Keywords
performance cues;
musical memory;
self-regulated learning;
cue construction;
metacognitive monitoring;
motivation;
self-efficacy;
instrumental practice;
autonomous learning
Abstract
Memorized performance is widely recognized as a a widely used marker of instrumental expertise because it releases performers’ attention from continuous note retrieval and allows greater focus on structural awareness, technical control, and expressive interpretation. Despite its importance, many students experience unstable memorization: recall may collapse under performance pressure, reliance on the written score remains strong, and practice frequently centers on mechanical repetition rather than deliberate encoding or reflective monitoring. This paper argues that such difficulties are not simply the result of limited memory capacity but emerge from the combined absence of a coherent internal memory structure and an effective regulatory approach to learning.
To address this conceptual problem, the present paper examines two influential theoretical perspectives. Chaffin’s Performance Cues (PCs) theory explains how musical memory becomes organized through networks of meaningful reference points that connect semantic understanding, motor coordination, structural awareness, emotional intention, and auditory imagery. In parallel, Zimmerman’s Self-Regulated Learning (SRL) model conceptualizes learning as a cyclical process in which learners set goals, apply strategies, monitor performance, and engage in reflective evaluation supported by motivational beliefs such as self-efficacy and task value. Rather than treating these perspectives as separate lines of inquiry, this paper develops a theoretical analysis of their complementarity as well as their points of tension, including differing assumptions about temporal development, the sequencing of learning strategies, and the role of motivation within practice.
Building on this analysis, the paper proposes an integrated conceptual framework in which SRL processes operate as regulatory pathways through which cue-based memory structures are intentionally constructed and stabilized. From this perspective, stable memorized performance emerges from the dynamic interaction between structural encoding and cyclical self-regulation rather than from repetition alone. The framework highlights pedagogical possibilities for guiding learners toward autonomous memorization by combining cue construction with explicit regulatory support, and it outlines directions for future theoretical and empirical work on the co-development of memory structure and learning regulation in instrumental practice.
References
1.Aydan, S. (2025). Another brick in the wall to understand the complex process of self-regulated learning: general and domain-specific features of SRL. Education Sciences, 15(3), 293.
2.Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action. Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 1986(23-28), 2.
3.Chaffin, R., Gerling, C. C., & Demos, A. P. (2024). How secure memorization promotes expression: A longitudinal case study of performing Chopin’s Barcarolle, Op. 60. Musicae Scientiae, 28(4), 703–722.
4.Chaffin, R., Ginsborg, J., Dixon, J., & Demos, A. P. (2023). Recovery from memory failure when recalling a memorized performance: The role of musical structure and performance cues. Musicae Scientiae, 27(1), 94–116.
5.Chaffin, R., & Imreh, G. (1994). Memorizing for piano performance: A case study of a concert pianist. 3rd Practical Aspects of Memory Conference, University of Maryland, College Park,
6.Chaffin, R., & Imreh, G. (2002). Practicing perfection: Piano performance as expert memory. Psychological science, 13(4), 342–349.
7.Chaffin, R., Lisboa, T., Logan, T., & Begosh, K. T. (2010). Preparing for memorized cello performance: The role of performance cues. Psychology of music, 38(1), 3–30.
8.Chaffin, R., Logan, T. R., & Begosh, K. T. (2008). Performing from memory.
9.Ginsborg, J., & Chaffin, R. (2011). Preparation and spontaneity in performance: A singer's thoughts while singing Schoenberg. Psychomusicology: Music, Mind and Brain, 21(1-2), 137.
10.Kohut, D. L. (1985). Musical performance: Learning theory and pedagogy. (No Title).
11.Lisboa, T., Chaffin, R., & Demos, A. P. (2015). Recording thoughts while memorizing music: a case study. Frontiers in Psychology, 5, 1561.
12.Zimmerman, B. J. (1998). Academic studing and the development of personal skill: A self-regulatory perspective. Educational psychologist, 33(2-3), 73–86.
13.Zimmerman, B. J. (2012). Goal setting: A key proactive source of academic self-regulation. In Motivation and self-regulated learning (pp. 267–295). Routledge.
14.Zimmerman, B. J., Bandura, A., & Martinez-Pons, M. (1992). Self-motivation for academic attainment: The role of self-efficacy beliefs and personal goal setting. American educational research journal, 29(3), 663–676.
15.Zimmerman, B. J., & Kitsantas, A. (1997). Developmental phases in self-regulation: Shifting from process goals to outcome goals. Journal of educational psychology, 89(1), 29.
16.Zimmerman, B. J., & Kitsantas, A. (1999). Acquiring writing revision skill: Shifting from process to outcome self-regulatory goals. Journal of educational psychology, 91(2), 241.
17.Zimmerman, B. J., & Pons, M. M. (1986). Development of a structured interview for assessing student use of self-regulated learning strategies. American educational research journal, 23(4), 614–628.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Copyright (c) 2026 Renjie Li, Agnes Balint