‘Imagine you’re in the Opera House … ’ Learning nonverbal communication for the concert stage

ABSTRACT

Top performers create stage magic through their command of nonverbal communication. While students aspire to the highest levels of performance, they may be unprepared for the intricacies of professional stagecraft. This study trials an experiential learning workshop about optimising nonverbal communication on the concert stage. Five emerging music professionals participated in role-playing exercises on stage entrance and appropriate stage behaviour, and discussed their experiences in the workshop and in interviews. Recordings were transcribed and coded thematically. Participants were able to exaggerate nervous, arrogant and confident stage personas, before imagining their stage entrance to an examination or the Opera House stage. As audience members, they experienced the power of performativity first-hand, and as performers, they grasped experts’ approach to stage entrance to enhance performance. Participants gained a sense of autonomy over their stage presentation. These early-career performers advocated the inclusion of stage training as a critical extension to current practice.

KEYWORDS:

• Sight and sound
• experiential learning
• stage entrance
• roleplay
• visualisation

Background

Audiences are drawn to concert soloists, who command the stage with charismatic stage persona. Expert performers have mastered the art of performativity (Davidson 2014) and understand how to perform for the audience’s gaze (Urbaniak and Mitchell in press). The art of professional showmanship often remains tacit knowledge for early-career music professionals, who are traditionally taught to prize faithfulness to the score over onstage individuality (Ford and Sloboda 2016). Stage training and performance skill workshops can optimise students’ stage preparation (Aufegger et al. 2017). This study aims to trial an experiential learning workshop about optimising performativity and stage entrance on the concert stage.

First impressions

First impressions count. It only takes 39 ms to make a good first impression (Bar, Neta, and Linz 2006). Making eye contact and smiling suggests a friendly personality, while neutral, sad, angry, fearful or disgusted expressions deter others (Sutherland, Young, and Rhodes 2017). People can even perceive neutral facial expressions to resemble traits such as happiness, disgust and fear, or anger, based on structural similarity to emotions (Said, Sebe, and Todorov 2009). Body language transcends verbal communication to transmit critical information without words. Gesture and posture provide insight into emotional states (Calero 2005), and communicate social and interpersonal relations (Ambady and Skowronski 2008).

In music, first impressions have the power to shape the audience’s judgements of performers from neutral to positive, based on performers’ behaviour (Platz and Kopiez 2022). Music examiners make instantaneous judgments about performers from the moment they walk on stage, and may even assign approximate grades before a single note has been played (Stanley, Brooker, and Gilbert 2002). In experimental settings, audiences prefer performers who walk on stage with a confident demeanour, assertive strides and upright posture, and penalise poor posture, a shuffling gait, and averted gaze harshly (Platz and Kopiez 2013). Audiences favour performers who walk on stage making direct eye contact, rather than those who do not lift their gaze (Waddell and Williamon 2017).

Music performance as communication

Music performance is a form of nonverbal communication. Performers’ body movements extend beyond sound production, to communicate expression through non-essential movements or gestures (Davidson 2001). For performers, gestures are essential to coordinate precise timing and expression without words (Williamon and Davidson 2002). Across instrument groups, musicians including violinists (Chander et al. 2022), clarinettists (Weiss, Nusseck, and Spahn 2018) and pianists (Froneman 2018) appear to optimise their gestures for expressive communication. Performers can communicate elements of their personalities and their attitudes towards the performance through body language alone (Platz and Kopiez 2022). Music performance can be interpreted as social interaction as a form of rhetoric (Platz and Kopiez 2022), and video analysis of performers has revealed patterns of nonverbal communication that guide the audience through their interpretation (Davidson 2012, 2014).

Audiences’ aesthetic impressions

Audiences’ impressions of performances are influenced by unconscious bias. Audiences favour attractive performers (Wapnick et al. 1997), who dress formally (Griffiths 2008) and conventionally (Urbaniak and Mitchell 2022). Audiences respond positively to exaggerated gesture, and can only distinguish between deadpan, projected and expressive intentions when they can observe performers’ body language (Davidson 1993). Audiences prefer performances where nonverbal communication is exaggerated (Broughton and Stevens 2009) and visual cues influence audience perceptions of expressivity (Vuoskoski et al. 2014). Audiences were even able to differentiate between different levels of prize-winners at an international competition based on body language alone (Tsay 2013). The predominance of visual information in forming judgements of music performance has been evidenced across numerous experimental settings (Platz and Kopiez 2012).

