A Quantitative Study of Choral Singing and

Psychological Well-Being

Étude quantitative sur le chant choral et le bien-être

Sally L. Busch, MA (Candidate), BASc, BA
Carleton University, Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA

Maiy Gick, PhD

Carleton University, Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA

Note: This study was funded by Canadian Institutes for Health Research
[CIHR). Both authors are also afflliated with AIRS [Advancinglnterdisciplinary
Research in Singing), a Major Collaborative Research Initiative [MCRI) funded
through the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
[SSHRC).

Address Correspondence to Sally L. Busch, Department of Psychology,

Ottawa, ON, Canada, KIS 5B6 [613) 520-2600x3781 [phone) [613) 520-3667
(fex) ssimpso6@connectcarleton.ca

Abstract
Singing has been associated with beneflts to psychological well-being.
Hedonism and eudaimonism are two perspectives from which psychological
well-being may be deflned and measured. In this study we asked members
of two choirs [N = 59) to complete hedonic and eudaimonic measures of well-
being both before and after a single rehearsal. Results suggest that a single
rehearsal of choral singing is associated with significant increases in positive
affect, personal growth, and vitality. Psychosocial factors of personality and
social support and the singer characteristic time spent singing per week
were considered for their potential roles in changes in well-being. Perceived
social support was found to be positively predictive of change in positive
affect. Consideration was given to whether the beneflts from choral singing
stem from social interaction or the singing itself. This study adds to the
quantitative evidence connecting singing and well-being, and itsuggests well-
being measures that could be useful for the evaluation of singing programs
and for future research. Controlled and longitudinal studies are suggested as
further directions.

Canadian Journal of Music Therapy oo Revue canadienne de musicothérapie, 18(1), 45

Keywords: singing, psychological well-being, choral singing, music therapy

Résumé
L'hypothèse proposée sous-tend que l'action de chanter est directement
reliée à des bénéfices se rapportant au bien-être psychologique. L'hédonisme
et l'eudémonisme sont deux perspectives à partir desquelles le bien-être
psychologique peut être défini et mesuré. Dans le cadre de cette étude, nous
avons demandé à deux chorales (n = 59) de remplir des mesures hédonistes et
eudémonistes de bien-être, avant et après une seule répétition. Les résultats
révèlent qu'une répétition de chant choral d'environ deux heures est reliée
à des augmentations significatives de l'affect positif, de l'épanouissement
personnel et de la vitalité. Le rôle des différences individuelles telles
la personnalité, le temps de répétition personnelle hebdomadaire et le
soutien social ont été considérés dans le changement de l'état de bien-
être. Le soutien social perçu par les participants s'est avéré apporter des
changements constructifs sur l'affect positif. Les implications sur le débat,
à savoir si les bénéfices du chant choral découlent de l'interaction sociale ou
de l'action même de chanter, sont discutées. De plus, des recommandations
pour des recherches futures sur le chant et le bien-être comme des études
longitudinales et des études plus contrôlées sont formulées.

Mots dés : chant, bien-être psychologique, chant choral, musicothérapie

The definition and measurement of well-being has long provided challenges

for psychological researchers. Some psychologists propose that well-being
should be equated with happiness, while others argue that true well-being
must encompass concepts beyond pleasure or affect. Much of the current
research reflects this dichotomy (Ryan & Deci, 2001). The hedonic perspective
equates well-being with pleasure of both mind and body. It is generally
defined and measured in terms of happiness, mood, and life satisfaction. The
eudaimonic perspective, in contrast, posits that well-being must consist of
more than happiness. Eudaimonic well-being is defined in terms of human
potentials, which include personal growth, autonomy, purpose in life, and
relationship with others. In the simplest terms, the difference between the
hedonic and eudaimonic perspectives may be summed up as pleasure versus
purpose; thus eudaimonic well-being is often considered a more virtuous
pursuit than hedonic well-being (Ryan & Deci, 2001).

Well-being has been associated with a number of individual factors, both

physiological and psychological. Stone et al. (2010) found that older adults
tended to report higher well-being and lower stress than younger adults.
Eudaimonic, but not hedonic, well-being has also been linked to biomarkers
Canadian Journal of Music Therapy oo Revue canadienne de musicothérapie, 18(1), 46
of stress in that higher eudaimonic well-being has been associated with
lower salivary cortisol and better sleep (Ryff, Singer, & Love, 2004). However,
though physical health and psychological well-being have been shown to be
correlated, individuals with poor health can report high well-being and those
with low well-being can be in excellent health (Ryan & Deci, 2001).

Personality and social factors have also been shown to be associated with
well-being. All Big Five personality traits (extraversion, conscientiousness,
neuroticism, openness, and agreeableness) have been shown to predict
various forms of well-being (Grant, Langan-Fox, & Anglim, 2009). Higher
neuroticism (also known as low emotional stability) has been shown to have
a significant inverse relationship with both hedonic and eudaimonic well-
being, while high levels of the other four traits have generally been positively
associated with well-being (Ryan & Deci, 2001). In terms of social factors,
high relatedness, which represents one's feeling of having stable and fulfilling
relationships with others, has been shown to be positively associated with
well-being, while loneliness has predicted poor well-being (Ryan & Deci,
2001). Similarly, individuals high in well-being tend to be rated as more
sociable by others (Nave, Sherman, & Funder, 2008).

