This study examines how pianists interact with various fingering suggestions when making their fingering decisions. In semi-structured online interviews, 20 classically trained pianists responded to unfingered scores, fingered scores, and video recordings of four scale passages from Beethoven’s piano works while considering physical constraints, interpretive judgments, and embodied habits in deciding their fingerings. Rather than automatically accepting suggestions, the participants critically evaluated them, and the responses ranged from disagreement to the realization of alternatives. This study highlights scores and recordings as historically mediating agents connecting various influences on pianists’ decision-making. While negotiable, standard fingering tends to strongly influence choices as collective embodied knowledge. Pianists act as both executors and reflective observers, selecting and attuning to external and embodied influences. This study conceptualizes this dynamic network of relationships in solo piano playing as resonance—selective engagement through which pianists negotiate between personal preferences and external influences.
AmmiranteP.ThompsonW. F. (2012). Continuation tapping to triggered melodies: Motor resonance effects of melodic motion. Experimental Brain Research, 216(1), 51–60. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00221-011-2907-5
3.
BachC. P. E. (1753/1949). Essay on the true art of playing keyboard instruments (MitchellW. J., Trans., Ed.). W. W. Norton.
4.
BailyJ. (1990). The role of a motor grammar in musical performance. In WilsonF. R.RoehmannF. L. (Eds.), Music and child development: The biology of music making: Proceedings of the 1987 Denver conference (pp. 202–213). MMB Music.
5.
BambergerJ. (1976). The musical significance of Beethoven’s fingerings in the piano sonatas. Music Forum, 4, 237–280.
6.
BarrettM. (2006). “Creative collaboration”: An “eminence” study of teaching and learning in music composition. Psychology of Music, 34(2), 195–218. https://doi.org/10.1177/0305735606061852
BiancoR.NovembreG.KellerP. E.VillringerA.SammlerD. (2018). Musical genre-dependent behavioural and EEG signatures of action planning. A comparison between classical and jazz pianists. NeuroImage, 169, 383–394. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2017.12.058
9.
BilsonM. (2008). Fingerings in Urtext editions. International Piano, 57, 35–39.
BorroniP.GoriniA.RivaG.BouchardS.CerriG. (2011). Mirroring avatars: Dissociation of action and intention in human motor resonance. European Journal of Neuroscience, 34(4), 662–669. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-9568.2011.07779.x
BraunV.ClarkeV. (2021). One size fits all? What counts as quality practice in (reflexive) thematic analysis?Qualitative Research in Psychology, 18(3), 328–352. https://doi.org/10.1080/14780887.2020.1769238
14.
ByrneD. (2022). A worked example of Braun and Clarke’s approach to reflexive thematic analysis. Quality & Quantity, 56(3), 1391–1412. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-021-01182-y
15.
CahourB.LicoppeC. (2010). Confrontations with traces of one’s own activity. Revue d’Anthropologie des Connaissances, 4(1), 1. https://doi.org/10.3917/rac.010.000a
16.
CahourB.SalembierP.ZouinarM. (2016). Analyzing lived experience of activity. Le Travail Humain, 79(3), 259–284. https://doi.org/10.3917/th.793.0259
17.
CandidiM.SacheliL. M.MegaI.AgliotiS. M. (2014). Somatotopic mapping of piano fingering errors in sensorimotor experts: TMS studies in pianists and visually trained musically naïves. Cerebral Cortex, 24(2), 435–443. https://doi.org/10.1093/cercor/bhs325
18.
ChaffinR.ImrehG. (2002). Practicing perfection: Piano performance as expert memory. Psychological Science, 13(4), 342–349. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9280.00462
19.
ClarkeE.ParncuttR.RaekallioM.SlobodaJ. (1997). Talking fingers: An interview study of pianists’ views on fingering. Musicae Scientiae, 1(1), 87–107. https://doi.org/10.1177/102986499700100106
20.
ClarkeE. F.DoffmanM. (2017). Distributed creativity: Collaboration and improvisation in contemporary music. Oxford University Press.
CzernyC. (1839). Complete theoretical and practical piano forte school: From the first rudiments of playing to the highest and most refined state of cultivation, with the requisite numerous examples newly and expressly composed for the occasion: Opus 500 (HamiltonJ. A., Trans., Vol. 1). R. Cocks.
23.
D’AusilioA.AltenmüllerE.BelardinelliM. O.LotzeM. (2006). Cross-modal plasticity of the motor cortex while listening to a rehearsed musical piece. European Journal of Neuroscience, 24(3), 955–958. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-9568.2006.04960.x
24.
D’AusilioA.NovembreG.FadigaL.KellerP. E. (2015). What can music tell us about social interaction?Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 19(3), 111–114. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2015.01.005
25.
