The following are the main text sections for the report. Also included are some headings and instructions from the original form. You will note that we were asked to refer to the original application, which you can also download a synopsis of.

Questions regarding this text please contact Scott deLahunta: sdela@ahk.nl

END OF AWARD REPORT

Arts and Science Research Fellowships

Completed and submitted: 10 November 2004

To be completed by the award-holder and Fellow at the end of the award period. 

Award-Holder:

Dr. Rosaleen McCarthy
Department of Experimental Psychology
Downing Street
Cambridge
CB2 3EB

Institution at which award was held:

University of Cambridge

Fellow: 

Wayne McGregor
Random Dance
Sadler's Wells Theatre
Rosebery Ave
London, EC1R 4TN

Amount awarded:

£29925.00

Title of research project:

Choreography and Cognition: a joint research project 

Dates of project:

Start date: 01/ 09/ 2003

End date: 30/ 04/ 2004

An extension until 30 April 2004 was approved by ACE / AHRB on 12 December 2003.

Section A: Research Report:

Please attach copies of your original application and refer to them when completing the section below. You should include in your report:

•	your own assessment of the extent to which the stated aims and objectives of the research proposal have been achieved
•	details of any difficulties encountered or changes to the programme of research during the period of the award that you consider are relevant to this report.
•	assess the impact of the scientific aspects of the project on the art research and the impact of the arts aspects of the proposal on science research.

A1 The Research Process:

The aims and objectives as described in the original application have all been met, as the following description of the project should make clear. We followed the plans for 'methods, timetables and roles' outlined in the original application almost exactly with only minor changes to the timetable. There were no major difficulties encountered during the programme of research. We requested and received an extension of two months to give more time for continuing some lines of investigation, for the preparation and presentation of the joint research at a major public forum (at the Winchester Festival of Art and Mind, 5-7 March 2004 – see Output of Research section), and to conclude budget management by the University. The mutual impact of the research is also addressed in the following description.

As described in the original application, an initial two-day shared session was organised for all participants on 7-8 November 2003 in the rehearsal studio at Sadler's Wells Theatre, London where Wayne McGregor's Random Dance is company-in-residence (this and all subsequent sessions were co-ordinated by Scott deLahunta working closely with the staff of Random Dance). In the mornings we observed Wayne McGregor and his company of ten dancers generate new movement material and subsequently we discussed these observations in the afternoons. The movement generation sessions were also recorded on video. During the discussion sessions, the collaborating scientists were invited to present responses to what they had seen based on their individual areas of research and also had an opportunity to question Wayne and two of the dancers. We had set aside two weeks in December and one week at the end of January 2004 when the scientists could return to the studio to continue whatever line of questioning might have emerged for them. In the discussion sessions we achieved our goals of defining the starting points for research to take place during these return visits.

The first afternoon's discussion session on 7 November was organised so that each scientist had an allotted time to describe his or her observations in the movement generation sessions. The discussions were recorded in audio and video for future reference. The discussion included freely querying and seeking clarification from each other, Wayne and the dancers. The outcome was an enhanced shared understanding of methods, terminology and vocabularies across disciplines. It was agreed that this session was as useful for the cross-fertilisation of ideas between scientists as it was for forging links and understanding between artists and scientists.

These conversations continued the afternoon of the second day after another morning session observing Wayne and the dancers generate movement material using a different set of exercises. Our goal for the end of this shared session was to define some starting points for the research that was scheduled to take place during return visitsThe second afternoon's discussion began with Wayne responding to what he had found of interest in the observations and research areas of the scientists. For example, he explained how he felt that neuroscience research might help him invent movement generation exercises that would disturb normal patterns of perception and motion control. We continued to explore areas of mutual interest and, by the end of the discussion session on 8 November, arrived at three lines of enquiry that had implications for Wayne's creative process and could at the same time be explored from different scientific starting points, i.e. cognitive, neurological, psychophysical and biomechanical: 

[1] perturbations – the introduction of disruptions and selective interference to danced movement as a creative strategy.

[2] parsing – the perception of segmentation of dance sequences.

[3] representation – the examination of choreographic design processes involving external representations (notations) and associated behaviours. 

Before the scheduled research studio time in December and January, these three themes evolved into five separate strands of investigation for which a variety of experiments were designed and carried out (as far as possible within the budget limitations) with the intention of investigating what takes place in the mind and body of the choreographer and dancer in the context of the choreographic process. These five strands are outlined in section A2 below.