Singing and Well-Being

Recent reviews by Gick (2011) and Clift, Nicol, Raisbeck, Whitmore, and
Morrison (2010) examined the available research about the relationship
of singing, well-being, and health. Although current research into the
relationship between singing and well-being is limited (Clift et al., 2010; Gick,
2011 Stacy, Brittain, & Kerr, 2002), it has included considerations of both
perceived and quantitatively measured benefits. The perceived benefits of
singing have been found to include psychological benefits such as improved
mood and self-actualization (Grape, Sandgren, Hansson, Ericson, & Theorell,
2003) as well as improved self-esteem (Bailey & Davidson, 2003); physical
benefits such as improved breathing (Clift & Hancox, 2001); and social
benefits such as improving social interaction (Bailey & Davidson, 2003)
and making friends (Clift & Hancox, 2001). Singers have also reported that
singing represented to them an opportunity for growth (Clift & Hancox,
2001), learning (Clift et al., 2007), and self-expression (Bailey & Davidson,
2005). However, the perception of the benefits of singing may be infiuenced
by factors such as socioeconomic status or singing experience. In Bailey and
Davidson's (2005) study comparing choirs composed of homeless individuals
to a choir composed of middle-class individuals, homeless choristers were
more likely to place emphasis on the social opportunities that singing in a
choir offered, whereas middle-class choristers placed more importance on
the challenge and learning aspects of choral singing. Grape et al. (2003)

Canadian Journal of Music Therapy oo Revue canadienne de musicothérapie, 18(1), 47

also found that one's singer status (amateur or professional) influenced the
perception of benefit; amateur singers were more likely to report increased
well-being following a singing lesson.

Some studies measuring the influence of singing on well-being have compared

active singing with listening to songs; others have used before-and-after
designs measuring well-being. Kreutz, Bongard, Rohrmann, Hodapp, and
Grebe's (2004) study of amateur choir members suggests that active singing
may be better for hedonic well-being compared with listening (although Gick,
2011, suggests it is unclear whether this result, in part, arose because singers
expected to sing rather than listen). In contrast, Unwin, Kenny, and Davis
(2002) found that with amateur singers recruited from the community who
were randomly assigned to sing—or listen to—vocal exercises and unfamiliar
songs in non-native languages (chosen to reduce emotional connections to the
music), there was no clear advantage to singing as compared to listening. In a
before-and-after design, Hillman (2002) measured change in emotional well-
being and quality of life among men and women aged 65 and over engaged
in a community singing program. Hillman found that both emotional well-
being and quality of life improved. However, choral singers did not report
higher life satisfaction than equally active non-singers living in a retirement
community (Wise, Hartmann, and Fischer, 1992). In a study comparing the
beneflts of singing versus swimming, Valentine and Evans (2001) found that
singing improved mood and energized participants, though the effect was
smaller than that produced by swimming (possibly due to differing baseline
values; Gick, 2011).

Taken together, quantitative studies of singing and well-being appear

promising but inconclusive. In addition, in most of these quantitative
studies participants were self-selected for engaging in singing; thus the
generalizability of these flndings is limited. Further, in the singing research
to date there is little evidence to suggest how much singing is needed for an
effect on well-being, what measures might best capture this effect, or what
factors might influence such an effect.

The Present Study

The limited state of research in the area of singing and well-being and the
inconclusive flndings have led to several calls for further empirical (Gick,
2011; Stacy et al., 2002) and quantitative research (Young, 2009) that might
help inform or evaluate therapeutic interventions that use singing. In addition,
Gick (2011) suggests that future research on singing and well-being could
examine previously unexplored psychosocial factors, such as personality, in
order to examine whether they may play a role. For example, it is possible
that extraverts who enjoy being around people gain more social benefits

Canadian Journal of Music Therapy oo Revue canadienne de musicothérapie, 28(1), 48

from group singing than introverts (see Gick, 2011, for further discussion of
psychosocial and other factors]. Thus, the present study was designed to (a]
explore whether a small amount of choral singing might lead to measurable
changes in well-being; (b] determine measures of hedonic and eudaimonic
well-being that might be most likely to show such an effect; and (c] explore
whether singer characteristics (e.g., hours sung per week, vocal training] and
previously unexplored psychosocial factors of personality and social support
may play a role in determining who shows the most effects from singing.
These particular factors were chosen for examination based on the role of
singer characteristics in the perceived benefits of singing (Grape etal., 2003],
the demonstrated relationship between personality and well-being (Ryan &
Deci, 2001], and the inherent social nature of choral singing.

Due to a dearth of research, no hypotheses were made concerning the

influence of singer characteristics or psychosocial variables. However, we did
hypothesize that well-being would increase following the singing. Because
hedonic well-being has been shown to vary more than eudaimonic well-being
over short time periods (Ryff, 1989], we also hypothesized that hedonic well-
being measures would be more likely than eudaimonic well-being measures
to show an effect from a small amount of singing.

