something - then looks up. You hear the b e l l and know you must begin. Yoy wonder i f you can remember the f i r s t note but you say to y o u r s e l f ' . You begin to play. You're f e e l i n g kind of shakey and are j u s t hoping y o u ' l l get to the end without messing i t up but then you say to y o u r s e l f _ ^ . You're remembering the louds and s o f t s , the parts t o play staccato and the parts to p l a y smoothly, and you're concentrating on the b e a u t i f u l phrasing. You're doing so w e l l you wonder i f you can keep i t up but you say to yourself . You f i n d you are a c t u a l l y enjoying p l a y i n g . You come t o the c l o s i n g notes. You stand up. The audience i s applauding. You f e e l good i n s i d e and you say t o y o u r s e l f . This exercise has two purposes: a)  I t helps you to challenge negative anxiety-arousing thoughts.  b)  I t shows you that you can p r a c t i s e dealing w i t h anxiety i n a v a r i e t y of s i t u a t i o n s and s e t t i n g s simply by using your imagination.  How many of you were able to imagine the scene  vividly? 7.  homework assignment:  I'd l i k e you to do something between now and the time you come back • f o r the post-program performance. Again, one time during the week do the same., thing which you've been doing over the past two weeks. Perform a piece of music i n c r e a s i n g your audience, s i z e from l a s t week. Rate the q u a l i t y of your performance and the l e v e l of your anxiety. And w r i t e down the accompanying thoughts. The second t h i n g I'd l i k e you to do i s imagine you are i n an examination s i t u a t i o n . Do t h i s the same way i n which I have, done i t today. S t a r t from before you enter the room and go through u n t i l the time you leave. Be aware of the things you are saying to y o u r s e l f . Try to focus on p o s i t i v e task-oriented thoughts. When they're negative, challenge them and change them. Next do the same thing i n a r e c i t a l s i t u a t i o n where you are one of three performers on the program. There's a difference between what we d i d today and what I'd l i k e you to do at home. I'd l i k e you to incorporate actual p l a y i n g i n t o your imagined sequence. S t a r t by s i t t i n g on the sofa w i t h your eyes closed and b r i n g the scenes i n t o your mind. Then as you're imagining y o u r s e l f g e t t i n g up t o approach the piano a c t u a l l y get up and go to the piano and p l a y , t r y ' -..ing'tokeep i n mind a l l the time that you are not i n your l i v i n g room at home but f i r s t i n an exam and second i n a r e c i t a l .  166.  8.  questions on expectancy  9.  closing  10.  refreshments  167. HOME ASSIGNMENT #3  Name  PART A 1.  date of performance  2.  piece of music  3.  Did you play from memory?  4.  How many people were l i s t e n i n g ?  5.  Please c i r c l e the number which best describes your: a)  o v e r a l l l e v e l of anxiety  completely relaxed b)  or w i t h music?  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9  10  extremely tense  q u a l i t y of performance  worst you've ever played  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9  10  best you've ever played  6.  Please l i s t a l l the negative thoughts or self-statements you  7.  Please l i s t a l l the p o s i t i v e self-statements you made.  8.  Has there been a change since l a s t week: Yes a)  Has your anxiety decreased?  b) . Has the q u a l i t y of your p l a y i n g improved? c)  Do you have fewer negative thoughts or self-statements?  d)  Do you have more p o s i t i v e s e l f statements?  No  had.  168. Home Assignment #3  Page 2  PART B 1.  a) How v i v i d l y were you able t o imagine the examination scene?  not at a l l b)  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9  10  Please c i r c l e the number which best describes your o v e r a l l l e v e l of anxiety.  completely 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 relaxed c)  very v i v i d l y I almost f e l t as i f ! were there  10  extremely tense  Please c i r c l e the number which best describes the q u a l i t y of your performance.  worst you've ever played 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 d)  10  best you've ever played  Please l i s t a l l the negative thoughts o r self-statements you had.  e) Please l i s t a l l the p o s i t i v e self-statements you made.  2.  a) How v i v i d l y were you able t o imagine the r e c i t a l scene w i t h y o u r s e l f as one o f three performers on the program?  not at a l l b)  1  2  3 4  5 6  7  8  10  very v i v i d l y I almost f e l t as i f I were there  Please c i r c l e the number which best describes your o v e r a l l l e v e l of anxiety.  completely 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 relaxed c)  9  10  extremely tense  Please c i r c l e the number which best describes the q u a l i t y of your performance.  