Western Illinois University, USA.
J Music Ther. 2012 Autumn;49(3):335-64. doi: 10.1093/jmt/49.3.335.
Systematic reviews of research provide pertinent information to both practitioners and researchers. While there are several recent reviews of music research and children with specific disabilities (primarily autism), there is no current review of music research with children with a wide variety of disabilities.
The aim of the current study is to identify and systematically review music research with children and youth published in peer reviewed journals for the years 1999 through 2009. Research questions focused on participant characteristics; research purposes, methodologies, and findings; as well as the presence of ideas from special education policies, and practices. We also asked how results have changed from those from an earlier review (Jellison, 2000).
Using computer and hand-searches, we identified 45 articles that met our criteria for inclusion. Once identified, through a process of consensus we analyzed articles based on criteria, categories, and codes used in the earlier review. Additionally we analyzed measurement instruments and effectiveness of interventions as reported by the authors.
Primary findings show a large majority of studies were experimental with most reporting effective or partially effective interventions, particularly for social variables. Compared to the earlier review, increases were found for participants with autism and for reports including ideas from special education. Percentages of articles measuring generalization and examining high-incident disability populations (specific learning disabilities) were low.
The findings from this review and comparisons to the earlier review reveal important implications for practices with children with autism and preparation of researchers to design and conduct studies in inclusive music settings.
系统的研究综述为从业者和研究者提供了相关信息。虽然最近有几篇关于音乐研究和特定残疾儿童(主要是自闭症)的综述,但目前还没有针对各种残疾儿童的音乐研究综述。
本研究旨在确定并系统地综述 1999 年至 2009 年期间发表在同行评审期刊上的针对儿童和青少年的音乐研究。研究问题集中在参与者特征、研究目的、方法和发现,以及特殊教育政策和实践的思想存在情况。我们还询问了结果与早期综述(Jellison,2000)相比有何变化。
我们使用计算机和手工搜索,确定了符合纳入标准的 45 篇文章。一旦确定,我们通过共识过程,根据早期综述中使用的标准、类别和代码来分析文章。此外,我们还分析了作者报告的测量工具和干预措施的效果。
主要发现表明,大多数研究都是实验性的,大多数报告的干预措施是有效的或部分有效的,特别是针对社会变量。与早期综述相比,自闭症患者的研究和包括特殊教育思想的报告有所增加。测量推广和检查高发生率残疾人群(特定学习障碍)的文章比例较低。
本综述的结果与早期综述的比较揭示了对自闭症儿童实践和研究人员在包容性音乐环境中设计和进行研究的重要启示。