Mastering performance skills

Live performances transcend score reproduction, and draw audiences with a sense of spectacle (Cook 2012). The term ‘performativity’ has been applied to music to describe the performance of performance (Davidson 2014). Performativity reflects the audiovisual, social and cultural aspects unique to every performance (Kartomi 2014). In the Western classical tradition, legendary pianist Franz Liszt embodied the concept of performativity through his revolutionary approach to stagecraft and concert spectacle (Hilmes 2016). Liszt’s virtuosic performance manner shifted audience expectations of performance visuals, and elements of his flamboyant stage behaviour are common practice for today’s performers (Urbaniak and Mitchell in press). Expert performers choreograph stage entrance to set the tone of the concert (Urbaniak and Mitchell in review), and craft gesture to shape audiences’ perception of the music (Barenboim and Said 2002).

Harnessing performativity may present a challenge for emerging music professionals. Classical music students often practise alone in small practice rooms, and in doing so, learn to play for themselves rather than for others (Ford and Sloboda 2016). Music students may be expected to develop performance style independently, with little teacher guidance (Ford 2013). When music students participate in sessions with theatre students, they learn to exaggerate stage demeanour, develop their own stage presence (Rea 2015), and become more aware of themselves as performers on stage (Ford and Sloboda 2016). Stage charisma can be developed through play and active engagement (Rea 2015), and students should be encouraged to develop their own individual performance style (Platz and Kopiez 2022). The next challenge is to understand how learning through physical exaggeration can enhance stage entrance styles (Platz and Kopiez 2013).

Experiential learning

‘Experiential learning’ (learning by doing) can facilitate real-world learning to engage students in complex concepts (Benjamins, Roland, and Bylica 2022; Clark and Williamon 2022). Interactive and reflective activities enable learners to evaluate experiences critically (Southcott 2004). For undergraduate students, experiential learning promotes student engagement alongside increased flexibility, communication and community (Allsop et al. 2020). Experiential learning also facilitates higher-order thinking (Kim 2018), teamwork (Kayes, Christopher Kayes, and Kolb 2005) and empathy (Bearman et al. 2015).

In music, experiential learning is an effective method to train performance skills. In performance simulations, music students can learn about stage confidence (Bissonnette et al. 2016; Williamon, Aufegger, and Eiholzer 2014). Through Virtual Reality, musicians can understand how the presence of a virtual audience impacts performance gestures (Schaerlaeken, Grandjean, and Glowinski 2017). Students can learn to manage stage anxiety through performance simulations (Williamon, Aufegger, and Eiholzer 2014) and can provide peers with feedback on body language by reviewing videos of their performance trials (Spahn, Walther, and Nusseck 2016). Self and peer assessment fosters a sense of collaboration and community (Lebler 2016) and peer-to-peer learning develops collaborative skills (Van Zelm 2016). Peer collaboration also enables students to reach new insights into how audiences perceive sight and sound on the concert stage (Mitchell and Benedict 2017).

Aim

Nonverbal communication and stagecraft are vital to performance success, and the next challenge is to explore stage techniques for early-career performers. This study aims to develop a framework for early-career performers to analyse and develop individualised and persuasive stage presence. This study trialled an experiential learning workshop about optimising performativity and stage entrance on the concert stage.

Method

Research design overview

Early-career performers participated in an experiential learning workshop. Participants engaged in two role-playing exercises on stage entrance and appropriate stage behaviour. They roleplayed as ‘performer’ and ‘audience’ and discussed their viewpoints from the stage and from the stalls. In post-workshop interviews, participants shared their experiences of the workshop. This study took place during COVID-19, and followed all restrictions and social distancing guidelines, including limited participant numbers.

Researcher description and researcher-participant relationship

Both authors had a background in Western classical performance, as well as music psychology and empirical musicology. Author 1 acted as workshop ‘host’ and interviewer. The researchers and participants were familiar to each-other prior to the research and participants were also familiar to each-other prior to the study.

Participant recruitment

Recruitment process

Participants were required to have graduated with a Bachelor’s degree in Music within the past 10 years. Participants were recruited face-to-face or via phone or email. Participants were provided with a Participant Information Statement and a Participant Consent Form. The institutional Human Ethics Committee approved the project.