Method
Participants
The participants in this study were members of two amateur adult choirs in
Ottawa, Ontario, Canada, who the primary researcher knew through prior
membership (A/ = 59]. Both men (n = 15] and women (n = 44] participated,
and participants ranged in age from 28 to 80 (Mage = 55.92; SD = 11.19]. Both
choirs require an audition and some sight-singing ability for membership.
Although the choirs rehearsed repertoire in similar fashions (e.g., much
repetition, occasional rehearsal of one part at a time] and performed similar
repertoire (e.g., multi-part arrangements in a variety of styles], the choirs
also exhibited some distinct differences. The first choir was composed of
only women, while the second was composed of both men and women. In
addition the two conductors had markedly different styles (observable
during the rehearsal]; for example, the first choir's conductor kept the
rehearsal atmosphere businesslike, whereas the second choir's conductor
used primarily positive feedback to guide choristers and made a lot of jokes
during rehearsal. Further, the second choir took a short break for snacks and
socialization in the middle of rehearsal while the first did not.

Participation in this study was voluntary and most (though not all] choir
members participated. Each choir's conductor and board of directors

Canadian Journal of Music Therapy oo Revue canadienne de musicothérapie, 18(1), 49

consented to the study. Informed consent was also obtained from each
participant, and any identifying information was kept confldential. Ethical
approval for this study was obtained from the researchers' institution, and
ethical guidelines were adhered to throughout the study.

Measures
General Information Questionnaire: For this measure participants were
asked to provide basic demographic information (e.g., age and gender) as
well as answer questions about their singing experience (e.g., training) and
singing practice (e.g., number of hours spent singing per week, duration of
choir membership in months).

Ten-Item Personality Inventory (TIPI; Gosling, Rentfrow, & Swann, 2002):

This 10-item scale was used to measure each of the Big Five personality
dimensions of extraversion, agreeableness, emotional stability (the opposing
pole from neuroticism), conscientiousness, and openness. Each dimension
was measured with two items. Participants rated whether the traits listed
for each item apply to them on a Likert scale from 1 = disagree strongly
to 7 = agree strongly. An average score for each trait was calculated by
summing responses to the two items pertaining to that trait and dividing by
two; higher scores indicated greater presence of that trait. As Gosling et al.
(2002) noted, although the brevity of this measure results in low internal
reliability, the TIPI has demonstrated high convergent validity with other
measures of personality and moderately high test-retest validity. In fact, the
TIPI was chosen for its brevity in this case due to the field nature of the study;
a minimal intrusion upon choir rehearsal time was desirable.

Multidimensional Scale of Perceived Social Support (MSPSS; Zimet, Dahlem,

Zimet, & Farley, 1988): This 12-item instrument was used to measure
perceived social support across the domains of friends, family, and signiflcant
other. Participants were asked to indicate their agreement with statements
using a 7-point scale ranging from 1 - very strongly disagree to 7 = very
strongly agree. An average perceived social support score was calculated by
summing scores for all items and dividing by 12; a higher score was indicative
of greater perceived support. A sample statement from this scale is There is
a special person who is around when I am in need. Zimet et al. (1988) reported
Cronbach's a - 0.88 for the total scale; in the present study, Cronbach's a -
0.94.

Hedonic Well-Being Measures

Positive and Negative Affect Scale (PANAS; Watson, Clark, & Tellegen,
1988): This 20-item scale was used to measure both positive and negative

Canadian Journal of Music Therapy oo Revue canadienne de musicothérapie, 18(1), 50

affect (moods). It can be used to assess mood and hedonic well-being over
various time frames; for the purposes of this study it assessed present mood.
Participants were asked to indicate the extent to which they presently felt
a certain way based on a 5-point scale of 1 = very slightly or rxot at all to S -
extremely. Two examples are excited (positive affect) and distressed (negative
affect). The total scores for positive affect (PA) and negative affect (NA) were
each calculated by summing the 10 items for each affective scale. Higher
scores indicated greater experience ofthat affect. Watson, Clark, and Tellegen
(1988) reported the reliability of the PANAS scale as high, with Cronbach's a=
0.86 for the PA scale and Cronbach's a = 0.84 for the NA scale; in the present
study, Cronbach's a = 0.88 for the PA scale and 0.85 for the NA scale.

Satisfaction With Life Scale (SWLS; Diener, Emmons, Larsen, & Griffin, 1985):
This brief (5-item) measure asks participants to indicate their agreement
with statements concerning global life satisfaction (a measure of hedonic
well-being) on a scale of 1= strong disagreement to 6 = strong agreement. A
total score was calculated by summing item responses; a high score indicated
greater satisfaction with life. Diener et al.(1985) reported high internal
reliability for the SWLS, with Cronbach's a= 0.87; in the present study,
Cronbach's a = 0. 89.

