An investigation of studio music teachers’ strategies to manage music performance anxiety

Abstract

Musicians use a range of strategies to cope with music performance anxiety (MPA), but there is little research that investigates the coping strategies that are fostered by studio teachers (one-to-one instrumental/vocal teachers). Through an examination of 52 questionnaire responses of studio teachers, the most common strategies used to support students with MPA were investigated, as well as their self-perceived effectiveness. Two prominent strategies were identified: simulated performance and accepting mistakes, both regarded by studio teachers as fostering a positive learning environment and supporting MPA management. The teachers reported similar preferences for MPA management strategies among their students. This research contributes insights into the studio teachers’ role in addressing performance anxiety among musicians, highlighting helpful strategies and potential challenges that might be encountered when managing MPA in the teaching studio.

Introduction

Music performance anxiety (MPA) is a prevalent challenge encountered by many musicians, requiring effective management to enable optimal performance. MPA can arise through many factors including “underlying biological and/or psychological vulnerabilities and/or specific anxiety-conditioning experiences” (Kenny, 2009, p. 433). While Kenny’s (2009) definition of MPA is widely used, it focuses on MPA as a diagnosable, clinical condition. Herman and Clark (2023) argue that not all performance-related stress such as MPA warrants clinical framing and suggests that music educators should focus on the physical and psychological demands of performance, and train students in how to deal with these responses. Because of the prevalence of MPA (Fernholz et al., 2019; Fishbein et al., 1988; Kenny, 2011), there has been ongoing interest in MPA management strategies and how these are used by the musicians employing them. Common strategies include beta-blockers (Kenny et al., 2014; Kuwabara et al., 2024), breathing techniques (Burin et al., 2019; Kenny et al., 2014; Studer et al., 2011; Su et al., 2010; Zakaria et al., 2013), distraction (Biasutti & Concina, 2014; Steptoe & Fidler, 1987), Acceptance and Commitment Therapy (ACT) and mindfulness (Mahony et al., 2022; Paul et al., 2024; Shaw et al., 2020), mental rehearsal (Gregg et al., 2008; Williamon, 2004; Yoshie et al., 2009), positive thinking (Fehm & Schmidt, 2006; Kaleńska-Rodzaj, 2023), practice strategies (Burin et al., 2019; Fehm & Schmidt, 2006; Kenny et al., 2014), progressive muscle relaxation (Kim, 2008), and simulated performance (Bissonnette et al., 2015; Burin et al., 2019; Candia et al., 2023; Kenny et al., 2014).

Musicians can seek various forms of support to help manage their MPA including intervention programmes at some pre-tertiary and tertiary institutions (Evans et al., 2024), counsellors and psychologists (Matei & Ginsborg, 2024), and social support from peers, music educators, and accompanists (Huang & Yu, 2022). However, it seems likely that the responsibility for dealing with MPA is often left to the performer. This could be due to a reluctance to discuss MPA, driven by the perceived stigma associated with it and musicians’ embarrassment about acknowledging that they experience it (Pecen et al., 2018; Sieger, 2017). Given the important role that studio teachers have on the growth and development of musicians’ education and careers (Gaunt et al., 2012; Kaspersen & Götestam, 2002), it is worth investigating whether—and how—studio music teachers support their students with performance-related issues such as MPA, to build on the growing body of associated research explored below.

Research has shown that musicians can experience MPA across varying points of their education and career, including as children (Boucher & Ryan, 2011; Wang, 2001), adolescents (Dempsey & Comeau, 2019; Fernholz et al., 2019; Osborne & Kenny, 2008), tertiary-level music students (Biasutti & Concina, 2014; Papageorgi et al., 2013; Williamon & Thompson, 2006), and professional musicians (Kenny et al., 2014; Papageorgi, 2022; Yoshie et al., 2011). Most musicians begin their music education before the age of 12 (Nagel, 2004), and many formative experiences, such as learning to deal with MPA, can occur doing this period under the influence of the studio teacher (Patston, 2014; Osborne, 2016; Patston & Osborne, 2016). The need for support in MPA management at an early stage, and throughout a musician’s education, is therefore important to their development as a musician, and the studio teacher might be well placed to support their students during this time.