Participant selection

All participants who met the study criteria were invited to take part in the study. A cohort of early-career pianists participated in the study. While this cohort represents only a single specialised instrumental area (piano), the need for stagecraft is ubiquitous across instrument groups or genres.

Demographics

Five (M = 4, F = 1) early-career postgraduate pianists participated in the workshop. Participants have been given pseudonyms (Table 1).

Table 1. Participant demographics

Participant name	Gender	Age	Years of teaching experience		Years of performance experience
Claudia	F	27	11		18
Frank	M	23	1		5
Jake	M	24	4		16
George	M	26	9		13
Michael	M	25	‘Not long’		20

Materials

Two exercises were designed to explore the concepts of stage entrance and stage behaviour, through roleplay (Figure 1). Roleplay was chosen as a learning method to promote hands-on engagement, spontaneous discussion and peer feedback in a non-competitive environment, similar to theatre training (Rea 2015).

Figure 1. Objectives of Roleplay 1 (where acting is the dominant skill) and Roleplay 2 (where visualisation is the dominant skill) with projected impact on body language.

The first roleplay challenged participants to act out different types of stage presence, namely ‘nervous’, ‘confident’ and ‘arrogant’. These prompts were chosen to prompt contrasting stage demeanours, loosely following Davidson’s (1993) deadpan, projected and exaggerated prompts. The roleplay was designed to introduce participants to the concepts of exaggerated stage demeanour (after Rea 2015) to achieve a sense of theatricality (after Ford and Sloboda 2016).

The second roleplay exercise approached stage presence through contrasting performance scenarios, namely a performance examination in a conservatoire context, versus a solo performance at a major performance venue, such as the Sydney Opera House (Figure 1). Backstage, participants imagined that they were performing in the specific venue and situation, and then walked on stage and performed as though they were in each scenario. This approach was chosen to promote a naturalistic and individualised approach to stage presence, appropriate to certain situations, performer personalities and audience types (Platz and Kopiez 2022), and utilise expert performers’ methods for adopting a Lisztian stage presence (Urbaniak and Mitchell in press). In this roleplay, participants did not follow explicit behavioural or gestural prompts, but adopted behaviour that felt natural to the two performance situations. They received peer feedback on their performances.

Feedback booklet

In the workshop, participants were given a feedback booklet to note their responses to the role-playing exercises. The feedback booklets included a demographic questionnaire including their degree and year of graduation, instrument, age, years of performance experience, and years of teaching experience.

Post-workshop interview

A post-workshop interview expanded on themes raised in the workshop. The interview was semi-structured and questions were open-ended. Participants were asked questions such as ‘How did you find the workshop?’, ‘What did you think of the roleplay performances?’ and ‘Would you include any techniques learned in the workshop into your performance preparation, and if so, how?’.

Procedure

Participants read a Participant Information Statement and provided informed written consent for inclusion in the study, collection and use of data and publication.

Participants took part in a 1.5 h workshop in a performance space at a tertiary music institution. The concert hall had a capacity of around 200 people, with elevated audience seating and a separate green room. Stage lighting was used to mimic an evening recital, with the audience lighting dimmed. The first author led the participants through the workshop.

Performers completed their demographic information. Then, they participated in two roleplaying exercises (outlined in Materials). In Roleplay 1, two participants volunteered as ‘performers’. Performing participants received peer feedback on their stage manner from audience participants. In Roleplay 2, all participants roleplayed both as performers and as audience members. ‘Performers’ entered the stage from the green room, bowed and performed an excerpt from their chosen repertoire. ‘Audience’ members wrote down feedback, and they shared their impressions in a group discussion. The workshop was recorded audio-visually.

After the workshop, participants took part in semi-structured interviews. Interviews lasted around 40 min, and were conducted in person or via Zoom. Post-workshop interviews were recorded for transcription.

Analysis

The workshop recording was reviewed to observe participants’ different modes of performance and presentation. The workshop audio data and post-workshop interviews were transcribed. Participants were anonymised and given pseudonyms (Claudia, Frank, Michael, George and Jake).

Transcripts and feedback booklets were analysed together following an inductive analytic approach (Braun and Clarke 2006). Coding categories emerged from the analysis. In the first coding cycle, 23 codes were derived from the transcripts (Saldaña 2021) which were discussed by first and second author. In the second cycle coding, preliminary categories were consolidated into four broader themes (Grbich 2012), including familiarity and confusion with theatricality, acting for the stage, visualising success and reflections. Codes, categories and themes were discussed between Author 1 and Author 2. This analysis produced the final code list (Table 2).

