Perception of Movement Qualities Associated with Expertise in Dance
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Perception of Movement Qualities Associated with Expertise in Dance Matthew Henley A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy University of Washington 2013 Reading Committee: Dr. Virginia Berninger, Chair Betsy Cooper Dr. Nancy Hertzog Program Authorized to Offer Degree: College of Education ©Copyright 2013 Matthew Henley ii University of Washington Abstract Perception of Movement Qualities Associated with Expertise in Dance Matthew Henley Chair of the Supervisory Committee: Professor Virginia Berninger Department of Educational Psychology It is believed that participation in the arts is a vital component of development, and that dance education can support the understanding of human movement as an important source of meaning. However, psychometric measurement in the arts, which would help substantiate this claim, is not widely practiced. This research, contributes to the quantitative research foundation in dance education by investigating perceptual-cognitive differences associated with expertise in dance. In this dissertation, novice and expert contemporary dancers watched pairs of video- recorded short contemporary dance phrases, which were either the same choreography or contained a single manipulation to an element of the choreographic phrase associated with Shape, Time, or Space. After watching each pair, participants were asked to select from one of four options they felt best reflected the quality that had been changed between the videos: Shape, Time, Space, and No Difference. Participants’ responses were summed within categories and group means were compared. No differences were found between novices and experts in the iii discrimination of manipulations to Shape, however, significant differences were found between novices and experts in the discrimination of manipulations to Space and Time. Although reliability analyses indicate that further instrument development is required before strong conclusions can be drawn, the data initially support the idea that contemporary dancers are able to discern spatial and temporal elements of contemporary dance better than novices. This is consistent with research from neuroscience that suggests experience modulates neural processing in areas of the brain responsible for the comparison of production and perception through simulation. Further, this data suggests that processes of simulation provide unique access to spatial and temporal information. It is the hope of this researcher that once the perceptual-cognitive skills associated with experience in dance are better defined, they can be used to support the framing of dance education, not just as peripheral, but integral to the cognitive and social-emotional development of all students. iv TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter 1: Introduction ................................................................................................................... 1 Chapter 2: Relationships between Perception and Production ....................................................... 5 Theoretical Accounts .......................................................................................................... 5 Neural Substrate for Perception-Production Integration................................................... 10 Production and Perception across the Life-Span .............................................................. 12 Conclusion ........................................................................................................................ 16 Chapter 3: Perceptual-Cognitive Mechanisms of Expertise ......................................................... 18 General Expert-Novice Distinctions ................................................................................. 20 Expertise in Chess ............................................................................................................. 23 Expertise is Sport .............................................................................................................. 25 Expertise in the Performing Arts ...................................................................................... 28 Conclusion ........................................................................................................................ 31 Chapter 4: Dance in Experimental psychology ............................................................................ 32 Dance Expertise in Sports Psychology ............................................................................. 35 Dance Expertise in Neuroscience ..................................................................................... 36 Dance Expertise in Motor Cognition ................................................................................ 42 Conclusion ........................................................................................................................ 46 Chapter 5: Terminology ................................................................................................................ 48 Modern and Contemporary ............................................................................................... 48 Movement Analysis: A Framework .................................................................................. 50 Chapter 6: Rationale for Current Research ................................................................................... 55 Pilot Study #1 .................................................................................................................... 56 Pilot Study #2 .................................................................................................................... 57 Research Question and Hypothesis ................................................................................... 58 Chapter 7: Methods ....................................................................................................................... 60 Methods............................................................................................................................. 60 Chapter 8: Results ......................................................................................................................... 68 Results from Comparison of Means ................................................................................. 68 Results from Error Analysis.............................................................................................. 70 Results from Qualitative Analysis .................................................................................... 71 Chapter 9: Discussion ................................................................................................................... 73 Implications for Instrument Development ........................................................................ 74 Implications from Group Comparison .............................................................................. 76 Limitations ........................................................................................................................ 81 Future Directions .............................................................................................................. 83 Conclusion ........................................................................................................................ 89 References ..................................................................................................................................... 91 Appendix ..................................................................................................................................... 104 vi LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1. Instructions, sample response option, and short answer question…………………..64 Figure 2. Results from comparison of means………………………………………………...69 Figure 3. Error analysis………………………………………………………………………..70 Figure 4. Manipulation to Shape……………………………………………………………..104 Figure 5. Manipulation to Time…………………………………………………………...…104 Figure 6. Manipulation to Space……………………………………………………………..105 Figure 7. No Difference………………………………………….………..…………………105 . vii LIST OF TABLES Table 1. Grid for determining which movement was manipulated with which quality………61 Table 2. Reliability analysis….……….…...………….……..………………..……………....66 Table 3. Mean confidence ratings by group and category……………………………....….66 Table 4. Comparison of performance by block……………………………………………….67 Table 5. Mean correct answers by group and category……………………………………….68 Table 6. Correlation matrix..……...............…………………....……….………..…..………68 Table 7. Frequency of strategies reported in short-answer question by group……………....72 . viii Acknowledgements: Doi Doctoral Student Research Fund, for their generous financial support of this research. Roxanne Foster and Tonya Lockyer, for their professional expertise in developing the videos. Betsy Cooper and the faculty, staff, and students of the Dance Program, who have been an immeasurable source of intellectual, financial, and emotional support over the last five years. Ginger Berninger and the members of my doctoral committee, Betsy Cooper, Andy Meltzoff, Nancy Hertzog, and Liz Sanders, whose enthusiasm for my unconventional research topic and critical guidance have made the completion of this degree both easier and more challenging that I expected. My family, both given and chosen, who inspire me to think big and work hard. ix CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION It is often a complicated question to answer when asked why dance should be taught in schools. Some teach dance as