worst you've ever, played 1 2  3 4 5 6 7 8 9  10  best you've ever played  Home Assignment #3  Page 3  d)  Please l i s t a l l the negative thoughts or self-statements you had.  e)  Please l i s t a l l the p o s i t i v e self-statements you made.  170. APPENDIX X Therapist Manual f o r Behaviour Rehearsal Sessions  Session One 1.  attendance  2.  i n t r o d u c t i o n of t h e r a p i s t as a psychologist and also a p i a n i s t  3.  i n t r o d u c t i o n of group members d i s c u s s i o n of performance anxiety: a)  How long have you experienced performance anxiety?  When d i d  i t f i r s t become a problem f o r you? b)  How much does your anxiety i n t e r f e r e w i t h your p l a y i n g  (sometimes/  every time, able t o continue/have t o stop)? c)  What s i t u a t i o n s are most anxiety-arousing f o r you?  d)  How do you know when you're anxious?  I f I were l i s t e n i n g t o  you how would I know you were anxious? 5.  discussion of ways i n which performance anxiety can develop: In l i s t e n i n g t o you t a l k , I n o t i c e that many of you have not always been anxious while performing at the piano. Performance anxiety can develop f o r a number of d i f f e r e n t reasons: a)  You may have had one o r more bad experiences performing. Perhaps you had a memory lapse i n a r e c i t a l and were t e r r i b l y embarrassed, o r perhaps you were extremely nervous i n an exam and didn't p l a y . n e a r l y as w e l l as you could at home. Perhaps you were p l a y i n g f o r some f r i e n d s and f e l t they were bored by the piece you had chosen t o play. Negative experiences l i k e these tend t o make us l e s s eager t o perform and much more nervous and l e s s s e l f - c o n f i d e n t when we do perform. Have any of you had experiences l i k e these? Therapist gives an example from her own personal experience.  b)  Performance anxiety may also develop a f t e r seeing, other people perform who are very anxious and make a l o t of mistakes.  c)  Your a n x i e t i e s about performing may also be a r e s u l t of a n x i e t i e s which you have i n other areas of your l i f e . I f you have a poor self-image i . e . , a low opinion of y o u r s e l f I n general, then  171.  you may expect that you won't do w e l l , that y o u ' l l probably have a memory lapse, or that you won't be able to c o n t r o l your anxiety. d)  Do any of you have a d d i t i o n a l ideas as to how your anxiety about performing may have developed? In any case i t seems that many of us have learned to be anxious while performing. Knowing why we are anxious doesn't n e c e s s a r i l y help us to change how we f e e l . I t only helps i n that i f we have learned to be anxious, we should be able to rel'earn how not to be anxious!  6.  presentation of treatment r a t i o n a l e : A number of well-known teachers and musicians - A r t u r Rubinstein for one - have recommended that simply p l a y i n g i n f r o n t of others i s the key t o reducing performance anxiety.  They advise you to  make y o u r s e l f do the very thing you fear. - p l a y i n p u b l i c as much as p o s s i b l e , even though at f i r s t i t may be d i f f i c u l t because of your anxiety.  Each time i t w i l l get a l i t t l e easier.  Does t h i s  make sense to you? One good idea i s to s t a r t w i t h an audience of one - a f a m i l y member or f r i e n d .  You will.make mistakes.  Afterwards r e c a l l where,  how, and why the mistakes, happened and work to strengthen those d i f f i c u l t spots. two.  For the second performance get an audience of  Continue to repeat your performances, each time adding one  more to your audience.  Gradually you w i l l . c o n c e n t r a t e more on  p l a y i n g the music and l e s s on the f a c t that you are s i t t i n g i n front of an audience. The program i n which you are p a r t i c i p a t i n g i s divided i n t o two parts.  The f i r s t part takes place over the next three weeks.  During these three sessions I am going t o ask each of you to p l a y a piece of music i n f r o n t of the r e s t of us.  A l l of you share the  same concerns about performing so'together we form a sympathetic and understanding audience. best at f i r s t .  Don't worry i f you don't perform your  By continuing to perform i n a comfortable atmosphere,  without c r i t i c i s m from those l i s t e n i n g to you, you w i l l r e a l i z e that performing i s not such a f r i g h t f u l experience a f t e r a l l and your anxiety w i l l lessen.  172.  In the second part of the program we w i l l meet together during an afternoon f o r a workshop.  