Table 2. Themes, categories and codes as derived from thematic analysis.

Themes	Categories	Codes
Familiarity and confusion with theatricality	Prior training, previous experience, opinions on stagecraft	Acting, theatricality, teaching, method, preparation
Acting for the stage	From the stage: performers’ experiences with acting, from the stalls: audience’s impressions of body language	Arrogant, nervous, smiling, feeling, nonverbal cues
Visualising success	Performers imagine stage mastery, professional versus student: audience impressions	Personal opinion of performance, exam, Opera House, positive feedback, negative feedback, student, professional
Reflections	Reconnecting with performance, acting versus visualising, looking and learning from others, beyond the workshop: incorporating new knowledge	Performance, visualising, acting, social conventions, workshop, practice strategies

Results

Familiarity and confusion with theatricality

The first theme explores participants’ prior knowledge of stage training. Participants shared an eagerness to learn more about stage preparation methods.

Participants shared an appreciation of theatricality in performance, but struggled to define it within their own practice. Their teachers ‘had mentioned acting and presenting performance’ (Claudia), and had heard expert performers describing performance as ‘theatre, you’re putting on a show for people’ (George). This cohort sought clarity on how to refine performativity, ‘it has been alluded to so slightly over the years […] but how important is [theatricality] actually?’ (George). This group suspected that some of their current modes of performance preparation may not be ‘the right method’ (Claudia).

Acting for the stage

The second theme describes the first roleplay exercise, in particular how acting arrogantly, confidently or nervously on stage elicits appropriate or inappropriate concert behaviour. In this roleplay, two participants roleplayed as performers (Frank and George). Performers walked on stage, bowed and performed the first minute of their chosen repertoire in three different conditions. First, they acted nervous; then, they acted arrogant; and finally, they acted confident.

From the stage: performers’ experiences with acting

Performers’ body language reflected the three contrasting prompts (confident, nervous, arrogant). Frank and George adopted appropriate body language when acting confident, and inappropriate body language when acting nervous. Acting arrogant caused some confusion. Both agreed that their confidence increased when smiling.

For George, walking on stage confidently ‘forces me to relax and become more open, and people can sort of sense that’, and understood that smiling ‘draw[s] them in’. While acting confident, Frank hyper-fixated on facial expressions, ‘just trying to hold the corners of my mouth up obsessively, my tiny little muscles were straining’. However, Frank ‘did feel more comfortable afterwards, when [he] was sitting at the piano’. Arrogant stage presence was difficult to define, as ‘everyone has different definitions of arrogance – it can be an internal thing, not necessarily visible on the outside’ (Frank). George reflected that he had ‘walked on stage in the [arrogant] way many times [in the past]’, due to the preconceived notion that classical performers ‘must be serious’.

From the stalls: audience’s impressions of body language

The audience identified appropriate and inappropriate body language with ease. They preferred confident body language over nervous or arrogant body language.

Nervous stage entrances were criticised. Nonverbal cues such as wringing hands immediately caused negative connotations, such as ‘rubbing hands like Lady Macbeth and makes no eye contact with the audience’ (Michael about George). Negative facial expressions appeared ‘depressed and downtrodden from the start’ (Michael about Frank), or ‘haughty, looked arrogant, “too good” for everyone’ (Jake about Frank).

Arrogant stage entrances resulted in moderately appropriate stage behaviour. Arrogance could be misinterpreted as confidence, such as Frank who ‘walks on smiling […] to me [he] just looks confident and happy’ (Michael). In Frank’s case, his ‘general demeanour in confident and arrogant [was] the same’ (Jake), possibly due to Frank’s confusion with embodying the emotion. Contrastingly, George’s arrogant acting resulted in ‘quite cold’ (Michael), ‘angry, grumpy, [and] surly’ (Jake) body language.

Confident acting was praised. Smiling ‘come across much nicer’ (Jake about Frank) or ‘kinder’ (Michael about Frank) with ‘more energy’ (Jake about George). A smile influenced audience perceptions positively, as when ‘they were smiling, they were the most successful, it felt the most natural’ (Jake). Positive stage entrance also impacted audience perceptions of musical interpretation, ‘[when] I saw you as kind and warm, you played it more like that as well’ (Michael). Participants sensed an authenticity to the confident stage demeanour: ‘I felt like you were you on stage’ (Michael).

