1V1ESI_} RETURNING MATERIALS: P1ace in book drop to LIBRARIES remove this checkout from 4!:lzgneaL your record. FINES wi11 be charged if book is returned after the date stamped be10w. au2n~¢e§e .,J can; 178 A129; Mamas ‘) JAN 0 910% ASSESSMENT OF EGO FUNCTIONS IN CLASSICAL AND JAZZ MUSICIANS: A STUDY OF PERSONALITY DIFFERENCES By Steven Charles Fisch A DISSERTATION Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements fer the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Department of Counseling and Educational Psychology 1982 ABSTRACT ASSESSMENT OF EGO FUNCTIONS IN CLASSICAL AND JAZZ MUSICIANS: A STUDY OF PERSONALITY DIFFERENCES By Steven Charles Fisch This research investigation was concerned with one fundamental question: Are classical musicians different from jazz musicians with respect to personality structure? A second, though related, aspect of the inquiry sought to examine the motivational components which underlie the creative musician's particular form expression. These were based on a review of the literature pertaining to music and personality which presented numerous findings of a confusing and inconclusive nature. To seek answers for these questions, two groups of musicians, classical and jazz, were compared on twelve dependent measures of person- ality obtained through in-depth clinical interviews. Forty-fOUr subjects, twenty-two in each group, were selected on the basis of their self- reported musical preferences and randomly assigned to one of two groups for interviewing. The subjects were college students majoring in music at Michigan State University who had volunteered to participate. A screening instrument, designed and pilot tested by the author, was used to differentiate the two groups from a large population of music students. The instrument consisted of an eight item, Likert type scale and was constructed specifically fer this purpose using a forced- choice format to discriminate classical and jazz preferences. The final Steven Charles Fisch sample was obtained by selecting those respondents who scored at the extreme ends of the scale which indicated an exclusive or very strong preference for performing either jazz or classical music. Each interview group was comprised of an equal number of both jazz and classical musicians, randomly assigned and matched for instrument. Two trained interviewer/raters, one per group, conducted individual interviews with each subject and tape recorded the session. Once completed, the interviewer would review the tape and rate it as soon as possible using a thirteen-point scale. The interviews and ratings were based on the Interview Guide and Rating Manual for the Clinical Assessment of Ego Functions (Bellak, Hurvich, & Gediman, l973). These semistructured questions were designed to comprehensively assess an individual's characteristic level of functioning on twelve ego functions derived from ego psychological theory. A multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) was conducted to test for main and interaction effects. These effects included differences between jazz and classical musicians, males and females, undergraduate and graduate students, interviewers, and among the various instruments. Results indicated that no significant differences could be found between jazz and classical musicians for any of the main or interaction effects tested for on these measures. As a result of these findings, the major research hypothesis of this study which pr0posed that classi- cal musicians would differ from jazz musicians in personality structure was not supported. Steven Charles Fisch Limitations of the study and implications for future research were discussed. A theoretical model for musical motivation was presented which integrates current knowledge of music psychology. L. Bellak, M. Hurvich, & H. Gediman. E 0 functions in schizo hren- ics, neurotics, and normals. New York: John Wiley and Sons, l§7§. Used by permission. Copyright by STEVEN CHARLES FISCH l982 DEDICATION To my mother, whose untimely death robbed her of the joy of reading this iii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Anyone who has ever written a dissertation will know what I mean when I say "Is there life after the dissertation?" Actually, I'm deliriously happy at this point, for you see, a project of this magni- tude is frankly indescribable except to those who have been there. Transcending this “rite of passage" has taught me a lot about myself. During this time, I experienced feelings ranging from intense excitement to an anxiety attack lasting approximately seven months. Yet, the nonlent I saw my prose in print, a magical feeling overcame me in which pride, joy, even ecstasy all affirmed my lengthy endeavor. What I have learned from all this is that research can be fun as well as frustrating. Many special people gave generously of themselves iniorder to make this research possible, and I would like to acknowledge them now. To my doctoral dissertation committee, a collective thanks for being supportive of my ideas throughout the past year. To Dr. Richard Johnson, Chairman, thank you fer allowing me to follow my own path and discover research in a meaningful way. I appre- ciated your special blend of guidance and independence. To Dr. John Schneider, committee member, thanks for joining the committee under late circumstances. I valued your provocative thinking as well as personal interest in my study. To Dr. Dale Bartlett, committee member, thank you for your consid- erable help in making much of this research possible. I am grateful for your kind assistance in securing research subjects, interview rooms, and iv above all, providing me with stimulating ideas over our many pleasant chats. To Dr. Doug Miller, committee member, thank you for being the one guiding light in my graduate training. You served as an inspiration on many occasions and I am deeply grateful for your clinical wisdom, authentic caring, and wonderful sense of humor. You have enriched my being in innumerable ways. To Drs. Howard Teitelbaum and Judith Taylor, thank you for providing me with expert statistical consultation throughout the study. A special -nthanks to Judith far designing and writing the computer program for data analysis. Thanks to all the professors and students