I w i l l show you the videotapes and  heart rates from your performances and y o u ' l l have a chance t o see how much you have improved as a r e s u l t of the sessions we've had together. rehearsal : Now I'd l i k e each of you t o p l a y f o r the r e s t of us. A f t e r you've f i n i s h e d rate your anxiety from 1 (completely relaxed) to 10 (extremely anxious). Also rate the q u a l i t y of your performance from 1 (the worst you've ever played t h i s p i e c e ) to 10 (the best you've ever played i t ) . Over the next few weeks you should be able to see changes i n these r a t i n g s as a r e s u l t of an increase i n your number of performances i n supportive s i t u a t i o n s . I ' l l go f i r s t . Therapist performs and each group member performs. homework assignment: There i s something I'd l i k e you t o do before you come back next week. I'd l i k e you t o perform a piece of music f o r some family members. Have at l e a s t two people l i s t e n i n g to you and make i t l i k e a performance. Play something other than the piece which you played for the videotape. You can use your music i f you l i k e . A f t e r you f i n i s h I'd l i k e you t o rate your anxiety and the q u a l i t y o f your p l a y i n g i n the same way that you d i d today/tonight. questions on expectancy: The l a s t thing I'd l i k e you t o do today i s answer three questions which I ' l l pass out to you now. closing refreshments  Home Assignment f o l l o w i n g A l l Three Behaviour Rehearsal Sessions Name-  '  1.  date of performance  2.  piece of music  3.  Did you p l a y from memory?  4.  How many people were l i s t e n i n g ? .  5.  Please c i r c l e the number which best describes your: a)  or w i t h music? ______  o v e r a l l l e v e l of anxiety  completely relaxed b)  .  1 2 3 4 - 5 6 7 8 9  10  extremely tense  10  best you've ever played  q u a l i t y of performance  worst you've ever played  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  174.  Session Two 1.  attendance  2.  b r i e f restatement of r a t i o n a l e  3.  d i s c u s s i o n of homework assignment: a)  What k i n d of audiences d i d you manage to gather?  b)  How d i d your r a t i n g s of anxiety and q u a l i t y of performance compare w i t h the ones i n our session l a s t week?  c)  Did you make a note of the places where you had d i f f i c u l t y or f e l t insecure so you could work on those parts?  4.  rehearsal: Again today/tonight I'd l i k e each of you to play f o r us. A f t e r you've f i n i s h e d , rate your anxiety (1-10) and rate the q u a l i t y of your performance (1-10). Each group member performs.  5.  homework assignment: Your assignment f o r t h i s week i s the same as before. Perform' a piece of music f o r family members or f r i e n d s . Try t o increase the number of people i n your audience from l a s t week and make i t l i k e a performance. Again, don't use the piece which you played f o r the videotape. You can use your music i f you l i k e . A f t e r you've f i n i s h e d , rate your anxiety and the q u a l i t y of your performance i n the same way that you did. today/tonight. Look to see what changes have taken place since l a s t week.  6.  questions on expectancy  7.  closing  8.  refreshments  175.  Session Three 1.  attendance  2. b r i e f restatement o f r a t i o n a l e 3.  d i s c u s s i o n of homework assignment: a)  How d i d your r a t i n g s of anxiety and q u a l i t y o f performance compare w i t h the ones i n your home assignment l a s t week? Was your audience larger?  b ) Did you make a note of the places where you had d i f f i c u l t y or f e l t insecure so you could work on those parts? 4.  rehearsal : Again today I'd l i k e each of you to play f o r us. A f t e r you've f i n i s h e d , rate your anxiety (1-10) and rate the q u a l i t y of your performance (1-10). Each group member performs.  5.  homework assignment: Your assignment f o r t h i s week i s the same as before. Perform a piece o f music f o r f a m i l y members o r f r i e n d s . Try t o increase the number of people i n your audience from l a s t week and make i t l i k e a performance. Again, don't use the piece which you played for the videotape. You can use your music i f you l i k e .  6.  questions on expectancy  7.  closing  8. refreshments  176.  APPENDIX Y Therapist Manual, f o r A t t e n t i o n a l Training Workshop  1.  attendance  2.  i n t r o d u c t i o n of t h e r a p i s t as a psychologist and also a p i a n i s t  3.  i n t r o d u c t i o n of group members  4.  cognitive r e c a l l : I am going to ask you to think back to the f i r s t , performance you gave i n f r o n t of the video camera. I'm going to show you the videotapes of your performances and ask you to share the thoughts and f e e l i n g s you were experiencing. Therapist shows videotaped performances and asks: What were you t h i n k i n g here? What were you t e l l i n g y o u r s e l f or saying to yourself here? Did you f i n d that your thoughts took the. form of things you were saying to yourself?  5.  presentation of treatment r a t i o n a l e : (same as i n A t t e n t i o n a l Training - s e s s i o n  one)  6.  d i s t r i b u t i o n of S e l f - I n s t r u c t i o n a l Training handouts  7.  modeling s l i d e - t a p e presentations and  discussions:  (same as i n A t t e n t i o n a l T r a i n i n g - sessions one and a)  p i a n i s t p l a y i n g f o r a group of f r i e n d s  b)  p i a n i s t performing i n an exam  8.  