Visualising success

The third theme explores the second roleplay exercise, in particular how imagining a high-confidence situation (Opera House performance) or low-confidence situation (conservatoire examination) promoted appropriate and inappropriate body language, respectively. All participants acted as both performer and audience member. Participants walked on stage, bowed and played a minute of their chosen repertoire in two contrasting conditions. First, they imagined being in an examination, then, they imagined they were celebrated performers performing in a major international venue, such as the Sydney Opera House.

Performers imagine stage mastery

All performers preferred performing in the Opera House scenario. Putting on a stage character prompted appropriate stage behaviour, such as confident posture, a welcoming smile and eye contact with the audience. These performers also perceived improvements in their own playing in the Opera House condition, as they felt empowered to adopt a more self-assured approach to personal interpretation.

Performers perceived a ‘big psychological difference’ (George) between exam and Opera House. Where the exam ‘felt like practice mode’ (Frank), the Opera House mindset encouraged a positive attitude, as though ‘I am the master, I know everything, so I’ll just do it all’ (Frank). Participants viewed the audience differently in the two conditions, where in the exam condition ‘two people are just staring you down, and looking to critique you in a way that the public [in a concert] generally are not’ (George). The perception of the audience had a profound impact on performers’ approach to performance:

[In the exam,] the examiners have the power, and you’re trying to impress them and you’re the one being judged. [… whereas in the Opera House,] everyone loves you, and they’re just there because they love you so much that you can do whatever the hell you want to do. (Frank)

Participants ‘took more risks’ (Michael) in the Opera House mode than in the exam, and did not feel the same pressure to ‘be pristine and exact’ (Claudia). On stage, performers were aware they were creating a ‘different atmosphere’ (Jake) with the audience.

Professional versus student: audience impressions

From the stalls, all participants were able to witness the effect of visual impression techniques on their perception of performers. While each performer’s stage presence reflected their individual personalities, certain common traits were praised as being effective or ineffective. In the exam, performers adopted unengaging behaviour without being provided with specific behavioural prompts. They avoided eye contact and appeared uncomfortable on stage. In contrast, all performers adopted appropriate and exciting stage demeanours in the Opera House scenario. The audience was more excited to hear the ensuing performance.

Looking like a student. In the exam, all performers entered the stage and played in a worrisome manner. Frank’s exam performance was ‘very solemn and serious walking on’ (Michael), and left the audience feeling cold, like ‘he could acknowledge a little’ (Jake). They felt alienated by Michael, as he ‘did walk particularly fast’ (Frank) and ‘didn’t look at us at all, didn’t acknowledge that we were there’ (George). George’s ‘bow seem[ed] out of place’ (Michael) while Jake ‘looked very unsure’ (George) and simply ‘looked down at floor, hands on knees, no bow, introverted playing’ (Frank). Claudia was ‘giggly’ (Michael). Overall, participants’ exam behaviour made the audience ‘[feel] like an outsider, not part of the experience’ (George).

Looking like a professional. In the Opera House scenario, all performers created an immediate visual bond with the audience, that positively impacted their impressions of the performer:

I much more enjoyed your playing [in the Opera House], because I felt that initial connection to you. […] When you establish that [visual] connection with us, the audience, it allows us to really appreciate what you’re saying and all the work you’ve put in. (George)

All performers received the praise from their peers. Frank presented a ‘much warmer’ (Jake) stage appeal, with ‘his best playing so far! The big hall ‘grand manner’ suits him!’ (Michael). George was praised for his ‘humble, very grateful and nice [stage presence]’ (Jake), with a ‘nice deep bow’ (Jake). His playing was ‘very engaged’ (Michael), and ‘by far, more stimulating’ than in previous versions (Michael). George’s heightened demeanour ‘didn’t come across as affected or pretentious’ (Jake), and Jake’s ‘kind, gentle, more inviting [demeanour]’ (Frank) created an ‘open and warm environment to partake in music’ (George). Claudia made a positive first impression with her ‘big smile’ (Frank) and ‘poise’ (George). Michael created an ‘immediate connection established with performer, [which] allowed for a deeper connection with the music’ (George). For the audience, Michael’s ‘smile, confidence, more risk taking’ (Frank) invigorated the performance to make it feel a ‘little more alive’ (George) than the exam performance. Overall, participants saw and heard an immediate improvement in the performance quality:

As your friend, I’m asking you next time you have an exam, imagine you’re in the Opera House … Because we’re talking, like, orders of magnitude better playing than anything else. (Michael)

Reflections

The fourth theme covers participants’ responses to the experience of roleplaying performance demeanour. Participants valued the opportunity to trial different stage management techniques and discover personal stage persona. They learned to analyse other performers’ stage presence (not only their playing) and even began to translate these concepts in their own teaching.

