基于艺术的研究绩效评价:《重生》的观众观感。

IF 1.9 3区 医学 Q1 Arts and Humanities Journal of Music Therapy Pub Date : 2022-03-21 DOI:10.1093/jmt/thab018
Michael Viega
{"title":"基于艺术的研究绩效评价:《重生》的观众观感。","authors":"Michael Viega","doi":"10.1093/jmt/thab018","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The purpose of the study is to understand how audiences evaluated an arts-based research performance called Rising from the Ashes. Audience evaluation promises egalitarian and pluralistic perspectives that may assist artist-as-researchers with gaining new insight into out of performative arts-based research results. Rising from the Ashes was performed several times between 2015 and 2019. Evaluations were provided to six different audiences and consisted of rating-scale and open-ended questions based on general criteria for judging arts-based research: incisiveness, concision, generativity, social significance, evocation and illumination, and coherence. Descriptive rating scores and thematic analysis of open-ended questions aided in the artist-as-researcher's understanding of how audiences responded to the performances. Descriptive scores showed that audiences strongly agreed that the performance was concise, incisive, and evocative and illuminating. The performance was less likely to support audiences' understanding of the social issues addressed in the study, which implied decreased generativity and social significance. Open-ended questions enhanced and supported rating-scale responses as well as revealed specific elements of the performance that addressed its coherence. The results deepened the artists-as-researcher's understanding of potential strengths and limitations of Rising from the Ashes based on the audience evaluations. Implications for arts-based research evaluation in music therapy, particularly related to music performance, are discussed.</p>","PeriodicalId":47143,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Music Therapy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2022-03-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Evaluation for Arts-Based Research Performance: Audience Perceptions of Rising from the Ashes.\",\"authors\":\"Michael Viega\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/jmt/thab018\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>The purpose of the study is to understand how audiences evaluated an arts-based research performance called Rising from the Ashes. Audience evaluation promises egalitarian and pluralistic perspectives that may assist artist-as-researchers with gaining new insight into out of performative arts-based research results. Rising from the Ashes was performed several times between 2015 and 2019. Evaluations were provided to six different audiences and consisted of rating-scale and open-ended questions based on general criteria for judging arts-based research: incisiveness, concision, generativity, social significance, evocation and illumination, and coherence. Descriptive rating scores and thematic analysis of open-ended questions aided in the artist-as-researcher's understanding of how audiences responded to the performances. Descriptive scores showed that audiences strongly agreed that the performance was concise, incisive, and evocative and illuminating. The performance was less likely to support audiences' understanding of the social issues addressed in the study, which implied decreased generativity and social significance. Open-ended questions enhanced and supported rating-scale responses as well as revealed specific elements of the performance that addressed its coherence. The results deepened the artists-as-researcher's understanding of potential strengths and limitations of Rising from the Ashes based on the audience evaluations. Implications for arts-based research evaluation in music therapy, particularly related to music performance, are discussed.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47143,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Music Therapy\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-03-21\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Music Therapy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/jmt/thab018\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"Arts and Humanities\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Music Therapy","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jmt/thab018","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本研究的目的是了解观众如何评价一个以艺术为基础的研究表演,名为《灰烬重生》。观众评价承诺平等主义和多元化的视角,可以帮助艺术家作为研究人员获得新的见解,而不是基于表演艺术的研究成果。《浴火重生》在2015年至2019年期间多次演出。评估提供给六种不同的受众,包括评分量表和基于评判艺术研究的一般标准的开放式问题:精辟,简洁,生成,社会意义,唤起和启发,以及连贯性。描述性评分分数和开放式问题的专题分析有助于作为研究人员的艺术家理解观众对表演的反应。描述性分数显示,观众强烈同意表演简洁,深刻,令人回味和启发性。表演不太可能支持观众对研究中所讨论的社会问题的理解,这意味着创造性和社会意义的降低。开放式问题加强和支持了评价量表的回答,并揭示了解决其一致性的具体表现要素。结果加深了作为研究者的艺术家基于观众评价对《浴火重生》潜在优势和局限性的理解。讨论了音乐治疗中艺术研究评价的意义,特别是与音乐表演有关的研究。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Evaluation for Arts-Based Research Performance: Audience Perceptions of Rising from the Ashes.

The purpose of the study is to understand how audiences evaluated an arts-based research performance called Rising from the Ashes. Audience evaluation promises egalitarian and pluralistic perspectives that may assist artist-as-researchers with gaining new insight into out of performative arts-based research results. Rising from the Ashes was performed several times between 2015 and 2019. Evaluations were provided to six different audiences and consisted of rating-scale and open-ended questions based on general criteria for judging arts-based research: incisiveness, concision, generativity, social significance, evocation and illumination, and coherence. Descriptive rating scores and thematic analysis of open-ended questions aided in the artist-as-researcher's understanding of how audiences responded to the performances. Descriptive scores showed that audiences strongly agreed that the performance was concise, incisive, and evocative and illuminating. The performance was less likely to support audiences' understanding of the social issues addressed in the study, which implied decreased generativity and social significance. Open-ended questions enhanced and supported rating-scale responses as well as revealed specific elements of the performance that addressed its coherence. The results deepened the artists-as-researcher's understanding of potential strengths and limitations of Rising from the Ashes based on the audience evaluations. Implications for arts-based research evaluation in music therapy, particularly related to music performance, are discussed.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Music Therapy
Journal of Music Therapy REHABILITATION-
CiteScore
3.50
自引率
5.30%
发文量
13
期刊最新文献
Developing Music Therapy in Maternity Care in Ireland: A Qualitative Study Scoping Review of Music Interventions Aimed at Improving Reading Skills in Children with Specific Learning Disorders in Reading. Telehealth Engaged Music for Pain Outcomes: A Music and Imagery Proof-of-concept Study with Veterans. Professional Development and Learning Through the Research Process. Music Therapists´ Job Satisfaction and Related Factors: A Cross-Sectional Survey in Five European Countries and Israel.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1