器乐练习中的技术中介反馈:反馈架构、表现结果与效应量可行性的系统综述
Technology-mediated feedback in instrumental music practice, performance, and learning: a systematic review of feedback architectures, performance outcomes, and effect-size feasibility
一项发表于 Frontiers in Psychology 的系统综述检索了 2000 年以来 5 个数据库的 1,689 条记录,最终纳入 26 项研究进行描述性综合,考察技术中介反馈在器乐练习中的反馈架构与表现结果。
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW article
Front. Psychol.
Sec. Performance Science
College of Music and Dance, Guangzhou University, Guangzhou, China
Abstract
Technology-mediated feedback can support instrumental music performance during practice, but such gains do not necessarily indicate durable learning. This systematic review examined feedback architecture (information type, modality, timing, performance target, and function), performance outcomes, assessment conditions, and quantitative-synthesis feasibility. Scopus, RILM Abstracts of Music Literature, Web of Science Core Collection, APA PsycINFO, and ERIC were searched in May 2026 for empirical studies published since 2000 involving instrumental music learners across expertise levels. Quantitative and mixed-methods designs with learner-level performance data were eligible. Appraisal used the 2018 Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool. Findings were mapped and tabulated by design, comparator, feedback characteristics, and outcome domain, with reporting guided by Synthesis Without Meta-analysis. Of 1,689 records, 29 were retained in the record ledger; 27 formed the systematic-synthesis set and 26 the descriptive synthesis set. Learners ranged from novices to advanced musicians, principally in piano and bowed-string tasks. Among these 26 records, 21 included visual feedback and 18 delivered feedback concurrently. Movement, posture, or technique and rhythm or timing each accounted for 9 of 43 performance outcomes. Three reports described later-session retention and two tested different pieces; assessment conditions did not consistently establish performance without feedback. Appraisal identified unclear allocation, assessor blinding, and measurement safeguards. Of seven reports examined quantitatively, two yielded standardized group differences favoring technology-supported instructional packages, and two yielded paired differences representing a feedback-format comparison and uncontrolled pre-post change. Three lacked sufficient numerical information. Heterogeneous designs and outcomes precluded pooling or technology rankings. Interpretation is limited by incomplete reporting, single-reviewer extraction with partial independent verification, and incomplete coverage of conference and gray literature. Organizing the identified evidence by feedback architecture connects the information provided with the performance processes targeted across technologies. The synthesis highlights alignment among feedback architecture, performance targets, outcome measures, and assessment conditions as a basis for distinguishing immediate performance from durable learning. Systematic review registration: https://doi.org/10.37766/inplasy2026.7.0069, identifier INPLASY202670069 (retrospectively registered). Funding: Guangzhou Municipal Postdoctoral Research Funding Program and the Education Science Project (Higher Education Special) of the Department of Education of Guangdong Province.
Keywords
augmented feedback, effect size, Feedback architecture, instrumental music learning, music education, music performance, Systematic review, Technology-mediated feedback
Received
02 August 2026
Accepted
25 September 2026
Copyright
© 2026 Zhang and Liu. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
*Correspondence:
Disclaimer
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.
来源:Frontiers in Psychology · frontiersin.org
猜你喜欢
- 慈悲训练对青少年情绪调节与亲社会道德发展的追踪研究Frontiers in Psychology · 4 小时前
- 眼动实验比较生成式AI、传统搜索与混合检索对职校学生来源核查与迁移表现的影响Frontiers in Psychology · 13 天前
- 研究:AI 迎合式回应经元认知惰性与依赖降低学习者自主性Frontiers in Psychology · 13 天前
- 基于语音识别MDD患者自杀风险:模型开发与4周随访验证Frontiers in Psychiatry · 2 小时前
- 真实创伤后视觉空间想象竞争任务干预减少闯入性记忆:系统综述与元分析Frontiers in Psychiatry · 2 小时前