of the Department of Music for generously donating their time and energy in allowing me to carry out my investigation. To Jeff Teal, my dear friend and colleague, thanks for your many helpful suggestions in developing my screening instrument. To Bob Smith and Sigi Saenz, who volunteered to serve as interviewer/ raters, my warmest appreciation for your dedication and generosity. Your participation in this study was greatly valued and I am thankful for your efforts and endearing friendship. Finally, to Lisa, my wife and partner in life, thank you fOr pro- viding me with contacts in the music department, ideas to think about, and above all, your support and love in so many ways. I'm not sure you were really prepared for my response to your question, "Honey, when are you going to start working on your dissertation?" TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter I. INTRODUCTION AND REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE ......... Introduction ...................... Purpose ......................... Importance ....................... Review of the Literature ................ Musical Preferences and the Personality of the Musician ...................... The Concept of the Ego and Its Functions in Psychoanalytic Theory ................ Psychoanalytic Contributions to Understanding Musical Process ........ . ............... Summary ......................... II. METHODOLOGY ........................ Hypotheses ....................... Definition of Terms .................. Population ....................... Measures ........................ Procedure ........................ Experimental Design ................... Analysis of Data .................... III. RESULTS .......................... IV. DISCUSSION ........................ Overview ........................ Limitations ....................... Conclusions and Implications .............. APPENDIX - ’ A. Standard Cover Letter for Explanation and Information to Prospective Subjects ................. 8. Screening Instrument For Music Preferences ........ C. Subject Consent Form to Participate in Research ...... D. An Interview Guide for the Clinical Assessment of Ego Functions . . .. ..................... vi Page l 17 22 42 45 56 78 81 82 TABLE OF CONTENTS--(Continued) APPENDIX E. Assessment of Ego Functions Rating Form ......... F. Standard Letter of Results and Feedback Sent to Research Participants ..................... 6. Letter of Approval from Human Subjects Committee to Conduct the Proposed Study .............. H. Raw Scores of Subjects on the Twelve Ego Functions REFERENCES ........................... vii Page 94 99 LIST OF TABLES Table Page l. Sample Characteristics of Subjects Originally Assigned Within Interview Groups .................. 51 2. Sample Characteristics of Subjects Hithin Interview Groups Following Attrition .................... 52 3. Sample Characteristics of Subjects Hithin Classical and Jazz Groups ........................ 52 4. Reliability of Interviewer Ratings for the Twelve Ego Functions ......................... 54 5. Cell Means and Standard Deviations for the Classical and Jazz Groups on the Twelve Ego Functions .......... 57 6. Multivariate Test of Significance for Main Effect Between Classical and Jazz Groups ................. 57 7. Multivariate Tests of Significance for Main Effects for Sex, Student Status, and Interviewer .............. 53 8. Multivariate Tests of Significance for Main Effects for Instruments ......................... 59 9. Multivariate Test of Significance for Interaction Effects, Between Sex and Type of Music ............... 50 lO. Multivariate Test of Significance for Interaction Effects Between Interviewer and Type of Music ........... 50 ll. Multivariate Test of Significance for Interaction Effects Between Instrument and Type of Music ........... 60 viii LIST OF FIGURES Figure Page l. Pictorial Representation of Experimental Design ....... 55 2. A Hypothetical Model of Musical Motivation ......... 73 ix CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION AND REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE Introduction Since the earliest times of civilization, the influence of music over human feelings and emotion has been generally accepted and nurtured. Philosophers as well as romantic writers have debated at great length about the meaning of music in relation to the human Spirit (Portnoy, 1963L Not until the advent of psychoanalytic theory by Freud and his various followers did any formal attempt emerge at developing a theory of the creative process and then, only with great reluctance. It appears that theories of music grew out of a psychoanalytic theory of art in general although both shared similar concepts (Noy, l966). Nonetheless, a signi- ficant body of literature developed highlighting various aspects of the musical process including functions (Kohut, l957), its use as a language (Racher, 195l), and studies of personality--often done from either a pathographic viewpoint (Sterba & Sterba, 1954), or as reports on the analytical psychotherapy of musician-patients (Branfman, 1955; Oremland, l975). Although some of the psychoanalytic literature has explored the personality of the musician, most of these articles have elucidated the emotional life of the creative artist and not the personality structure from a broad viewpoint (Noy, 1967). More recently, investigators have become interested in this area and preliminary studies have highlighted a variety of theoretical perspectives (Hylie, 1963; Kemp, l97l; McDaniel, 1974; Mikol, l975; Davies, l978; Shaw, l979; Kemp, l981 a & b). While I 2 personality research in this domain has finally begun, it has been con- fined mostly to studies of classical musicians with little attention paid to other types; for example, jazz performers. A review of the literature shows that with the exception of a single clinical study of jazz perfor- mers done twenty years ago (Cambor, Lisowitz, & Miller, l962), little has been reported and, therefore, not much is actually known about the personality structure of the average "normal" jazz musician. Furthermore, how do jazz musicians differ from classical musicians and might those differences be responsible for engendering their preferred playing styles? The premise of this