Choral conductor perceptions of ensemble success and failure: an application of dimensional attribution theory
OA Version
Citation
Abstract
Attribution theory literature provides various ways to discuss the relationships between success or failure and the reasons perceived to be responsible for an outcome. This study is based on Weiner’s (1986) attribution theory of achievement motivation and explores the attributions of choral ensemble performances made by choral directors who work in academic settings. The aims of this research were to determine whether participants’ own successful performances are attributed differently from those they consider unsuccessful and to determine the relationships between attribution responses and personal or work-related differences. An online survey was distributed to collect choral directors’ responses. Participants were asked about their degree backgrounds, the number of years at their current institutions, how many choral ensemble classes they conducted, the size of their institutions’ choral programs, the grade levels of students with whom they worked, whether their institutions were public or private, and demographic self-identifications. The second part of the questionnaire prompted participants to recall their most and least successful choral performances in recent history, then to rate their beliefs regarding 12 statements along a 9-point scale based on McAuley et al.’s (1992) Revised Causal Dimension Scale (CDSII). The statements corresponded to four subscales: locus, internal controllability, external controllability, and stability of the cause they believed most responsible for each prompt. A sample of N = 167 choral directors completed the questionnaire. The sample included choral directors in elementary, secondary, post-secondary, and multiple settings. Reliability testing was particularly poor on one stability test item, which was removed from subsequent analyses. Testing consisted of both parametric and non-parametric tests when applicable. Results from paired Wilcoxon and t-tests both revealed that participants significantly rated attributions of successful and unsuccessful performances differently on three subscales: locus, internal control, and stability. Among the personal and vocational questions, Pearson’s correlation revealed that years at institution negatively correlated with internal control with both success (R = -.220) and failure (R = -.227). The size of choral program was also related to internal control with success according to Spearman’s rho (ρ = -.155). External control with success was also related to level of teaching via Welch’s one-way ANOVA (F = 3.678) and related to public versus private school via independent samples t-test (t = -2.513). Finally, stability with failure significantly varied according to both gender (t = 1.982) and race (t = 02.474). Linear regression was initially used to test which variables could predict each subscale score, but no model produced sufficient R2 values. After converting subscale totals to Z-statistics and reorganizing them into ordinal quartiles, ordinal logistic regression (OLR) produced three modest but statistically significant models for locus with success, external control with success, andexternal control with failure. Alternatively, generalized linear mixed-effect model (GLMM) regression indicate at least one variable as predictive of each dimension for both success and failure. Private versus public institution, level of student taught, size of choral program, and number of ensembles appeared to predict more than one subscale. Limitations and concerns with the instrument and data are subsequently addressed. Discussion includes implications for how choral ensemble leaders might more intentionally reconsider the possible reasons for their own performance disappointments and how they convey those reasons to others. Results may additionally help those who serve in mentorship or adjudication capacities. Directions for future research are also offered.
Description
2025