Eudaimonic Weil-Being Measures

Flourishing Scale (FS; Diener et al, 2009): Originally called Psychological
Well-Being (PWB), this 8-item scale measures important aspects of
eudaimonic well-being including meaning, purpose, and social relations.
Participants were asked to rate their agreement with each statement on a
scale of 1 = strongly disagree to 7 = strongly agree. A total scale score was
calculated by summing item responses; thus a high score was indicative of
greater psychological resources and strengths than a low score. An example
of a statement from this scale is / lead a purposeful and meaningful life. The
internal reliability of this scale was high both in previous studies (Cronbach's
a - 0.87; Diener et al., 2009) and in the present study (Cronbach's a = 0.89).

Vitality Scale (VS; Ryan & Frederick, 1997): For this brief (6-item) measure
of subjective vitality, participants were asked to indicate how true each
statement was for them on a scale of 1 = not at all true to 7 = very true.
An example of a statement from this scale is / feel energized. An overall
average score was calculated by summing all responses and dividing by six;
higher scores represented greater feelings of vitality. For the purposes of
comparison that was desired in this study, the directions were changed to
indicate how true the statement was "right now" as opposed to "in general in
your life." Ryan and Frederick (1997) reported Cronbach's a = 0.84 for this

Canadian Journal of Music Therapy co Revue canadienne de musicothérapie, 18(1), 51

scale; in the present study, the scale demonstrated markedly higher reliability
(Cronbach's a = 0.92). The Vitality Scale was included in the present study
because it captures an important but often overlooked aspect of eudaimonic
well-being.

Ryff Scales of Psychological Well-Being (RPWB; Ryff, 1989): The full RPWB
consists of six subscales with 20 items each. For the sake of brevity, in this
study we used the 9-item versions endorsed by Ryff, and we included only
the two subscales we thought most likely to show effects from singing:
Personal Growth (PG) and Relations With Others (RO). These two subscales
were also selected for inclusion based on previous evidence that singing
may present an opportunity for growth (Clift & Hancox, 2001) as well as
research findings suggesting that singing may improve social functioning
(Bygren et al., 2009). Thus, for this study participants were asked to indicate
their agreement with a total of 18 statements (alternating items from each
subscale) using a 6-point response scale from 1 = strong disagreement to 6 =
strong agreement. Total scores for each subscale were calculated by summing
responses for the nine items pertaining to that scale; higher scores signalled
greater perceptions of growth (for the PG subscale) or better relations with
others (for the RO subscale). Examples of statements from the PG and RO
subscales (respectively) are I have the sense that / have developed a lot as a
person over time and / know I can trust myfriends and they know they can trust
me. Reliability coefficients for both subscales have been found as follows: PG
a = 0.87, RO a = 0.91. In the present study, the reliability of each subscale fell
slightly below the recommended Cronbach's a = 0.80 value (PG a = 0.75, RO
a = 0.73); this was likely due to the small sample size.

Procedure
Participants filled out a set of questionnaires both before and after a weekly
choir rehearsal. A single rehearsal was chosen as the timeframe both for
convenience and as a representation of the lowest weekly amount of singing
that a chorister might expect to experience. These rehearsals (i.e., one
rehearsal for each choir) included a brief warm-up followed by practice
for upcoming concerts. The first choir, from whom data were collected in
November 2010, rehearsed songs for their Christmas concert such as "Irish
Blessing," "II est né," and "Stille Nacht." The second choir, from whom data
were collected in January 2011, rehearsed songs for their March concert such
as "Triumph of the Spirit" (in Hebrew) and "Didn't My Lord Deliver Daniel?"
Both choirs rehearsed songs in a variety of tempos and languages. The total
duration of singing for each choir was approximately two hours. All well-
being measures werefilledout both before and after the rehearsal. One-time
measures including general information, personality, and social support were

Canadian Journal of Music Therapy oo Revue canadienne de musicothérapie, 18(1), 52

distributed across timeframes in order to equalize the lengths of the before
and after questionnaires. The before-rehearsal questionnaire consisted of
the following measures:

• general information,
• the Ten-Item Personality Inventory,
• the Positive and Negative Affect Scale,
• the Satisfaction With Life Scale,
• the Vitality Scale,
• the Flourishing Scale, and
• the Ryff Scales of Psychological Well-Being (Personal Growth
and Relations with Others subscales).

The after-rehearsal questionnaire consisted of:

• the Multidimensional Scale of Perceived Social Support,

• the Positive and Negative Affect Scale,
• the Satisfaction with Life Scale,
• the Vitality Scale,
• the Flourishing Scale, and
• the Ryff Scales of Psychological Well-Being (Personal Growth
and Relations with Others subscales).

In order to reduce potential response bias (i.e., perceived pressure to

participate in the study or to please the researcher), participants were given
minimal information about the purpose of the study prior to completing the
questionnaires (i.e., only that the study concerned psychological variables
associated with singing), and the primary researcher left the room during
the periods of questionnaire completion and collection.

Data Analysis
Two separate analyses were conducted in this study:

• evaluating change in well-being over time, and

• examining differences in well-being change as functions of singer
characteristics and psychosocial factors.

First, in order to determine the signiflcance of well-being change over the

course of a choir rehearsal, a repeated measures MANOVA was run for each
set of measures (hedonic and eudaimonic). Time (before-after) was entered
as the within-subjects variable, choir was entered as a between-subjects
variable (due to the differences between choirs), and age was entered as a
covariate (as age is known to be linked to well-being).