Through a PRISMA-based systematic review, Mazzarolo et al. (2023) identified the strategies used by music educators to help manage their students’ performance anxiety and investigated whether music educators have a role in managing MPA in their students. Among the six articles reported, the researchers concluded that studio and classroom teachers employ multiple strategies in their lessons to support students with MPA, with the most common being simulated performance, a positive outlook, preparation, and controlled breathing (Huang & Yu, 2022; MacAfee & Comeau, 2022; Moura & Serra, 2021; Ryan et al., 2021; Sieger, 2017; Gill et al., 2024).

While the research-driven understanding of strategies taught by music educators is evolving, another critical question is the effectiveness of these various strategies. The isolated setting of the teaching studio often means that teachers are left to their own methods of teaching, perhaps based on their previous experiences and how they were taught by their teachers (Bauer & Berg, 2001). Teachers might therefore benefit from inquiries into the studio setting, prompting them to reflect on their own approaches (Burwell et al., 2019), particularly in the space of MPA management. MacAfee and Comeau (2022) have begun to investigate helpful MPA strategies used in the teaching studio by interviewing five piano teachers, asking them to describe coping strategies that they had found particularly successful in helping ease performance anxiety in young musicians. All five of the teachers described the following strategies as effective at managing MPA: preparation, open communication, realistic expectations, and exposure to performance (i.e., simulated performance). This study did not test the efficacy of the strategies reported, nor establish an agreed definition of effectiveness, but its findings nevertheless suggest lines for further investigation.

In their review, Mazzarolo et al. (2023) identified some evidence for the perceived effectiveness of common MPA strategies. One of these strategies was simulated performance, identified in five of the six studies. This strategy provides exposure to realistic performance contexts and anxiety-inducing conditions. All five of the piano teachers in the study by MacAfee and Comeau (2022) described simulated performance as an effective strategy that can help increase student comfort on stage and create a less threatening environment for performance. Similarly, there is evidence that students regard teachers’ use of simulated performance as effective, shown through reported comments such as “I feel it was very helpful” (Huang & Yu, 2022, p. 127), “it helped me to understand the real exam situation and feel like I was really in the actual exam” (p. 127), and “it was very important for me to have experts present and hearing feedback” (p. 128). Other beneficial aspects of simulated performance have been identified, such as producing similar physical reactions that might occur during an actual performance. For example, a teacher in the study by Sieger (2017) would encourage their students to jog around the block or run up and down a set of stairs and then play their instrument to replicate performing with an increased heart rate. Norton (2016) found that studio teachers engaged with simulated performance activities with their students by taking them to the performance venue to visualise performance routines such as walking on stage, introducing a piece, bowing, and walking off, and to discuss what to expect when performing. These examples provide support for the benefits of utilising simulated performance to cope with MPA, and some insights into the potential efficacy of this strategy when implemented by teachers.

Preparation is another strategy that can mitigate MPA by enhancing confidence and task mastery. Preparation might also involve specific task-oriented strategies such as technical drills, mastering specific phrases, practising hands separately, slow practice, playing with accompaniment, and repetition (Bugos & Lee, 2015). While these task-oriented strategies are basic forms of ordinary practice for a musician, all five of the piano teachers in the study by MacAfee and Comeau (2022) also described preparation as an effective MPA coping strategy. Similarly, Gill et al. (2024) found that teachers observed that preparation and practice habits can help students to build confidence and, thus, cope with MPA, with one teacher stating “if you know it well, you don’t usually experience too much in the way of nerves” (p. 12). However, while preparation might be paramount to building students’ confidence and task mastery, it might not obviate the feelings of performance anxiety that musicians are faced with when performing, despite their level of preparation (MacAfee & Comeau, 2022; Salmon, 1990). As MPA can occur regardless of level of experience and may also be sensitised by anxiety-conditioning experiences in one’s performance history, it is unlikely that preparation alone would be wholly effective.