research, then, is an attempt to answer that question while at the same time illuminating the personality dynamics which underlie the creative musician's particular form expression. Purpose The purpose of this research study was to determine whether those musicians who considered themselves classically-oriented were signifi- cantly different in personality structure from those who considered themselves jazz-oriented. The musicians were selected on the basis of their self-reported musical preferences and were compared by analyzing their developmental ego functions obtained through in-depth interviews. The interviews were designed to specifically measure twelve ego functions thought to be representative of healthy adaptive functioning and consis- ted of a structured series of questions based on the scales and rating manual of Bellak, Hurvich and Gediman (1973). Besides assessing differences between the two groUps in general, specific ego functions were analyzed in order to ascertain whether a dis- tinctive personality profile could be developed for each group. This was 3 done in order to shed light on the motivational aspects of jazz and classical performance, a variable not fully explored in earlier studies. However, due to the often confusing and inconclusive findings of the relevant literature, no attempt was made to predict specific differences with regard to the dependent measures. Although the author had some hunches as to how these groups might differ, it was decided a test of the null hypothesis would seem most suitable in light of the available evidence. Overall, the goal in using a descriptive approach to personality assessment was to elicit a richer understanding of the motivational components which comprise not only the musician's personality but the creative personality in general as well. Importance The significance of this research can be viewed as threefbld. First, a fuller understanding of the creative personality and how it manifests itself through various ferms will enable personologists to refine current theories on the psychology of music. An outgrowth of this could be the development of screening instruments which could discriminate and direct talented music students into perfbrmance areas more commensurate with their interests and values. Second, by applying a personality assessment instrument emphasizing a descriptive developmental diagnosis to a normal, highly functioning population, the art of diagnosis can be more highly developed. This is in contrast to the ubiquitous, though often useless, symptom-oriented medical model currently employed. Traditionally, diagnosis has centered on pathology and degree of dysfunction rather than wellness and health. 4 This research will provide a unique opportunity to investigate a normal healthy population in relation to their adaptive potential. Hopefully, further research will lead to better instrumentation for assessing normal as well as creative individuals. Finally, the process of being interviewed may provide subjects with a better and more realistic view of themselves so that future career decisions can be made with greater satisfaction. Review of the Literature Since the psychology of music is so broad, this section will be divided into three parts. The first will examine the research on music preferences and its relation to personality as well as personality studies in general. The second part will briefly survey the concept of the ego and its functions in psychoanalytic theory in order to help clarify and support the rationale, jargon, and concepts for measurement. Finally, the third part will review the psychoanalytic contributions to understanding musical process. Musical Preferences and the Personality of the Musician It is interesting to note that in the recently published Handbook of Music Psychology, there are only two small paragraphs devoted to personality, and this having to do with the interaction of personality and musical taste of the listener (Hodges, 1980). Although many investigators have specu- lated on the relationship between personality and musical preference, it was not until the pioneering work of Hahn (1954) that anything substantive developed. He sought to develop a technique for investigating the relationship between musical preferences and personality structure. By using a 4 This research will provide a unique opportunity to investigate a normal healthy population in relation to their adaptive potential. Hopefully, further research will lead to better instrumentation for assessing normal as well as creative individuals. Finally, the process of being interviewed may provide subjects with a better and more realistic view of themselves so that future career decisions can be made with greater satisfaction. Review of the Literature Since the psychology of music is so broad, this section will be divided into three parts. The first will examine the research on music preferences and its relation to personality as well as personality studies in general. The second part will briefly survey the concept of the ego and its functions in psychoanalytic theory in order to help clarify and support the rationale, jargon, and concepts fer measurement. Finally, the third part will review the psychoanalytic contributions to understanding musical process. Musical Preferences and the Personality of the Musician It is interesting to note that in the recently published Handbook of Music Psychology, there are only two small paragraphs devoted to personality, and this having to do with the interaction of personality and musical taste of the listener (Hodges, 1980). Although many investigators have specu- lated on the relationship between personality and musical preference, it was not until the pioneering work of Hahn (1954) that anything substantive developed. He sought to develop a technique fer investigating the relationship between musical preferences and personality structure. By using a 5 combination of both psychological tests of personality and multiple measures of musical preference, he was able to show that there was a direct relationship between personality and musical preferences. He concluded that further research was warranted to explicate this relation- ship since his work only represented a technique for investigation. Payne (1967) hypothesized that people with different temperaments will prefer different types of music. She administered the Maudsley Personality Inventory, a factual questionnaire, and Hing's Test of Musical Aptitude to 151 college-age and adult subjects, all self-described as discriminating (but not professional) music listeners. She felt that people with stable, as opposed to neurotic, temperaments would prefer classical music over romantic music (since classical emphasizes form while romantic emphasizes feelings). Her results yielded moderate support fer her hypothesis although the relationship was not strong. She concluded that personality is an important basic factor in the motivation of taste. It is important to note that while a substantial body of research has accrued on preference responses to music, this has generally been from the viewpoint of the listener and not the perfbrmer. Subsequently, this research has employed one of two approaches--either personality traits are used to predict musical preferences (Butler, 1968) or musical preferences are used as predictors of personality characteristics (Cattell & Anderson, 1953). Butler (1968) measured receptivity fer electronic music using the Cattell 16 Factor Personality Test (16PF) and feund there was a signifi- cant correlation between unconventionality and radicalism and the taste fer electronic music. Cattell & Anderson (1953) attempted to develop a test of personality based on musical preferences. Their results 6 demonstrated the instrument's ability to discriminate between normal and abnormal subjects as well as among various types of abnormalities. In a comprehensive and critical review of the literature regarding responses to music, Abeles (1980) concluded that "moderate relationships exist between musical preference and certain personality factors (as well as shorter term emotional states) [and that] the specific nature of these relationships has yet to be determined and needs further exploration" (p. 121). Considering the sizeable body of research in this area, it is surprising that very little is actually known about the personality characteristics of the average performing musician. In 1962, a comprehensive study on the personality of musicians was undertaken by Cambor, Lisowitz and Miller. They interviewed thirty of the world's foremost jazz artists as they toured through Pittsburgh in order to "gain some understanding of the psychodynamic processes of the individual musician, of his interpersonal relationships, and of his integrated identity with the jazz-making culture" (p. 1). Although they were limited in terms of data collection (they had to interview the musicians during breaks in their perfbrming set), they were able to collect a sizeable body of information concerning family dynamics, early experiences with music, and quality of interpersonal relationships. Most of the musicians came from families in which the mother was overprotective and dominant while the father was passive. Typically, the family environment in childhood restricted normal self-expression (e.g., aggression through sports). Most of the subjects described having difficulty establishing intimacy with others, especially members of the opposite sex. In fact, three-fourths of the musicians felt that only, through playing their instrument were they able to feel comertable with 7 themselves and communicate their true feelings in a satisfying way. Moreover, most of those interviewed described a turbulent emotional life, beginning with a depressive adolescence that continued into adulthood, marked often by intermittent disruptions, dependence on drugs, and painful self-searching as they tried to "find themselves." In fact, the use of drugs by jazz musicians has long been held as de rigueur with many of the most accomplished having been addicted at one time or another. Hinick and Nyswander (1961) reported on the psycho- therapy of 15 successful jazz artists addicted to heroin. In the course of their therapy, a number of common elements emerged which led the authors to hypothesize possible functions of their drug use. Most of the musicians reported feeling angry and depressed during their life and felt that the expression of these feelings was difficult. Subsequently, drugs afforded them additional ego controls to master the underlying rage and violence within. Furthermore, it helped them escape their feelings of loneliness, inadequacy, and dependency--common elements of a depressive personality. Interestingly, the Cambor et a1. (1962) study also feund that the emotional crises were usually accompanied by regression and that those musicians who allowed themselves to regress fully were often considered the most creative. After analyzing their clinical findings, the authors concluded that the musicians' lives were "pervaded by a theme of dependency conflicts and depression" (p. 13), a finding which is in support of Hinick and Nyswan- der's (1961) earlier contentions as well. They attributed this to the fellowing factors: 8 l. The relentless pressure of the dominant parent--usually the mother--compelled the son to find an identity in a unique position in the community. 2. A high degree of innate musical giftedness was coupled with what seems to be an unusual sensitivity for oral-sensory modes of feeling and expression. 3. Unresolved dependency and Oedipal conflicts, with resultant frustration in peer group relationships, were followed by iso- lation and withdrawal (p. 13). In order to feel accepted and valued, the young musicians turned to jazz as a means of defiant identity whereby they could continue their symbiotic childhood, and gratify their dependency needs through a group identity and sense of belongingness. The authors further suggested that by playing jazz, the musicians could avoid many of the demands of social conformity, and prolong normal maturation thereby extending their adolescence. This notion is in accord with Margolis' (1954) contention that the psychology of jazz is really a psychology of adolescence. Margolis hypothesized that jazz, as an expression of cultural protest, embodies the ambivalent nature of the adolescent whose conflicts between id impulses and superego dictates vacillate. If this is valid, one would expect those musicians who choose jazz as a career to display a more prominent adolescent personality profile than say the classical musician whose life is more confbrming and disci- plined (Kemp, 1981a). Even with the limitations of the short-term interview method used by Cambor, et al., (e.g., incomplete and/er unconscious distortions of data) it is still the only serious attempt at personality study of the jazz musician done so far and, while it is twenty years old, it nonetheless provides many interesting hypotheses. 