4.0 Article

Specific demands and resources in the career of the Norwegian freelance musician

期刊

ARTS & HEALTH
卷 6, 期 3, 页码 205-222

出版社

ROUTLEDGE JOURNALS, TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/17533015.2013.863789

关键词

freelance musicians; artists as entrepreneurs; psychosocial work environment; mental health; occupational health psychology

资金

  1. Norwegian ExtraFoundation for Health and Rehabilitation (Extrastiftelsen) through EXTRA funds
  2. Norwegian Musicians' Union and Performing Arts Health Norway

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Research indicates that there is a higher degree of mental health problems, family/work conflicts and sleep-related problems among workers in creative occupations than in other professions. Research also reveals that musicians have to deal with a relatively high degree of occupational stress. There is, however, a lack of research investigating the qualities of freelance musicians' psychosocial work environment, as well as possible protective factors for maintaining good mental health. Methods: Based on 12 in-depth interviews, we used a template analysis to examine the unique characteristics of the professional life of freelance pop and rock musicians. Results: Using the job demands-resources model as a conceptual framework, we found that an unpredictable future, threats to the family/work balance and significant amounts of external pressure were three broad contextual demands facing freelance musicians. Social support from family, fellow band members, audiences and their professional network, as well as having adequate personal resources such as entrepreneurial skills, value-anchored flexibility, tolerance for ambiguity and dedication to music making were described as important for managing life as a freelance musician. Conclusions: Musicians' psychosocial work environment and health seem to be related to the three overarching protective factors also described in resilience research: namely personal dispositions, family coherence and social resources.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.0
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据