Canadian Journal of Music Therapy oo Revue canadienne de musicothérapie, 28(1), 53

Then differences in well-being change as a function of singer characteristics,
personality, and perceived social support were evaluated using regression
analyses. Only one singer characteristic was analyzed for the sake of
simplicity; time spent singing per week was selected based on the idea that
increased exposure to the effects of singing may result in either sensitization
or tolerance and that this effect (measured on a ratio scale] may be more
detectable than an effect of previous training (measured categorically as yes/
no]. Thus, for each well-being measure that showed significant change, three
2-step hierarchical regressions were run where before-rehearsal well-being
scores predicted after-rehearsal well-being scores in the first step and then
in the second block: (a] time spent singing per week was entered; (b] all five
personality variables were entered simultaneously; and (c] perceived social
support (MSPSS total score] was entered. Due to the running of multiple
regressions using the same well-being measures, Bonferroni p values that
adjust for increased Type I error were used to determine significance.

Results

Preliminary Analyses
The data from this study were analyzed using SPSS 18.0. Data were cleaned
and variables checked for outliers and assumptions of normality. The negative
affect (NA] portion of the PANAS scale was found to be extremely skewed.
Demonstrating a floor effect, more than 47% of the sample (n = 28] had the
lowest possible score on the pre-rehearsal NA measure. After unsuccessful
attempts to transform the variable to make it normally distributed, the NA
variable was discarded from further analyses. Other non-normal variables
were transformed, but analyses with both transformed and untransformed
data produced similar results. Thus, analyses with untransformed data are
reported for ease of interpretation.

Choristers reported that they sang an average of 5.63 hours per week, though
this varied widely (5D = 4.88]. The minimum amount of singing per week was
about the length of a regular choir rehearsal (2.5 hours] and the maximum
reported amount was quite high (17 hours]. Duration of choir membership
varied from 4 months to 43 years (one chorister had been with the choir since
its inception 43 years previous]; the average membership was 132 months
or 11 years {SD - 15 months]. Many choristers (31] reported that they were
members of other choirs (i.e., in addition to the one they were with at the
time of testing], and even more (39] had taken solo voice lessons. Average
personality scores amongst choristers (out of a possible range of 1-7] were
as follows: extraversion M = 4.47 [SD = 0.21], agreeableness M = 5.64 [SD =
0.13], conscientiousness M = 5.70 [SD = 0.15], emotional stability M = 5.08
Canadian Journal of Music Therapy oo Revue canadienne de musicothérapie, 18(1), 54
{SD = 0.16), openness M = 5.53 [SD = 0.13). Most choir members reported
high levels of perceived social support, with the average total score on the
MSPSS being 5.93 [SD = 0.12) and the minimum being 3 [out of a possible
range of 1-7). See Table 1 for means and standard deviations for each of the
hedonic and eudaimonic well-being measures.

Main Analyses
Measuring change in well-being. Change over time was signiflcant [p
< 0.05) in both of the overall MANOVAs [one encompassing all hedonic
measures and one for all eudaimonic measures). Thus a closer look at the
change in individual measures was warranted. Results of Ftests for each well-
being measure [hedonic and eudaimonic) are displayed in Table 1. Neither
the between-subjects factor [choir) nor the covariate (age) were found to
be signiflcant in either MANOVA. Although mean scores for all measures
increased, only some of these increases were statistically signiflcant. From
the hedonic measures. Positive Affect [PA) increased signiflcantly (.M^^^^^ =
33.93, M^^^ = 39.37; p < 0.05). From the eudaimonic measures, scores on
both the Vitality Scale [VS) and the Personal Growth subscale of the Ryff
Scales [RPWB_PG) increased significantly [respectively M^^^^^^ = 4.62,
'^Aft.r = 5-37; Mg^f^^^ = 43.49, M^^^^^ = 46.41; both p-values < 0.05)"

Table 1. MANOVA results for Hedonic and Eudaimonic Measures of Well-

Being

Mean (SD) F Effect size Power

Before After (•partial r\h fPost-hoci
Hedonic
PA 33.93 (6.51) 39.37 (6.81) 8.26* 0.13 0.81
SWLS 22.81 (5.22) 24.20 (4.71) 3.50 0.06 0.45

Eudaimonic
FS 47.85 (6.36) 49.44 (5.37) 4.13 0.07 0.52
VS 4.62 (1.28) 5.37 (1.2!) 10.55 * 0.16 0.89
RPWB PG 43.49 (6.50) 46.41 (6.59) 6.83* o.n 0.73
RPWB RO 43.69 (6.25) 45.49 (6.67) 0.48 0.01 0.11

Note . * = / ? < 0.05. PA = Positive Affect (from PANAS); SWLS = Satisfaetion with Life Seale;
FS = Flourishing Scale; VS = Vitality Scale; RPWB = Ryff Scales of Psychological Well-being;
PG = Personal Growth Subseale; RO = Relations to Others