Moreover, even with enhanced preparation, musicians might still experience MPA stemming from apprehensions about the negative impact of excessive physical arousal prior to or during the performance (Osborne & Kirsner, 2022). One way to control these feelings of MPA is through positive self-talk and reframing. For example, some musicians can view anxiety as beneficial by reframing it as performance energy or excitement, rather than fear or anxiety (Brooks, 2014). In the review by Mazzarolo et al. (2023), displaying a positive outlook was found to be a prominent approach used by teachers to combat MPA in their students. This might include reacting positively to mistakes and normalising errors as beneficial and as an opportunity for learning (Moura & Serra, 2021; Sieger, 2017). In addition, studio teachers have reported helping their students to develop a constructive attitude by encouraging them to think positively about their performances and helping them to adopt realistic attitudes towards success and failure (Norton, 2016).

While a problem-focused strategy like preparation would indeed be imperative to master performances, emotion-oriented strategies such as embracing a positive outlook could prove more effective in managing MPA in that they focus on the regulation of distress rather than the source of it (Folkman & Lazarus, 1980). Emotion-regulation strategies such as positive thinking (Kaleńska-Rodzaj, 2023) and cognitive reinterpretation, which involves reframing negative thoughts into positive thoughts (Osborne et al., 2014), have been found to be effective at managing MPA. Goal-setting is another important emotion-oriented strategy, with research showing that mastery goals can be more helpful for musicians, allowing them to focus on the aesthetic and enjoyable aspects of their own performances, viewing them as a learning experience, rather than performance goals which focus on proving ability and achievement (Stoeber et al., 2008), and can lead to heightened MPA (Lacaille et al., 2005).

Another popular strategy used by musicians to combat their MPA is breathing regulation (Steptoe & Fidler, 1987; Su et al., 2010). Breathing techniques have been regarded as effective because they can create a calm and relaxed state to enable concentration for potentially anxiety-provoking tasks (Su et al., 2010). Breathing has also been found to be a common strategy used among music educators with their students (MacAfee & Comeau, 2020; Moura & Serra, 2021; Sieger, 2017). From students’ perspective, breathing techniques such as to breathe deeply have also been reported as common teaching advice to deal with nervousness (Huang & Yu, 2022; Norton, 2016; Ryan et al., 2021). There is room to explore how these breathing techniques are executed within the teaching setting, including what types of breathing techniques are conducted and how effective they are at creating relaxed states for the student.

As the well-being of musicians is becoming an increasing concern (Alessandri et al., 2020), so too is the need for studio teachers to confidently manage issues like MPA with their students (Williamon & Thompson, 2006). While the aforementioned research offers insights into MPA management in the teaching studio, there is room to build on these findings. This study recognises the need for studio teachers to reflect on their practices in MPA management and therefore assesses (1) the types of MPA management strategies that are used by studio teachers with their students and (2) studio teachers’ perceptions on the effectiveness of these strategies. By investigating these objectives, this study aims to yield findings that can potentially provide a range of MPA strategy options to studio teachers and inform MPA educational practices.

Method

Participants

Fifty-two studio music teachers (one-to-one instrumental/vocal teachers) participated in this study, which involved the completion of an online questionnaire. First, a pilot study was conducted with two participants to test the clarity, functionality, and approximate completion time of the questionnaire. Small refinements were made to the questionnaire based on the pilot. Once the finalised version of the questionnaire was complete, Author IM contacted specific social media Facebook pages such as the Instrumental and Vocal Music Teaching Commission and Australian Society for Music Education, as these pages are frequently used by the target sample of studio teachers. In addition to this, Author IM contacted music teaching associations, such as the Australian Music Examinations Board and Australian and New Zealand Cultural Arts—two leading providers of syllabi and examinations for music students that most studio teachers in Australia follow—and the University of New South Wales (Sydney) Bachelor of Music programme, to reach early career teachers. Administrators from these organisations were requested to contact prospective participants, and participants were then contacted by them via email or through Facebook posts. The participants were told that the researchers were conducting a project about if and how music educators support their students with performance anxiety, and invited them to participate in a questionnaire. The questionnaire was open to all types of music educators in addition to those teaching in music studio environments, as they might have insights to share about teaching MPA management. However, only a small number of non-studio teaching groups completed the survey (three conductors, three tertiary music instructors, seven ensemble tutors, and 10 classroom music teachers). We decided to omit these responses from the current study and focus only on studio teachers, consistent with the aim of this study. The demographic and teaching backgrounds of the studio teachers who participated in this study are presented in Table 1.