9 In another study utilizing famous jazz artists, Shaw (1979) investi- gated the relationships between experiential factors and percepts of professional musicians adept at jazz improvisation. Data was obtained by means of personal interviews in which demograph- ic data, concepts of improvisation, initial improvisational attempts, early experiences, recommendations and current improvisational situations were disclosed. The interviews were then analyzed and conclusions drawn based on similarities of experience or percepts. Results showed that outstanding jazz artists come from all over the United States, started music study in the public schools at an early age, usually did not complete college because they preferred the stimulation of constant perfbrmance, and grew up in an environment where improvisation and jazz music was an everyday experience. More importantly, all of the musicians interviewed indicated an intense desire to create and play music, that is, they are strongly attracted to the practice of composing while they play. Subsequently, in order to perfect their improvising art, they required the constant association of others with whom to play, experiment, and create new ideas. Since improvisation is the distinguishing feature of jazz music, requiring both spontaneous and creative elements, some effert has been spent exploring this area. McDaniel (1974) investigated the differences between jazz improvisers and non-improvisers with regard to music achievement, musical experience, and background using college freshmen and saphomores. He reasoned that differences existed between these groups due to the special and complex nature of jazz improvisation. Because the jazz player must be able to "conceive an idea, place it in a tonal perspective, translate it into actual notes for his instrument to play, all this in a ‘ 10 split second" (Baker, 1969, p. 79), he/she is more skilled than non- improvisers. He explained this further by saying that in order to improvise well, the jazz musician must develop a keen sense of hearing since the notes must be "preheard" in the mind before being played. To investigate this, two instruments were employed as data gathering devices. To measure the subject's power of auditory and visual discrim- ination, the Aliferis Music Achievement Test (AMAT) was used; to measure musical experience and background, the McDaniel Background Inventory (MBI) was used. The latter was a 125-item author-designed questionnaire developed after adequate pilot testing for reliability and validity. Both instruments were administered to 118 improvisers and 158 non-improvisers at eleven midwestern junior colleges and universities and at three southern universities, all selected because of their highly respected jazz programs. Results revealed a significant difference between the improvisers and non-improvisers in music achievement as measured by the AMAT. With regard to background variables (family membership, socio-economic status, high school activities, etc.), no differences were feund although having a background in jazz and improvisation was feund to be a good indicator of later improvisational skill. Significant differences were found, however, in musical experience with five scales fbund to be fair to good indicators of jazz potential. For example, the ability to improvise well was posi- tively correlated with: ‘ 1. having a large record collection and listening mostly to jazz 2. positive parental attitudes towards jazz 3. familiarity and involvement with jazz, especially from an early age 4. jazz instruction during high school 5. higher evaluations of performance on self-assessment measures 11 Clearly, the results of this study suggest that jazz improvisers are indeed different from non-improvisers if music achievement and experiential factors are used as criterion variables. The validity of these findings are further strengthened by the impressive sampling techniques used as well as the experimental design and analysis. If there are any shortcomings, however, they lie in the area of the measuring instrument. Items chosen for background measures in the M81 were of such a general nature that quite likely, differences were lost in the measurement process itself. - Fer example, although jazz improvisers may be more musically skilled than non-improvisers in terms of visual-auditory discrimination, this in combination with their different experiences does not explain their preferred playing styles from a motivational viewpoint. Only an assess- ment of intrapsychic functioning which takes into account motivational aspects of the creative process, conflicts, values, situational factors, and various ego functions can provide these answers. It would have been more fruitful to administer a recognized personality battery or at least correlate the data with a known instrument. With the excellent popula- tion available, it's unfbrtunate that better measures were not employed. Despite these limitations, however, this attempt constitutes a serious effert to understand the nature of jazz improvisation and is a signifi- cant contribution to that body of knowledge. A different approach was undertaken by Wylie (1963) who investigated the creative aspects of jazz musicians vis-a-vis a gestalt perspective. He attempted to differentiate between relatively creative and relatively uncreative jazz musicians through the use of two cognitive-perceptual phenomenon. He also examined the influence of musical training and 6—! 