Effects of time singing and psychosocial factors. As described in the

analysis, the singer characteristic time spent singing per week and the
psychosocial factors of personality and perceived social support were
considered individually for each well-being measure that shov/ed signiflcant
change: the Positive Affect Scale, the Vitality Scale, and the Personal Growth

Canadian Journal of Music Therapy oo Revue canadienne de musicothérapie, 18(1), 55

subscale. Thus, a total of nine regressions were run. Only one of these
regressions yielded a significant result using the Bonferroni-corrected p value
of .005. The score on the Multidimensional Scale of Perceived Social Support
was found to be positively predictive of Positive Affect after rehearsal while
controlling for Positive Affect before rehearsal [R^,^ = 0.105, F^ (1, 56) =
11.03, B = 0.338, p < .005). This intriguing result led us to consider additional
exploratory analyses of perceived social support as a possible moderator for
change in positive affect. However, regression analyses with both transformed
and untransformed data yielded a non-significant interaction term (MSPSS x
P^Beforei ' ^^^^ indicated that change in positive affect was not affected by levels
of perceived social support (i.e., people who perceived themselves as having
more social support did not experience more or less of an increase in positive
affect than people who perceived themselves as having less social support).

Discussion

Summary of Results
Three of the six well-being measures—Positive Affect (PA), Personal Growth
(RPWB_PG), and Vitality (VS)—showed a significant increase in average
scores from before rehearsal to after rehearsal. This suggests that a single
choir rehearsal (approximately two hours of singing) may be associated
with statistically significant improvements in well-being for choir members,
supporting our first hypothesis. Further, counter to our second hypothesis,
both hedonic and eudaimonic well-being measures showed significant
change. Time spent singing per week and personality did not predict change
in well-being. Only perceived social support was significantly predictive of
well-being change, and only for positive affect. An exploratory analysis of
perceived social support as a moderator of the change in positive affect was
non-significant.

Hedonic and Eudaimonic Well-Being

One hedonic well-being measure (Positive Affect) and two eudaimonic well-
being measures (Personal Growth and Vitality) showed signiflcant change.
Although this result was counter to our second hypothesis that hedonic
measures would be more likely to show change, it may prove to be a far more
interesting result. These three scales—Positive Affect (PA), Personal Growth
(RPWB_PG), and Vitality (VS)—may represent three distinct avenues through
which singing influences well-being. The Positive Affect scale measures
positive mood. Consistent with amateur singers' reports of perceived mood
enhancement (Grape et al., 2003), singing may measurably improve mood.
The Personal Growth subscale of the Ryff Scales of Psychological Well-Being
measures feelings of personal growth that may be enhanced by singing

Canadian Journal of Music Therapy oo Revue canadienne de musicothérapie, 18(1), 55

activities that encourage learning and practice. This personal growth result
is consistent with previous studies in which singers reported opportunity for
growth and learning as a perceived benefit (Clift & Hancox, 2001; Clift et al.,
2007), but this may be the first time that change in perception of growth has
been measured quantitatively The Vitality Scale, on the other hand, may be
capturing some of the physical aspects of singing that, like other forms of mild
exercise, can enhance feelings of vitality and well-being. This is consistent with
Valentine and Evans' (2001)findingthat singing increased energetic arousal.

Perceived Social Support and Positive Mood

Perceived social support, measured once after singing, predicted change
in positive affect from before to after singing. One possible mechanism
underlying this relationship is an interaction with stress. Social support
has been found to reduce the impact of stress on mood (DeLongis, Folkman,
& Lazarus, 1988), which may have enabled choir members with higher
perceived social support to experience a greater increase in positive mood.
Alternatively, individuals with higher perceived social support simply gain
more from choral singing. Although enhanced benefits for individuals with
higher social support could be due to the social aspect of choral singing and
not to the actual singing, it is unlikely that perceived social support itself
increased over the course of the rehearsal. The Multidimensional Scale of
Perceived Social Support (MSPSS) has been shown to have fairly high test-
retest stability over time (0.85 for two to three months between testings;
Zimet et al., 1988) and this stability has been shown to increase with
shorter time intervals (0.88 for four weeks between testings; Duru, 2007).
Thus, perceived social support as measured by the MSPSS may reasonably
be assumed to stay more or less stable over a 2- to 3-hour testing interval.
This is further supported by the lack of significant change in the Relations to
Others (RO) subscale of the Ryff Scales of Psychological Well-Being over the
course of the rehearsal.

Further, the difference in social characteristics of the two choirs (in that one
choir's rehearsal included a designated break for social time and the other did
not) suggests that socializing—independent of singing—may not be the most
important factor in well-being change since both choirs showed the same
changes in well-being. Valentine and Evans (2001) found that choral and
solo singing show little or no difference in benefit to well-being. Although
further research is required to replicate Valentine and Evans' (2001) findings,
their study supports the idea that the increased well-being observed in this
study may be attributed to the singing and not to the social aspect of the choir
rehearsal.