Reconnecting with performance

This workshop took place after a year of extensive COVID-19 lockdowns, where performers had very little experience with performing live. When first asked to volunteer to perform, some performers hesitated, jokingly offering that they would ‘be happy to give you a video of my final recital [instead]’, (Michael) rather than perform for their peers. However, the relaxed and supportive atmosphere immediately led to an increase in confidence, ‘it was fun, I thought it was beneficial as well’ (Frank).

Acting versus visualising

Participants agreed that their stage behaviour and interpretation was markedly better during the visualisation exercise than the acting exercise. Visualisation contextualised appropriate stage behaviour within a realistic setting, ‘you’re performing in a way that makes the audience appreciate you more’ (Claudia). Acting confident was an abstract concept, while imagining being a celebrated performer in the Opera House was easier to emulate.

I think when you’re being asked to play at a venue like the Opera House, the implication would be that you have something quite special to give, so you have that feeling in you, when you walk on stage. Which is a different thing to just being confident. (George)

Participants were amazed by the immediate impact of stage presence on audience perceptions, ‘it’s amazing how subtle things affect the quality of the performances’ (George) and that ‘changing stage presence changes sound, even when playing pretend’ (Jake). They also noted the psychological value of visualising themselves in front of paying audiences, as ‘the way you view your audience changes the way you play’ (Frank) and concluded that ‘thinking of playing in the Opera House makes everyone play better!’ (Michael). The different cognitive processes prompted by acting or visualisation, and the resulting nonverbal communication, are demonstrated visually in Figure 2.

Figure 2. Nonverbal communication resulting from Roleplay 1 (where acting prompted accurate yet somewhat artificial body language) and Roleplay 2 (where visualising prompted natural body language appropriate to each scenario).

Looking and learning from others

Participants learned to observe each-others’ performance style critically. They were not familiar with research on stage entrance styles (e.g. Platz and Kopiez 2013), and some participants had ‘never thought’ (Claudia) about their stage presence. Over the course of the workshop, participants became cognisant of how visual impression techniques could shift the dynamics of a performance:

Before the workshop, I wasn’t aware of how much stage presence had an impact on the quality of the performance, or the music, or how I perceived the music in general, or how I connected to a performer. (George)

They reflected on the social conventions surrounding stage entrance, and extrapolated how poor stage entrance could discourage the audience:

It’s like if you invite people over for like a dinner party, and then as soon as you opened the door, you grimace and you said, ‘Here are your seats’. (Frank)

Participants were able to pinpoint stage behaviour that either engaged or deterred them as listeners, ‘I feel happiest when I see someone walking on with a warm smile, and someone who doesn't have an air of arrogance’ (Claudia). Participants began to reflect on their preferred performers, and go beyond musical analysis to consider their stage presence:

[The workshop] made me think about every time I’ve seen a performer who I really enjoy, I’m like, how did they look on stage? It’s something I never really paid much attention to before, because it’s something that you [take for granted]. But now that I know that it has such a profound impact on how I perceive music … (George)

Beyond the workshop: incorporating new knowledge

Participants incorporated their new insights into performance preparation, and become ‘more ritualised’ (George) about developing stage presence. They took ownership over developing stage appeal:

Before my upcoming recital at the end of the year, I think I’m going to just work on making it a little more convincing, a little less apologetic. I think sometimes my walk is a bit apologetic, and my attitude is a bit apologetic. (Frank)

Participants understood the value in preparing stage presence consistently, ‘just for minute or something, just sitting at the piano, closing my eyes, thinking about walking on’ (Claudia). Preparing the extramusical elements helped them feel ‘psychologically prepared’ (George) for all aspects of performance, not only making music.