Table 1.

Demographic and Teaching Background of Studio Teachers.

Variable	Studio music teachers (N = 52)
Age	Range = 19–73 years M = 39.26SD = 15.11
Years of teaching	Range = 0.5–50 years M = 16.20SD = 12.36
Sex	Female = 43, Male = 9
Age of students	11 years old or younger n = 48 M = 18.02 SD = 24.35 12–17 years old n = 50 M = 16.45 SD = 18.47 18–24 years old n = 19 M = 3.47 SD = 3.44 25+ years n = 26 M = 3.31 SD = 4.00
Instrument predominantly taught	Piano = 25 Strings = 8 Flute = 7 Vocals = 4 Guitar = 4 Drums = 1 Trumpet = 1 Clarinet = 2
Genre predominantly taught	Classical = 35 Pop = 6 Multiple styles = 5 Musical theatre = 4 Jazz = 1 Rock = 1

As shown in Table 1, the majority of participants (83%) were female, and so the sample contains a sex bias. This does reflect a general sex bias in Australian studio teaching, which is around two thirds female (Australian Bureau of Statistics, 2021), though the proportion of female participants in the current sample is notably higher. We decided to retain all participants’ responses. The table also shows that, proportionally, many of the studio teachers taught classical piano (48%, n = 25). The predominance of piano teachers among the respondents of this questionnaire might suggest that these teachers were particularly interested in sharing their experience of MPA, were seeking additional guidance in addressing the potentially high levels of MPA experienced by their piano students (Papageorgi et al., 2013; Sokoli et al., 2022), or that there are more piano teachers at the music organisations that were included in the recruitment for the study.

Materials and procedure

This study was approved by the Human Research Ethics Advisory of the University of New South Wales (HC220436). Data were collected anonymously through Qualtrics questionnaire software (www.qualtrics.com). Prior to completing the survey, participants were directed to a Participant Information Sheet, which included information on the purpose of the study. Written informed consent was obtained from the respondents before participating in this study.

Within the questionnaire, demographic details were obtained including sex, age, and years of teaching experience. Teaching background questions were also asked, including the instrument, genre of music, and age groups of students taught. Participants were provided with the following lay definition of MPA to ensure clarity: “Music Performance Anxiety is a fear of public performance, also known as stage fright or nervousness, that has a negative effect on the performance. It will be referred to as ‘MPA’ for the remainder of the survey.” It is worth noting that this definition does not refer to formal diagnoses of MPA as Kenny’s (2009) definition does, or positive conceptualisations of MPA as included in Papageorgi’s (2024) definition. This lay definition was created to be easily understood by participants who may not be familiar with clinical terminology or multifaceted conceptualisations of MPA. However, it does not fully capture the complexity of MPA as understood in research literature (e.g., Kenny, 2009; Papageorgi, 2024). The potential implications of using this simplified definition will be discussed in the limitations section of this article.

Participants were then asked about their perspectives on MPA, including approaches to MPA management, challenges they had encountered in MPA management, and their beliefs about who is responsible for MPA management. Then, participants were asked about their background in music education and training. It took the participants an average of 48 minutes to complete the questionnaire (Supplemental Appendix A). Out of 55 teachers who began the survey, 52 completed it in full (94.5% completion rate), with consistent response quality throughout. This study only reports on the fully completed responses and focuses on Items 16 and 18 of the questionnaire, which directly relate to the research questions of this article.

In Item 16, designed to gather data on the most common MPA strategies, participants were asked to select the strategies they use with their students from a pre-determined list. Common coping strategies that have been reported in MPA literature were on the list, including accepting mistakes, breathing techniques, mental rehearsal, mindfulness, relaxation skills, and simulated performance. Participants were also asked to rate the self-perceived effectiveness of these strategies on a 5-point Likert-type scale ranging from not at all effective (0) to extremely effective (4).