Canadian Journal of Music Therapy oo Revue canadienne de musicothérapie, 18(1), 57

Limitations and Future Research
The most signiflcant limitation of this study was its design, lacking both
random assignment (as the participants were self-selected to sing) and
a clear control group. As a result, causal inferences (such as that singing
caused an increase in well-being) cannot be drawn from this study, and the
generalizability of results (i.e., to anyone outside of those who choose to sing
in a choir) is limited. Further, due to the small number of participants (N
= 59), some of the analyses performed in this may not have had sufflcient
power to detect certain effects (i.e., the influence of personality or time spent
singing per week; moderation of positive affect by social support). The fact
that the choirs were known to the primary researcher must also be taken
into account; it is possible that the results were influenced by this familiarity
despite efforts to reduce response bias (e.g., participants may have guessed
at the purpose of the study and responded in a way to please the researcher).
However, the validity of this study is supported by the fact that not all
measures showed signiflcant change, which argues against a response bias
to please among participants. Moreover, although this study did not have a
non-singing control group, drawing participants from two markedly different
choirs provided some cross-validation of results. Despite their differences,
both choirs showed similar increases in positive mood, feelings of growth,
and vitality.

Future research in this area should compare the effects of singing both on
singers and non-singers in order to broaden the generalizability of any
associations between singing and well-being. Larger and more varied
samples of participants may also increase the likelihood of detecting factors
influencing the relationship between singing and well-being. More studies
comparing group singing to solo singing should also be conducted for greater
evidence of the influence (or lack thereof) of the social aspect of choral
singing on well-being (see Gick, 2011, for further discussion of this point).
Importantly, future intervention studies should employ control groups,
random assignment, and longitudinal designs (e.g., to consider cumulative
effects) whenever possible in order to elucidate the effects of singing on well-
being and strengthen any potential claims about the benefits of singing (see
Gick, 2011, for further discussion of methodological issues in singing and
well-being research).

Conclusion
This study suggests that a small amount of choral singing (a single rehearsal)
may have a beneficial effect on well-being that can be measured using a
combination of hedonic and eudaimonic well-being measures of positive
affect, personal growth, and vitality. Further, perceived social support may

Canadian Journal of Music Therapy oo Revue canadienne de musicothérapie, 28(1), 58

influence the effect of choral singing on positive mood. Although further
research with more controls is required to explore causality and the true
nature of these effects within different populations, these findings provide
quantitative support for the idea that choral singing may be used to improve
well-being. This study may help other researchers wishing to address the
need for empirical, quantitative research in the area of singing or music
therapists wishing to evaluate their singing programs by demonstrating
measures of well-being that show an effect from a small amount of singing.

References
Bailey, B.A., & Davidson, J.W. (2003]. Perceived holistic effects of three levels
of music participation. In R. Kopiez, A.C. Lehmann, I. Wolther, & Wolf, C.
(Eds.], Proceedings of the 5th Triennial ESCOM Conference (pp. 220-223].
Hanover, Germany: Hanover University of Music and Drama. Retrieved
from http://www.epos.uni-osnabrueck.de/music/books/k/klww003/
pdfs/230_Bailey_Proc.pdf
Bailey, B.A., & Davidson, J.W. (2005]. Effects of group singing and performance
for marginalized and middle-class singers. Psychology of Music, 33(3],
269-303. doi: 10.1177/0305735605053734
Bygren, L., Weissglas, G., Wikstrom, B-M., Konlaan, B., Grjibovski, A.,
Karlsson, M.,...Sjostrom, M. (2009]. Cultural participation and health:
A randomized controlled trial among medical care staff. Psychosomatic
Medicine, 71,469-473.
Clift, S.M., & Hancox, G. (2001]. The perceived benefits of singing: Findings
from preliminary surveys of a university college choral society. The
Journal of the Royal Society for the Promotion of Health, 121[4), 248-
256. doi: 10.1177/146642400112100409
Clift, S.M., Hancox, G., Morrison, 1., Hess, B., Kreutz, G., & Stewart, D. (2007].
Choral singing and psychological wellbeing: Findings from English
choirs in a crossnational survey using the WHOQOL-BREF. In Williamon,
A., and Coimbra, D., (Eds.], Proceedings of the International Symposium
on Performance Science, 201-207. Utrecht, The Netherlands. European
Association of Conservatoires (AEC], Retrieved from http://www.
performancescience.org/ISPS/ISPS2007/Proceedings
Clift, S., Nicol, J., Raisbeck, M., Whitmore, C, & Morrison, I. (2010]. Group
singing, wellbeing and health: A systematic mapping of research
evidence. UNESCO Observatory, Faculty of Architecture Building and
Planning, The University ofMelbourne RefereedE-Journal,2[l). Retrieved
from: www.abp.unimelb.edu.au/unesco/ejournal/pdf/clift-paper.pdf

Canadian Journal of Music Therapy oo Revue canadienne de musicothérapie, 18(1), 59