12 experience on the level of creativity and the attitudes of jazz performers toward other jazz musicians as well as nonmusicians. Thirty local (Detroit) professional jazz musicians were selected as subjects, all of them male and all but one Black. Two basic measures were employed, each with musical and nonmusical tasks. The musical figure- ground tasks were tape recorded improvised jazz solos in which the musician was required to determine the tune from which the improvisation was based. The author hypothesized that the more creative musicians would be able to better utilize these solos and thereby select the original tune--that is to say, they could cognitively articulate the figure (improvisation) from the ground (chord patterns or melody). It was also hypothesized that tension resulting from incompleteness would be reflected by greater recall of incomplete items (the Zeigarnik Effect) on both musical and nonmusical items. Lastly, it was hypothesized that neither the amount of musical training nor extent of professional experience were important in determining the creative proficiency of a jazz musician. To assess attitudes toward fellow musicians and the general public, an interview schedule was administered which contained questions related to attitude and personal background. The results, although mixed, were certainly interesting. It appears that less creative jazz musicians are not able to articulate figure-ground relationships as well as their more creative colleagues. In addition, they tend to recall more incomplete musical items indicating less ability to resist the tension of incompleteness with musical phrases. Further- more, musical training and professional experience were not related to the level of creativity of jazz music or to subject perfbrmance on figure-ground or Zeigarnik measures as predicted. Concerning the general 13 nature of the two cognitive-perceptual phenomenon which the author speculated were not necessarily specific to musical tasks, these hypotheses were not supported. Results of the attitude measures suggest that jazz musicians are concerned with meeting socially appropriate standards of conduct and that they lack the hostility and feelings of alienation so often attribu- ted to them through reviews of their music. What makes this study so interesting are the provocative findings and their implications. For example, if the level of creativity is not related to musical training or experience, what then determines the creative potential of a musician? Could it be that this attribute has more to do with early emotional experiences between infant and mother than with later life experiences? What of the commonly held perception of jazz artists being rebellious adolescents whose jargon, dress, and proclivity fer pleasure seeking preclude confbrming to societal norms? Certainly, this study raises some unanswered questions regarding the nature of creativity and the needs of jazz musicians fer audience and self acceptance. Overall, the study was well executed. The experimental design, analysis, and population appear to be appropriate fer the stated goals. Although the author discusses the implications of these findings for cognitive theory, it would have been valuable to extend this to the personality and sociological realms as well. For example, is creative ability related-to-family dynamics or cultural impoverishment? Nonetheless, it is a solid contribution to the literature and one which deserves fUrther follow up though regrettably, this has not occurred. 14 Knowledge of the classical musician has fared somewhat better although much of this work has occurred only within the last decade. (Kemp, 1971, 1979, 1981 a & b) has attempted to study the personality structure of the perfbrming musician and has reported differences between the various types of instrumentalists (Kemp, 1981a). Prior to this work, there existed a common folklore within the music profession concerning different tempera- ments within different sections of the orchestra. For example, it has been suggested that brass players are loud and insensitive while string players tend toward sensitivity and introversion. Kemp attempted to measure these claims empirically by drawing on and extending the work of earlier inves- tigators (Cooley, 1961; Kaplan, 1961; Sample & Hotchkiss, 1971; Davies, 1978). He administered the 16PF questionnaire to 630 full-time music students from 20 British colleges and universities. Subjects were assigned to one of five groups (strings, woodwind, brass, keyboard, and singing) based on their principal instrument. The 16PF raw scores were then subjected to a multivariate analysis of covariance. Results were strongly in support of earlier hypotheses. String players were feund to be significantly more aloof than other players, a key factor involved in introversion. Brass players exhibited a distinctive pattern of inhibition and insensitivity, which supported earlier research, as well as displaying a somewhat lower intelligence. Woodwind players displayed traits of shyness and self sufficiency, both also linked with introversion. Keyboard musicians and singers were significantly more extroverted, although keyboardists . were also found to be conservative and submissive, a finding Kemp found rather difficult to interpret but which may explain the temperament of accompanists. 15 Kemp concluded that introversion may be generally linked with the development of instrumental skills but that its level and degree of primary traits differ within the feur groups. He ended by saying that his research demonstrates the "existence of only a few of probably several subprofiles existing within the structure of the musical personality which was once thought to be homogeneous" (p. 36). More recently, Kemp (1981b) has attempted to identify a profile of traits for the performer by assessing personality at three distinct stages of development. He administered the High School Personality Questionnaire to 496 high school musicians, aged 13 to 17, and the 16PF questionnaire to 688 full time college music students as well as 202 professional musicians. It was hoped that a core set of traits could be identified which remained constant across development and at the same time, explore possible shifts in traits as a function of maturation. His control group consisted of 272 secondary school students, 160 non-music college students, and the unpublished 16PF norms fer the professional musicians (since recruitment of adult non-musicians was considered problematic). The results revealed that a stable group