Participants also had the opportunity to identify additional strategies that they use in the form of a free-text response, and to indicate the effectiveness of these strategies using a 5-point Likert-type scale as above. Author IM created a list of strategies based on consultation and agreement with all authors. Subsequently, seven additional strategies were identified and are reported in Table 2. Finally, in Item 18, an open-ended question was used to ask participants if there was a strategy that was most preferred by their students and to explain why.

Table 2.

Classification for Additional Strategies.

Strategy	Description
Acceptance	Accepting nerves as a normal element of performance.
MPA discussions	Discussion about causes, symptoms, and strategies of MPA.
Psychological techniques	Strategies to enhance mental aspects of performance.
Practice techniques	Strategies to enhance technical elements of performance.
Preparation	Setting up consistent practice routines in lead up for performance, as distinct from specific practice techniques.
Pre-performance routine	Cognitive-behavioural routines or rituals before a performance.
Reflection	Providing self-feedback through activities such as journaling, recording.

Results

Common MPA strategies: Frequency count

Figure 1 summarises the frequency of strategies reported. An extra column named “additional strategies” was included to represent the strategies that participants provided in their free-text responses (Table 2). These strategies included preparation (7 counts), MPA discussions (6), acceptance (2), psychological techniques (2), physical activity (1), pre-performance routines (1), and reflection (1). However, due to their low frequency, totalling only 20 counts, these additional strategies will not be considered in the data analysis that follows; only the six pre-determined strategies will be analysed. Examining these strategies, accepting mistakes (41 counts) and simulated performance (39) were the most common strategies, while the least common strategies were breathing techniques (30) and mindfulness (27).

Figure 1.

Frequency Count of Strategies Selected.

Effectiveness of strategies

For each of the strategies selected, participants were asked to rate their perceived effectiveness. An ANOVA was conducted to identify whether there was a statistically significant difference between the mean effectiveness scores (dependent variable) of the MPA strategies (independent variable, consisting of six levels) used by the teachers in this study. Overall, there was a significant difference in the ratings of MPA strategy effectiveness, F(5, 150) = 10.371, p < .001. Figure 2 shows the mean values and illustrates the follow up pairwise comparisons.

Figure 2.

Bar Chart Showing Mean of Effectiveness by Strategy ± 1SE and Post-Hoc Pairwise Comparison Results.

Accepting mistakes had the highest mean score for effectiveness strategy. Post hoc paired sample t-tests show that simulated performance was considered more effective when compared with relaxation skills (t[39] = 4.207, p < .001), mental rehearsal (t[41] = 3.571, p = .014), and mindfulness (t[33] = 3.361, p = .028). Statistically significant differences were also found between the mean effectiveness scores of accepting mistakes and relaxation skills (t[41] = 7.131, p < .001), mental rehearsal (t[42] = 4.452, p < .001), mindfulness (t[34] = 6.844, p < .001), and breathing techniques (t[39] = 4.713, p < .001). To control for inflated Type I error, the significance values have been adjusted using Bonferroni correction.

Participants were asked, “of the strategies that you have used, is there one strategy that is most preferred by students? Please explain why.” There were 29 responses in total, shown in Figure 3. The most preferred strategies were simulated performance (10 counts) and accepting mistakes (7). Some teachers also mentioned MPA discussions (4), breathing (3), mental rehearsal (2), positive outlook (1), repertoire (1), and Alexander Technique (1) as the preferred strategies of their students.

Figure 3.

Frequency Count of Teachers’ Perceptions of Students’ Preferred MPA Strategies.

Simulated performance

Of the studio teachers who responded to the question about what strategies they think their students prefer, 34% (n = 10) described simulated performance as a preferred MPA strategy. In open-ended responses, teachers suggested that exposure to performance conditions helped to develop confidence and create a safe performance environment for their students. Examples of simulated performance opportunities included encouraging students to perform in front of peers/family, performing their programme in an informal setting on stage, and/or recording themselves. One teacher stated that this strategy “seems to build confidence” (Respondent 19) and another reported that it makes the actual performance experience “not so daunting” (Respondent 9).