DeLongis, A., Folkman, S., & Lazarus, R.S. [1988). The impact of daily stress
on health and mood: Psychological and social resources as mediators.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54[3), 486-495. Retrieved
from: http://search.proquest.com.proxy.library.carleton.ca/psycinfo/
docview/614292442/fulltextPDF/1330D8AC01F42F4F66/4?account
id=9894
Diener, E., Emmons, R.A., Larsen, R.J., & Griffln, S. [1985). The Satisfaction
with Life Scale. Journal of Personality Measurement, 49, 71-75.
Retrieved from: http://ps.psychiatryonline.org.proxy.library.carleton.
ca/searchresults.aspx?q=One-session%20music%20%20therapy&t=J
18&p=l&s=l&c=0&journalid=18
Diener, E., Wirtz, D., Tov, W, Kim-Prieto, C, Choi. D., Oishi, S., & Biswas-Diener,
R. [2009). New measures of well-being: Flourishing and positive and
negative feelings. In E. Diener [Ed.) Assessing well-being: The collected
works of Ed Diener [247-266). New York, NY: Springer Science +
Business Media.
Duru, E. [2007). Re-examination of the psychometric characteristics of the
multidimensional scale of perceived social support among Turkish
university students. Social Behavior and Personality, 35(4), 443-451.
Gick, M.L. [2011). Singing, health and well being: A health psychologist's
review. Psychomusicology, 21,176-207.
Gosling, S. D., Rentfrow, R J., & Swann, W. B., Jn [2002). A very brief measure
of the Big Five personality domains./ourna/ of Research in Personality,
37, 504-528.
Grape, C, Sandgren, M., Hansson, L.O, Ericson, M., Theorell, T [2003). Does
singing promote well-being?: An empirical study of professional and
amateur singers during a singing lesson. Integrative Physiological &
Behavioral Science, 38{1), 65-74.
Grant, S., Langan-Fox, J., & Anglim, J. [2009) The Big Five traits as predictors of
subjective and psychological well-being. Psychological Reports, ÍO5[1),
205-231. doi:10.2466/PRO.105.1.205-231
Hillman, S. [2002). Participatory singing for older people: A
perception of benefit. Health Education, 102(4), 163-171. doi:
10.1108/09654280210434237
Kreutz, G., Bongard, S., Rohrmann, S., Hodapp, V, & Grebe, D. [2004). Effects
of choir singing or listening on secretory immunoglobulin A, cortisol,
and emotional state. Journal of Behavioral Medicine, 27[6), 623-635.
doi:10.1007/sl0865-004-0006-9
Nave, C.S., Sherman, R.A., & Funder, D.C. [2008). Beyond self-report in the
study of hedonic and eudaimonic well-being: Correlations with
acquaintance reports, clinical judgements and directly observed
social behavior, yourna/ of Research in Personality, 42[3), 643-659. doi:
10.1016/j.jrp.2007.09.001.

Canadian Journal of Music Therapy oo Revue canadienne de musicothérapie, 18(1), 60

Ryan, R,M., & Deci, E.L. (2001). On happiness and human potential: A review
of research on hedonic and eudaimonic well-being. Annual Review of
Psychology, 42,141-66.
Ryan, R.M. & Frederick, C. (1997). On energy, personality and health:
Subjective vitality as a dynamic reflection of well-being. Journal of
Personality, 65, 529-565.
Ryff, C. D. (1989). Happiness is everything, or is it?: Explorations on the
meaning of psychological well-being,/ourna/ of Personality and Social
Psychology, 57,1069-1081.
Ryff, C. D., Singer, B. H., & Love, G. D. (2004). Positive health: Connecting
well-being with biology. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society
B: Biological Sciences, 359, 1383-1394. Retrieved from http://rstb.
royalsocietypublishing.org/
Stacy, R., Brittain, K., & Kerr, S. (2002). Singing for health: An
exploration of the issues. Health Education, 102[A:'), 156-162. doi:
10.1108/09654280210434228
Stone, A.A, Schwarts, J.E., Broderick, J.E, & Deaton, A. (2010). A snapshot of
the age distribution of psychological well-being in the United States.
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences in the USA, 107[22),
9985-9990. doi: 0.1073/pnas.l003744107
Unwin,M.M.,Kenny,D.T,&Davis,P.J.(2002).Theeffectsofgroupsingingonmood.
Psychology of Music, 30,175-185. doi:10.1177/0305735602302004
Valentine, E., & Evans, C. (2001). The effects of solo singing, choral singing
and swimming on mood and physiological indices. British Journal
of Medical Psychology, 74, 115-120. Retrieved from http://www.
bpsjournals.co.uk/
Watson, D., Clark, L. A., & Tellegen, A. (1988). Development and validation
of brief measures of positive and negative affect: The PANAS scales.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54(6), 1063-1070.
Wise, G.W., Hartmann, D.J., & Fisher, B.J. (1992). Exploration of the relationship
between choral singing and successful aging. Psychological Reports, 70,
1175-1183.
Young, L. (2 009). The potential health benefits of community based singing groups
for adults with cancer. Canadian Journal ofMusic Therapy, 15[1), 11-27.
Zimet, G. D., Dahlem, N.W., Zimet, S.G,, & Farley, G.K. (1988). The
Multidimensional Scale of Perceived Social Support. Journal of
Personality Assessment, 52(1), 30-41.

Canadian Journal of Music Therapy oo Revue canadienne de musicothérapie, 18(1), 61

Copyright of Canadian Journal of Music Therapy is the property of Canadian Association for Music Therapy
and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright
holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.