of primary factors fer the perfbrming musician exist across the whole age span. These primary factors--intelligence, sensitivity, self-sufficiency, and aloofness appear to be linked with the second-order factors of introversion, intelligence, and pathemia (a constellation of imagination, submissiveness, and sensi- tivity). Kemp suggested that these second-order factors reflect the under- lying nature of musical personality insofar as life style, cognitive structure, and work habits are concerned. That is to say, he sees the 16 musician as having the ability to withdraw into a colorful and imagina- tive inner mental life while simultaneously incorporating the intellec- tual resources necessary for the acquisition of technical skills. It was also found that a number of traits changed across development presumably indicating a maturation function. For example, while the youngest musicians displayed traits of conscientiousness and self-control (a factor of good moral upbringing), these shifted and by the time they reached maturity, traits of shyness and seriousness (desurgency) had replaced them only to be eliminated completely at the professional level. More importantly, however, is the increased prominence of anxiety. It appears that this trait is highly correlated with both exceptional musical talent and increased experience in playing. Why this is so still remains unclear but it suggests that anxiety may be an important person- ality dynamic in professional musicians, especially the more talented. Finally, the traits of subjectivity and independence seem to take on a progressive importance as musicians mature. Here again, this may suggest a more consolidated ego identity developed through years of arduous solitary practicing. Overall, Kemp's work is impressive and well executed. His sample sizes are quite large, and his research design and methodology are solid. Al-' though his research is based on a multivariate theory of personality, (i.e., statistically derived), his work truly represents a beginning attempt at understanding the differences between musicians. Unfortunately, it appears that his research, as well as that of others, suffers from a major conceptual weakness-~they lack a theoretical sub-structure upon which their hypotheses are predicated. In order to develop a personology of musicians, it is essential to build upon a theory whose postulates allow fer empirical testing. Such heurism has not been 17 the case with the evidence so far presented. Furthermore, while differ- ences in personality have been investigated, this has been through either a comparison of their principal instrument (Kemp, 1981a), or trait differences as a function of time and development (Kemp, 1981b) and not their preferred playing styles. Thus, while temperament differences have been shown to exist between instrumentalists as well as musicians at various levels of development, it is highly likely that differences also exist between musicians who prefer or identify with various kinds of music--name1y classical or jazz (Margolis, 1954; McDaniel, 1974). In order to investigate this possiblity, the psychological literature regarding music and personality will be examined, with special attention paid to the contribution of psychoanalytic theory to the meaning of the musical process. Before doing this, some of the concepts in psycho- analytic theory whiéh underlie this literature will be discussed. A brief history of the ego and its functions will be presented as back- ground for the diScussion of the psychological literature pertaining to music. The Concept of the Ego and Its Functions in Psychoanalytic Theory One of the great attributes of Freud was his quest for knowledge and scientific truth. He supported his theory of psychoanalysis only to the extent that it embraced actual clinical observation. If and when dis- crepancies occurred, the theory underwent revision in order to accommo- date these findings. Consequently, psychoanalysis as a comprehensive theory of personality has undergone many changes in the past eighty plus years since its inception. Beginning with his magnum opus, The Interpretation of Dreams (1900), 18 Freud set the fbundation fer all later theorizing by postulating that the mental apparatus which comprised the mind was really three dynamic systems. *This "topographic theory" which attempted to classify mental phenomenon in terms of their relationship to consciousness was represented by the system unconscious (ch.), the system preconscious (Pcs.), and the system conscious (Cs.). Despite the heuristic value of this classification system, clinical observation ultimately proved it to be both inadequate and insufficient due to theoretical ambiguity (Bellak, et al., 1973). Thus, Freud was to abandon this theory and replace it with a structural model of the psychic apparatus. This "structural theory" initiated a new era in psychoanalytic thinking and was defined by its functions rather than its relation to consciousness (Meissner; Mack, & Semrad, l975).. The~model hypothesized that the psychic apparatus was composed of three distinCt structures--namely id, ego, and superegoeaand all distinguishable by their different functions. The ego was conceptualized as that part of the psychic apparatus which mediates between the person and reality and therefbre functions primarily in the perception of reality and its adaptation to it (Hinsie & Campbell, 1970). That is to say, it carries out the pervasive role of self-preservation through a variety of tasks including but not limited to perception, motility, thinking, and the inhibition of primary instinctual drives through the mechanisms of defense. This coherent system of functions which must mediate between the instincts and the outside world are collectively termed "ego functionsi and comprise the feundation of ego psychology. Rapaport (1959 in Bellak, et al., 1973) summarized the major develop- ments of ego psychology in feur phases. The first phase (up to 1897) 19 emphasized the introduction of the defenses and the role attributed to external reality. The second phase (1897-1923) highlighted the role of instinctual drives while de-emphasizing the importance of external reality. During this period, there were three significant contributions which shaped ego