One teacher highlighted that the experience of simulated performance facilitates conversations about MPA:

[Simulated performance] helps open up the discussion surrounding MPA and what sensations they experienced. This way we can discuss how MPA is normal and not a bad thing, and then students are able to bring up the topic with me more easily when they feel like it is relevant. (Respondent 32)

Another teacher observed that engaging in simulated performance helps students handle mistakes effectively: “creating and recovering from mistakes [. . .] they find this liberating, that a mistake or slip doesn’t invalidate a performance” (Respondent 45).

Accepting mistakes

Among the responses reporting student preferences, 24% (n = 7) of studio teachers indicated that their students preferred the strategy of accepting mistakes as an effective way to deal with MPA. All of these teachers suggested that mistakes are a natural part of the learning process and are common among musicians, with one teacher reinforcing the idea that “mistakes can happen to anybody” (Respondent 21).

Some teachers also emphasised the importance of embracing mistakes as a way to avoid setting unreasonably high standards of perfection:

By encouraging students to accept that mistakes will happen, the pressure to produce a perfect performance is removed. Rather than focussing on correct notes during performance, I encourage my students to find flow and enjoyment. (Respondent 20)

Accepting mistakes and understanding that they are common seems to help my students most with coping in their exams, and not get stressed over wanting to give a flawless performance. (Respondent 1)

MPA discussions

Four of the studio teachers (14%) described MPA discussions as a strategy preferred by students. These might include discussions about what physical symptoms to expect leading up to or during a performance. For example, one teacher stated:

Younger students (and those with little to no music performance experience) tend to benefit from understanding physical symptoms of MPA and how they may be managed before and during the performance. (Respondent 4)

Other studio teachers mentioned the importance of discussing performance concerns and creating an environment in which students can feel heard and learn from shared experiences between themselves and their teacher. One teacher mentioned that “open communication, feeling heard, and not having their concerns dismissed” (Respondent 24) was received well by their students. Another teacher reported that “I share my own experiences and have them try some of the ideas of how I managed it” (Respondent 30); perhaps more fundamentally, the important task was “naming it, finding out what aspect of the playing concerns them and [addressing] it” (Respondent 30).

Discussion

A key finding in the present study is that simulated performance and accepting mistakes were the most common strategies used by studio teachers to manage their students’ MPA. These strategies were not only the most used but were also regarded by the teachers as the most effective when compared with other strategies such as relaxation, breathing, mindfulness, and mental rehearsal. The teachers also reported that, based on their observations, simulated performance and accepting mistakes were the strategies most preferred by their students. MPA discussions were also reported as a strategy that they perceived their students preferred, though the frequency with which this strategy was mentioned was not as pronounced as simulated performance and accepting mistakes.

According to the studio teachers in this study, students prefer the strategy of simulated performance because it helps them feel more comfortable on stage and builds confidence, which is similar to the views of the piano teachers interviewed by MacAfee and Comeau (2022). The efficacy of this strategy has been demonstrated by Candia et al. (2023), who found that repeated stage exposure significantly reduced the heart rate of performers and led to less subjective MPA and more calmness. Simulated performance can trigger physical reactions akin to those in actual performances (Huang & Yu, 2022; Sieger, 2017; Osborne et al., 2022), and the current study shows that this can also facilitate discussions about MPA between studio teachers and students. These findings suggest that simulated performance opportunities such as encouraging students to perform in front of peers/family, performing their programme in an informal setting on stage, and/or recording themselves, could provide significant benefits for students’ actual performance experience. The benefits of simulated performance are also recognised in conservatoire settings, such as at the Royal College of Music in London, England, which has established a “Performance Simulator” for musicians to practice the act of performance (Royal College of Music, 2025; Williamon et al., 2014).