Participants aimed to incorporate the roleplay strategies into their own teaching, and ‘get [students] to try it out, then bring in a parent or someone like that and so they can feel the difference’ (Claudia). They considered that the level of nuance may be adjusted for youngers students, ‘you have teach them to do a kid’s version of [stage presence] first’ (Jake), which could involve more direct instructions for visual management techniques. Frank shared his experience with encouraging a student to develop their own visual impression techniques:

I noticed one of the students, she walked on, and her playing just sounded nervous, like shaky […]. And I was like, ‘Hmm, this might sound weird but,’ then I was like, ‘Try walking on like so-and-so and like you’re in the Opera House, or whatever, and be confident. Act like you control everything, and just make your own decisions; don’t wait for anyone else to tell you what’s right or wrong.’ And then it sounded so, so much better afterwards. (Frank)

All participants agreed that this experience was formative in their process of developing an ideal stage presence.

Discussion

This study trialled an experiential learning workshop about developing stage presence through roleplay. Participants had limited formal training in stagecraft or developing stage presence, and welcomed the opportunity to participate in two roleplaying exercises. These emerging professionals were able to exaggerate nervous, arrogant and confident stage personas, before roleplaying their stage entrance to an examination or the Opera House stage. Roleplaying prompted discussions about appropriate versus inappropriate stage entrance styles, and whether acting or visualisation was more effective to promote positive stagecraft. Through practical exercises, participants were able to recognise the impact of stage entrance on audiences’ perceptions of performers, and appreciated musical experts’ tacit knowledge of stagecraft. Experiential learning promoted an enhanced sense of autonomy over stage presence.

Participants reflected on the limited formalised tertiary education on performance craft. Tertiary music training seemed to overlook performative skills in favour of sound production alone (Ford 2013). Participants hypothesised that expert preparation was more complex than preparing just the aural dimension when they considered top performers’ magnetic stagecraft and commanding demeanour (Davidson 2014). These emerging professionals appreciated how expert performers transcended the score to create the theatre of performance (Cook 2012) and were eager to learn strategies to enhance their stage preparation (Ford 2013).

These emerging professionals learned about the power of body language to shape an audience’s impressions of performers from neutral to negative, or neutral to positive (Platz and Kopiez 2022). The impact of stage entrance was profound and participants delineated between appropriate versus inappropriate performance style (Platz and Kopiez 2013), and identified discrete emotional states and expressive intentions through body language with ease (Ambady and Skowronski 2008; Vuoskoski et al. 2014). They were able to quickly deduce performers’ mental states and personalities from body language cues and facial expressions (Bar, Neta, and Linz 2006) and were dissatisfied by nervous, fearful or evasive body language (Sutherland, Young, and Rhodes 2017). Exaggerated body language (as in the Opera House condition) was more convincing than subdued body language (as in the examination) (Davidson 1993). As seen across many experimental settings (Platz and Kopiez 2012), performers’ visual presentation and nuances in body language had an immediate and lasting impact on audience impressions.

On stage, participants were able to emulate key elements of successful performativity (Davidson 2014). Performers adopted inappropriate behaviour such as slouching, averted gaze and dull facial expressions (Platz and Kopiez 2013) when asked to act nervously or imagine a stressful situation. In contrast, they adopted high-confidence body language intuitively, such as upright posture, happy facial expression and direct eye contact when acting confident or imagining empowering situations (Platz and Kopiez 2013). Visualising the Opera House stage prompted ideal body language, where performers exaggerated their demeanour, and, over time, these performers could form positive habits for performativity in front of an audience (Schaerlaeken, Grandjean, and Glowinski 2017). As recent conservatoire graduates, these performers had extensive experience performing under examination conditions (Stanley, Brooker, and Gilbert 2002). Roleplaying as a celebrated concert pianist empowered these students and recent graduates to adopt more professional and masterful stage presence techniques (Urbaniak and Mitchell in review).

These findings support the effectiveness of theatre-inspired activities for stage demeanour (Rea 2015). This workshop provided a scaffold for music educators to achieve theatricality without the necessity of drama staff or students (Ford and Sloboda 2016). By roleplaying exaggerated modes of stage entrance, these performers became aware of their visual impact on the concert stage (Davidson 1993). Physical exaggeration not only impacted performers’ demeanour, but their performance of the music itself (Rea 2015). Performers spent most of their preparation alone in practice rooms, and visualising the Opera House enabled them to visualise themselves as public performers (Ford and Sloboda 2016) and adopt dramatic and extroverted mindsets (Rea 2015). These participants appreciated the mindset of performance as ongoing creation (Cook 2012) rather than a reproduction of an ‘ideal’ version (Ford and Sloboda 2016).