short break f o r refreshments  9.  rehearsal:  two)  Therapist models performing and sharing thoughts out loud. Group members also perform, v e r b a l i z i n g t h e i r thoughts. Audience helps performer to challenge negative thoughts (same as i n A t t e n t i o n a l Training - session two). 10.  music f e s t i v a l imagination  sequence:  (same as i n A t t e n t i o n a l Training - session three) 11.  questions on expectancy  12.  closing  177. APPENDIX Z Post-workshop Follow-up I n s t r u c t i o n s f o r Behaviour-  Rehearsal and Waiting L i s t Control Subjects  There i s one f i n a l stage of p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n t h i s program. I am i n t e r e s t e d i n knowing how b e n e f i c i a l the workshop i s i n reducing your musical performance anxiety. I would l i k e you t o arrange a second performance, f o l l o w i n g the same procedures as you.did p r e v i o u s l y (of. course the place and audience may be d i f f e r e n t ) . Perform the same piece or pieces as you d i d f o r that performance - i n most cases, t h i s w i l l be the same as f o r the video-tape. Some of you w i l l be p a r t i c i p a t i n g i n music f e s t i v a l s or r e c i t a l s over the next few weeks. I f so, you may use the piece or pieces you are planning to p l a y f o r those occasions. For those of you who aren't, arrange a small " r e c i t a l " of your own. Have at l e a s t s i x people there t o hear you p l a y (more i f you can!). Perhaps s e v e r a l o f you who know each other could get together and arrange something. About 10 minutes before you p l a y ( o r j u s t before you leave home f o r the performance i f i t ' s more convenient), complete the f i r s t two questionnaires (#1 and #2). Just before you are about t o p l a y , p i c k one word from the t h i r d questionnaire (#3) which describes how you are f e e l i n g at that moment. And w i t h i n a short time a f t e r you've f i n i s h e d ( p r e f e r a b l y w i t h i n one or two hours), complete the f o u r t h questionnaire (#4-) d e s c r i b i n g the thoughts you had while you were performing. I n a d d i t i o n , r a t e your l e v e l of anxiety and the q u a l i t y of your performance i n the same way as you d i d before (#5). Again, I'm asking you f o r a " d o - i t - y o u r s e l f assessment" of the thoughts and f e e l i n g s you have when you perform i n p u b l i c . In a d d i t i o n t o t h i s , I'd l i k e you t o ask a member of your audience (someone who has heard you p l a y often i f p o s s i b l e - teacher, parent, f r i e n d , etc.) t o rate changes i n l e v e l of anxiety and q u a l i t y of your performance on the paper provided f o r t h i s (#6). I f p o s s i b l e , choose the same person who d i d t h i s before. Use the back of one of the pages f o r any comments you might have about the program. P o s i t i v e and negative self-statements are both h e l p f u l ! I f you have any questions, don't h e s i t a t e t o c a l l me at 224-1219. Please m a i l a l l t h i s information back t o me i n the addressed and stamped envelope, by May 22nd. Thank you f o r your p a r t i c i p a t i o n . I enjoyed the time we spent together and hope that the program has been and w i l l continue t o be h e l p f u l i n reducing your performance anxiety.  APPENDIX AA A n t i c i p a t e d E f f e c t s of Success and F a i l u r e Models on the Performance of Observers  Please place a check beside the answer which applies t o you. You should make two checks i n t o t a l . A.  Imagine you are w a i t i n g t o perform. The performer ahead of you i s p l a y i n g accurately and with r e a l musicianship. Do you f e e l t h i s would: a)  cause you t o play better?  b)  cause you t o play worse?  c)  have no e f f e c t on your performance?  B. Again imagine that you are about t o give a performance of piece of music. As you are w a i t i n g your t u r n , the performer ahead of you s t a r t s t o make a l o t of mistakes, and then has a memory lapse. Do you f e e l t h i s would: a)  cause you t o play better?  b)  cause you t o play worse?  c)  have no e f f e c t on your performance?  

Cite

Citation Scheme:

        

Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics

Share

Embed

Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                        
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            src="{[{embed.src}]}"
                            data-item="{[{embed.item}]}"
                            data-collection="{[{embed.collection}]}"
                            data-metadata="{[{embed.showMetadata}]}"
                            data-width="{[{embed.width}]}"
                            async >
                            </script>
                            </div>
                        
                    
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:
http://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.831.1-0076983/manifest

Comment

Related Items