Openly discussing MPA was reported by four studio teachers as their students’ most preferred strategy relating to MPA management. The content of these discussions generally included an explanation of the physical symptoms of MPA and how they might be managed before/during a performance, and sharing experiences of MPA between teacher and student. Sharing personal experiences was one suggestion reported by MacAfee and Comeau (2022) as a way to help create a safe environment and normalise MPA. Similarly, sharing anxious feelings can also be regarded as a form of emotional support to help manage MPA (Huang & Yu, 2022). Presumably, sharing helps to normalise anxious feelings: thus, Norton (2016) found that studio teachers engaged in MPA discussions with their students that centred around “addressing pupils’ concerns about failure, making mistakes, and the reactions of others” and “reassuring their pupils that it is normal to feel nervous before a performance” (p. 131). However, for some musicians, MPA might be considered a sensitive topic and an issue that they would prefer not to speak about or seek help for (Sieger, 2017; Wesner et al., 1990). In the current study, this can be linked to low reported frequencies of MPA discussions among the strategies used by teachers and the reported preferences of their students. Sieger (2017) found that some teachers prefer to avoid MPA discussions with their younger students, on the grounds that this might minimise its chances of occurrence. However, other studies have shown that young musicians do experience MPA regardless of whether it is discussed with them (Gill et al., 2022). Perhaps this apparent contradiction depends on whether MPA discussions are managed effectively: if studio teachers frame physiological arousal as a normal and potentially beneficial response to preparing for performances, this might reduce stigma around these experiences and make discussions about performance-related feelings more comfortable and productive for students.

Relaxation skills, mental rehearsal, and mindfulness were regarded as less effective than simulated performance. While studio teachers did not provide reasons against the use of these strategies, it seems likely that a significant level of training or support is required to implement these types of cognitive strategies (Blair & van der Sluis, 2022; Shaw et al., 2020). Perhaps teachers believe that these strategies are better suited to trained psychologists and are beyond the scope of their teaching. Yet, some initial research suggests that basic training for professionals who are not psychotherapists may equip them to provide effective cognitive interventions. For example, Mahony et al. (2022) found that a singing teacher with just 8 hours of training in Acceptance and Commitment Coaching (ACC) was able to provide significant benefits for students experiencing MPA, including “improvements in their ability to mindfully accept physiological MPA symptoms, defuse from MPA-related cognitive symptoms, and perform in a more psychologically flexible manner” (p. 16). Further inquiry into the use of other psychological strategies such as relaxation skills, mental rehearsal, and mindfulness in the context of studio teaching is necessary to explore this in more detail.

Accepting mistakes had the highest effectiveness rating and was also a common strategy used by studio teachers to manage MPA with their students. Free-text responses showed that teachers felt it was important to normalise errors and highlight that they are common among musicians. Huang and Yu (2022) also found that music teachers encouraged their students to create a rescue plan for when, or if, mistakes occur in the actual performance. Moreover, embracing mistakes as learning opportunities has been suggested to contribute to a nurturing and non-judgmental environment within the studio teaching setting (Blackwell, 2022).

However, accepting mistakes may be difficult to exercise due to the potential tension between the pursuit of musical proficiency and the need to alleviate MPA by embracing mistakes. This was exemplified by one studio teacher in the current study who touched on the concept of perfectionism. Though this remark was made by only one teacher, it does highlight a relatively complex area that might play a role in MPA management. Respondent 20 mentioned that during lessons, they would encourage their students to find flow and enjoyment, rather than focusing on “hitting the correct notes,” mentioning that “the pressure to produce a perfect performance is removed.” In this instance, striving for perfection may be perceived as problematic and to be avoided within studio lessons, rather than encouraged. However, striving for perfectionism and high standards is often associated with positive characteristics and outcomes (Frost et al., 1993; McNeil et al., 2022). Musicians are expected to exhibit a very high level of proficiency and mastery in their performances (Bennett & Stanberg, 2008; Evans & Bonneville-Roussy, 2016; Gaunt et al., 2012), and presumably studio teachers try to help their students achieve this.

