Cognition and the Assessment of Interaction Episodes in Jazz Improvisation


    loading  Checking for direct PDF access through Ovid

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to examine the cognitive processes related to interaction episodes in jazz improvisation through the development, testing, and validation of a rubric for assessing interaction in jazz improvisation. Four questions guided this study: (a) is a rubric an effective method for assessing performance achievement at undergraduate, graduate, and professional levels? (b) what is the interjudge reliability of a rubric used to assess interaction in jazz improvisation? (c) which of the rubric criteria maximally differentiate 3 performance achievement levels (i.e., undergraduate, graduate, and professional)? and (d) does a cognitive task ordering of difficulty exist in assessing jazz interaction? The rubric consisted of 3 melodic interaction criteria, 2 harmonic interaction criteria, and 3 rhythmic interaction criteria. A total of 55 expert judges evaluated 55 distinct jazz improvisation performances. The results indicated a statistically significant multivariate analysis of variance effect across all 3 performance achievement levels on each rubric item. The standardized discriminant function coefficients suggested that the 3 performance achievement levels were maximally differentiated by a canonical variate with greater weightings from all 3 melodic interaction criteria (i.e., “Reaction to implied [melodic] musical suggestions,” “Development of melodic musical ideas stemming from motivic interplay,” and “Adaptation to melodic interplay [call and response]”) and 1 rhythmic interaction criterion (i.e., “Coordination of rhythmical pulse [timing and synchronization]”). The results indicated a cognitive ordering of rater task difficulty: melodic interaction, rhythmic interaction, and harmonic interaction. A total of 66.33% of the variability was accounted for by performance achievement level, and interjudge reliability was estimated using Cronbach's alpha (α = .91).

    loading  Loading Related Articles