Experts at the highest level of performance are acutely aware of audiences’ perceptions of extramusical factors (Urbaniak and Mitchell in review), but students rarely consider extramusical factors in concert preparation (Ford and Sloboda 2016). By roleplaying as audience members, participants gained an appreciation of the audience’s gaze (Mitchell and Benedict 2017). Roleplay allowed participants to empathise (Bearman et al. 2015) with the audience’s experience and recognise how audiences and assessors judge performers based on visual and aural information (Stanley, Brooker, and Gilbert 2002). They experienced the impact of sight and sound on the concert stage (Tsay 2013), and understood the power of performativity to transform the audience’s perceptions (Davidson 2014).

Roleplay facilitated engagement with complex issues in a hands-on and reflective manner (Benjamins, Roland, and Bylica 2022; Clark and Williamon 2022). These exercises transmitted musicological research on nonverbal communication (e.g. Platz and Kopiez 2013) into practical educational experiences. Holistic engagement and reflection was key to creating immediate and lasting engagement with the workshop content (Southcott 2004). Roleplay encouraged self-efficacy (Kim 2018), and peer feedback facilitated an understanding of different perspective (Mitchell and Benedict 2017). Post-workshop, these early-career performers felt encouraged to embed performativity strategies into regular practice, and reported increased autonomy and increased satisfaction (Spahn, Walther, and Nusseck 2016). As participants were teachers themselves, they recognised the pedagogical value of roleplay (Kim 2018), and planned to replicate these exercises for their own students.

Significance

There is considerable research confirming the impact of visual bias (Platz and Kopiez 2012) and nonverbal communication (Platz and Kopiez 2022) on audience perceptions. While it is apparent that audiences judge performers based on their facial expressions (Waddell and Williamon 2017), first impressions (Platz and Kopiez 2013), and performance gestures (Davidson 1993), traditional performance education may not adequately address these extramusical performance skills. This workshop builds on existing experiential learning initiatives (e.g. Rea 2015) to provide a framework for developing persuasive stage presence for early-career performers. Music performance educators oversee student development of performance skills, and this workshop format enables efficient and interactive engagement with key ideas in music perception research, in a practical way. These participants benefited from the unique opportunity to roleplay as audience members, and analyse their peers’ stage presence from the audience perspective (Mitchell and Benedict 2017). The visualisation exercise empowered these early-career professionals to shift their concert preparation mindset from that of a student to that of a professional (Urbaniak and Mitchell in review).

Conclusions and future directions

This study demonstrated that early career performers can learn expert strategies for stage demeanour through roleplay. This study was conducted during COVID-19 which limited the number of participants able to participate. The small group format proved conducive to participants’ constant hands-on involvement in the session and provided ample time for personalised feedback. These participants could emulate expert performance mastery and experience the audience’s viewpoint from the stalls to gain an awareness of sight on the concert stage. They advocated the inclusion of stage preparation and appreciation of visuals into tertiary training as a critical extension to current practice. Conservatoires and performance educators must recognise the importance of training visual performance excellence alongside aural performance excellence, and can benefit from incorporating these roleplay activities into their regular performance training programmes. Future studies will translate the study design and embed this performance training in conservatoire education for concert preparation.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Olivia Urbaniak

Olivia Urbaniak is an early-career researcher in the field of music performance and music psychology. After graduating with first-class Honours from a Bachelor of Music (Performance), she has undertaken a PhD at The University of Sydney investigating performativity in expert practice and student learning. Her body of work explores how expert performers' firsthand knowledge of stagecraft can be absorbed into tertiary training through experiential learning.

Helen F. Mitchell

Helen F. Mitchell is Professor at the Sydney Conservatorium of Music, The University of Sydney. She studied music at Oxford University then moved to Sydney, where her PhD focused on singing pedagogy, acoustics and perception. As Australian Postdoctoral Fellow, her research tracked the impact of singing training on the development of the singing voice. Her recent work investigates audiences' perceptions and descriptions of individual performers, through sound alone and through an audiovisual fusion of sensory information. She is currently focused on developing new ways to incorporate multisensory music training as experiential learning to equip music students as critical listeners and evaluators of music performance.