psychological theory. The concepts of secondary process and the reality principle were introduced as well as an analysis of the process of repression. Whereas primary process thinking is regulated by the pleasure principle, secondary process is regulated by the reality principle. That is to say, the early child's thought processes are composed of free discharges of tension with delay caused by external circumstances. There is no concept of time, space, symbols or language and discharge of tension is striven fer directly. Through increased maturity and ego development, secondary process thinking occurs in which there is trial action before tension discharge. This is essential fer adaptation to reality and develops into the use of symbols, language, and abstract thinking. The critical difference here is that secondary process thought involves delay produced by internal controls. The third phase (1923-1937) conceptualized the ego as a coherent organization of mental processes built on identifications with abandoned or lost objects (loved ones). The fburth phase (1937-1959) underscored the importance of adaptation and strongly embraced the work of Hartmann and Erickson. Hartmann's influence was widespread since he first emphasized the innate roots of ego development as being independent of instinctual drives. He stressed that adaptation involved a reciprocal relationship between organism and environment and that this can be determinedonly in relation to an individual's "average expectable environment." Furthermore, he gave 20 special consideration to the notion that successful adaptation sometimes uses "pathways of regression" (fantasy, play, dreams) which may not be intrinsically adaptive but which indirectly aid its goal. Now that the ego concept has been briefly sumarized, the focus will be turned specifically to the ego functions and their role in ego psychological theory. Even though Freud defined the ego by its functions, there is no consensus among theorists as to how many actually exist. Subsequently, agreement has occurred mainly through research and historical precedent. Ego functions are theoretical constructs which are based on the observa- tions of behavior and patients' self-reports of their experiences through analysis. For purposes of this research study, the twelve ego functions outlined by Bellak, Hurvich, and Gediman (1973) will be used and described below. 1. Reality Testing--The ability to distinguish between inner and out- er stimuli including accuracy of perceptions for both internal and external events. 2. Judgment-~The ability to anticipate the likely consequences of intended behavior as well as the ability to discriminate between what is appropriate in a given social context and the extent to which it's manifested. 3. Sense of Reality of the World and of the Self--The ability to to subjectively experience oneself as a unique and separate person from both others and the general physical and social environment. It includes the development of individuality, stable sense of self, stable body image, and self esteem. 4. Regulation and Control of Drives, Affects and Impulses--This includes the ability to tolerate anxiety, depression, disappoint- ment and frustration and the necessity of postponing expected satisfactions. Also, the extent to which delay and control mechanisms operate without being under or overly controlled. 5. Object Relations--This includes the ability to ferm friendly and loving bonds with others with a minimum of inappropriate hostility and the ability to sustain relationships over a period of time with little mutual exchange of hostility. Relationships are relatively free of maladaptive elements from earlier inter- actions and fecus more on the here and now. 6. 10. 11. 12. 21 Thought Processes--The ability to conceptualize in a clear coherent manner including the extent to which abstract and concrete thinking are appropriate to the situation as well as the degree of adaptiveness in memory, concentration, and attention. . Adaptive Regression in the Service of the Ego (ARISE)--This refers to the ability of the ego to initiate a partial, temporary, and controlled lowering of its own functions in order to promote adaptation. It involves a bi-phasic process characterized by a) a relaxation of perceptual and conceptual acuity with a corresponding increase in ego awareness of pre- viously preconscious and unconscious content, and b) the use of primary process thought in the induction of new configura- tions and the ability to make creative integrations of primary process thought by the use of secondary process. Such regressions result in a relatively free, but controlled, play of the primary process. Defensive Functioning-—This includes the ability to regulate and employ defenses such that disturbing elements of mental content, anxiety, and intrapsychic conflict are effectively controlled. Stimulus Barrier--Defined as threshold fer, sensitivity to, or registration of external and internal stimuli impinging upon various sensory modalities. The effectiveness of coping is contingent upon the degree of adaptation, organization, and integration of responses to this sensory stimulation and may be observed in either motor behavior, affective or cognitive responses. Autonomous Functioning--Refers to the degree of freedom from impairment of apparatuses of primary autonomy (attention, concentration, memory, learning, perception, motor function, intention) as well as secondary autonomy (disturbances in habit patterns, learned complex skills, work routines, hobbies, and interests). Generally, the impairment results from the intrusion of conflict, ideation, affect, or impulse. Synthetic-Integrative Functioning-This includes the ability to reconcile the often conflicting demands of the id, superego and outside world as well as the incongruities within the ego itself. Both the degree of reconciliation of discrepant infermation and the active relating together of intrapsychic and behavioral events are involved. Mastery-Competence--A person's subjective feeling of competence in relation to how well they actually perform in accord with their existing capacity to interact with and actively master their environment. 22 In summary, the purpose of this section was to explore the concept