In the context of music performance, mistakes remain undesirable. Yet, in the current study, accepting mistakes was regarded as a way to help students cope with MPA, perhaps suggesting that studio teachers understand that perfectionism can contribute to MPA (Butković et al., 2022; Patston & Osborne, 2016). The maladaptive effects of perfectionism which lead to heightened MPA are related to “concern over mistakes and doubts about actions, socially prescribed perfectionism, feelings of discrepancy between expectations and results, and negative reactions to imperfections” (Stoeber & Eismann, 2007, pp. 2183–2184). These might override the potential benefits of perfectionism, such as increased motivation, effort and achievement (Stoeber & Otto, 2006; Stoeber & Rambow, 2007), and instead contribute to MPA. Similarly, Patston (2014) and Patston and Osborne (2016) warned that music educators’ approach to perfectionism can be damaging to students, with concern over mistakes and unhelpful thinking patterns leading to the development of MPA. Because this is a nuanced area and it is not entirely clear what teachers in the current study understood by the concept of “accepting mistakes,” further exploration is needed to determine the extent to which concern over perfectionism contributes to MPA management within the studio teaching context.

Limitations

There are certain methodological limitations that must be considered when interpreting the findings reported in this study. One limitation lies in the definition of MPA provided to participants. The definition described MPA as “a fear of public performance [. . .] that has a negative effect on the performance.” This definition, while intended to be accessible to participants, simplified the complex nature of MPA in ways that may have influenced the data collection and interpretation. The use of the term “fear” and the assumption of negative performance effects might have influenced how teachers interpreted and reported their MPA management strategies. For instance, teachers might have focused more on strategies aimed at addressing severe, fear-based experiences, or strategies specifically designed to counteract negative performance effects. This could have led to an over-reporting of strategies targeting extreme MPA manifestations and an under-reporting of strategies addressing milder forms of performance anxiety or those aimed at positively channelling performance arousal. Furthermore, the emphasis on negative effects might have biased teachers’ perceptions of strategy effectiveness towards those that noticeably reduce fear or improve performance, potentially overlooking strategies that help students manage or cope with MPA in more subtle ways. Future research should consider establishing definitions that more closely align with current academic consensus while still maintaining clarity for non-expert participants.

In addition, the study presented a list of strategies for the participants to select from, potentially limiting their options and not fully encompassing the breadth of potential strategies. To address this, the researchers encouraged participants to provide alternative strategies if applicable, though low response counts were received for this question. Moreover, no definition of accepting mistakes was outlined to the participants, and this may have led to mixed interpretations of this strategy. The participants’ remarks were therefore limited by the context of the questionnaire; they may have provided more nuanced insights if they had been asked about the relationship between accepting mistakes and the need to cultivate reliable performance skills.

Of course, questionnaire studies are based on self-report, and the participants may have provided answers that they believed would be expected or socially favourable in the context of studio music teaching. We also note that teachers’ reports of their students’ preferred MPA strategy, while a useful indicator of teachers’ perceptions, cannot be treated as direct data about student views. Further research should investigate students’ perspectives on MPA management, and comparison with how teachers report student views could prove fruitful. Teacher awareness of the incidence of actual or potential diagnosed MPA is another matter that could better inform future research.

Finally, the number of participants in this study (n = 52) is relatively small. Furthermore, there are geographical limitations of this research since it is limited to studio teachers in Australia. Replication with larger sample sizes and different countries is recommended, as the varying education systems, conventions, and qualifications may capture a greater diversity of studio teacher perspectives about MPA management strategies and their effectiveness.

Conclusion

The purpose of this article was to identify common strategies used by studio teachers in their lessons to support their students with MPA and to examine the self-perceived effectiveness of these strategies. The main finding was that studio teachers reported a frequent use of simulated performance and accepting mistakes, and regarded these as effective strategies for managing MPA. These strategies can contribute to fostering a positive and supportive learning environment. Future research could examine how strategies such as accepting mistakes and simulated performance are practically applied in lessons, to further explore the effectiveness of these strategies. This study has generated insights from studio teachers and their strategies for addressing MPA in their students and underscores the need for ongoing research within the field to better understand how educators can further support their students with MPA.

Supplemental Material

sj-pdf-1-rsm-10.1177_1321103X251410523 – Supplemental material for An investigation of studio music teachers’ strategies to manage music performance anxiety

Supplemental material, sj-pdf-1-rsm-10.1177_1321103X251410523 for An investigation of studio music teachers’ strategies to manage music performance anxiety by Isabella Mazzarolo, Kim Burwell, Margaret Osborne and Emery Schubert in Research Studies in Music Education