DavidsonJ. W.GoodJ. M. M. (2002). Social and musical co-ordination between members of a string quartet: An exploratory study. Psychology of Music, 30(2), 186–201. https://doi.org/10.1177/0305735602302005
GibsonJ. J. (1966). The senses considered as perceptual systems. Houghton Mifflin.
29.
GordonC. L.IacoboniM.BalasubramaniamR. (2018). Multimodal music perception engages motor prediction: A TMS study. Frontiers in Neuroscience, 12, Article 736. https://doi.org/10.1101/358507
30.
HeftH. (2001). Ecological psychology in context: James Gibson, Roger Barker, and the legacy of William James’s radical empiricism. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
31.
HogeveenJ.ObhiS. S. (2012). Social interaction enhances motor resonance for observed human actions. The Journal of Neuroscience, 32(17), 5984–5989. https://doi.org/10.1523/JNEUROSCI.5938-11.2012
32.
HutchinsE. (1995). Cognition in the wild. MIT Press.
33.
JacobsJ. P. (2001). Refinements to the ergonomic model for keyboard fingering of Parncutt, Sloboda, Clarke, Raekallio, and Desain. Music Perception, 18(4), 505–511. https://doi.org/10.1525/mp.2001.18.4.505
34.
JamesW. (1890). The principles of psychology (Vols.1–2). Henry Holt and Company.
35.
KilnerJ. M.FristonK. J.FrithC. D. (2007). Predictive coding: An account of the mirror neuron system. Cognitive Processing, 8(3), 159–166. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10339-007-0170-2
KramerL. (2012). The virtuoso body; or, the two births of musical performance. In HawkinsS. (Ed.), Critical musicological reflections (pp. 231–244). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315575056
NewmanW. S. (1982). Beethoven’s fingerings as interpretive clues. Journal of Musicology, 1(2), 171–197. https://doi.org/10.2307/763595
41.
ParncuttR.SlobodaJ. A.ClarkeE. F.RaekallioM.DesainP. (1997). An ergonomic model of keyboard fingering for melodic fragments. Music Perception, 14(4), 341–382. https://doi.org/10.2307/40285730
42.
PetitmenginC.RemillieuxA.CahourB.Carter-ThomasS. (2013). A gap in Nisbett and Wilson’s findings? A first-person access to our cognitive processes. Consciousness and Cognition, 22(2), 654–669. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.concog.2013.02.004
43.
RajaV. (2019). From metaphor to theory: The role of resonance in perceptual learning. Adaptive Behavior, 27(6), 405–421. https://doi.org/10.1177/1059712319854350
44.
RizzolattiG.Fabbri-DestroM. (2008). The mirror system and its role in social cognition. Current Opinion in Neurobiology, 18(2), 179–184. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conb.2008.08.001
45.
RizzolattiG.SinigagliaC. (2008). Mirrors in the brain: How our minds share actions, emotions, and experience (AndersonF., Trans.). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780199217984.001.0001
46.
RosaH. (2019). Resonance: A sociology of our relationship to the world (WagnerJ., Trans.). Polity.
47.
RosenblumS. P. (1988). Performance practices in classic piano music: Their principles and applications. Indiana University Press.
48.
RyanK. J.Jr.GallagherS. (2020). Between ecological psychology and enactivism: Is there resonance?Frontiers in Psychology, 11, Article 1147. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.01147
49.
SartoriL.BegliominiC.PanozzoG.GarollaA.CastielloU. (2014). The left side of motor resonance. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 8, Article 702. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2014.00702
50.
SchiavioA.HøffdingS. (2015). Playing together without communicating? A pre-reflective and enactive account of joint musical performance. Musicae Scientiae, 19(4), 366–388. https://doi.org/10.1177/1029864915593333
SlobodaJ. A.ClarkeE. F.ParncuttR.RaekallioM. (1998). Determinants of finger choice in piano sight-reading. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 24(1), 185–203. https://doi.org/10.1037//0096-1523.24.1.185
55.
SudnowD. (2001). Ways of the hand. MIT Press.
56.
SwinkinJ. (2016). Performative analysis: Reimagining music theory for performance. University of Rochester Press. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctvc16ncq
57.
TürkD. G. (1789/1982). School of clavier playing, or, Instructions in playing the clavier for teachers & students (HagghR. H., Trans., Ed.). University of Nebraska Press.
VolpeG.D’AusilioA.BadinoL.CamurriA.FadigaL. (2016). Measuring social interaction in music ensembles. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London Series B, Biological Sciences, 371(1693), 20150377. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2015.0377
60.
WilliamonA.ValentineE.ValentineJ. (2002). Shifting the focus of attention between levels of musical structure. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 14(4), 493–520. https://doi.org/10.1080/09541440143000221
61.
WuC. C.HammJ. P.LimV. K.KirkI. J. (2016). Mu rhythm suppression demonstrates action representation in pianists during passive listening of piano melodies. Experimental Brain Research, 234(8), 2133–2139. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00221-016-4615-7
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