During December and January, an intensive schedule of interactions and exchanges was organised to support these five lines of investigation. Sometimes the collaborating scientists visited the rehearsal studio by themselves, sometimes overlapping, working with various dancers in the company. Mutual curiosity on the part of Wayne and the scientists had instigated and continued to fuel these interactions, but crucial to their success was the open-mindedness and creativity of his extraordinary company of dancers and the ongoing facilitation provided by Scott deLahunta. On 18 December and on 31st January, meetings were organised for the mutual exchange of information. All of the artists and scientists came together for a review of what had taken place. These meetings started with each collaborating scientist giving a short presentation of their "work in progress". What began as descriptions of what the scientists were looking for became themselves the objects of probing and clarification; thus providing crucial insight into the cross-disciplinary interaction. 

For most of the participants, the end of January was the conclusion of the period of shared research in the rehearsal studio (Tony Marcel's project continued into February and March). Now lines of investigation or research strands were pursued separately including the transcription of interviews and further analysis of collected video and research data. Documentation was organised and collated, both joint and individual papers prepared and presented and plans for the website developed (see Output of Research section). Intensely stimulated by the exchanges so far and wishing to continue the joint research, we immediately began a discussion, via our group email list, about raising further funds, and we applied for a Choreography and Cognition Network to the EPSRC's call for proposals under their heading of Culture and Creativity. We were, unfortunately, unsuccessful with this bid.

In February, Wayne and the dancers went into an intensive rehearsal period for a major new choreography titled AtaXia that would premiere in London 4-6 June 2004.  This choreography was influenced creatively by the collaborative research period achieving the main artistic objective of the joint research project: to integrate the participation and contribution from the scientists into the fabric of the choreographic process. It is important to point out that this new choreography was never intended to be about or illustrate the work of the scientists. The public understanding of science has been one of the key objectives of science and art projects previously funded in the UK, but this Fellowship scheme made it possible to imagine and pursue joint research under other terms: to explore the possibility of doing collaborative research that would find value in both domains.

The evidence of the impact of the joint research on Wayne's creative process might be best articulated as follows. The artistic process is one of absorption and transformation over time of many different types of influences. Therefore the new sets of information, different terminology, ways of thinking about creativity and cognition, movement control and coordination and many other fresh reference points and insights shared so generously by the collaborating scientists were to impact not only on the creation of the new work – but also have longer term implications for Wayne's dance making. Publicity for the new choreography AtaXia has of course acknowledged the contributions of the collaborating scientists and the joint research project (see Output of Research section).

Dance and dance making involves a unique blend of physical and mental processes; multiple interacting dimensions of mind, brain and body spanning sensation, perception, cognition, emotion and movement control. We have greatly increased our mutual understanding of the complex interrelations between these processes through this joint research project involving choreographer, dancers and cognitive scientists. The project doesn't have any single conclusion, as the research is ongoing and continuing in different separate contexts (see Output of Research section). We only hope that more resources can be made available soon to enable further collaborative research to take place. 

A2 The Five Lines of Investigation/ Experiment:

[1] Alan Blackwell from the Computer Lab, University of Cambridge studies the cognitive dimensions of design and notation systems in collaboration with a research community who adopt analytic methods from a range of fields including experimental psychology and design research. Alan collected notebooks and scores from Wayne and four of the dancers and used some of these analytic methods to try and discover where they might experience the limitations of these design tools. The aim was to see how Wayne might improve on the use of notations in the context of his creative process.

[2] Tony Marcel and Phil Barnard from the Cognition and Brain Science Unit, Cambridge proposed an experiment to investigate the dancers' perception of the smallest units of movement in a newly generated movement phrase. They asked Wayne to give the dancers two different types of exercises to generate short movement phrases, and these were videotaped and then viewed by the dancers. With specific instructions for segmenting or 'parsing' the phrases, Wayne and the ten dancers recorded individual responses in data collection forms, which have since undergone a preliminary analysis that have lead to a set of interesting comparisons and contrasts as regards movement making and perceiving across the group.

[3] In addition to the parsing experiment, Tony Marcel conducted a series of structured interviews to probe levels of introspection and awareness during the creative process. The interviews sought to capture a sense of the overall phenomenology experienced by and preferred by generating dancers.

[4] Alan Wing and Kristen Hollands from the Sensory and Motor Neuroscience Centre, University of Birmingham took as their starting point a broad set of questions such as: what frames of reference are dance movements controlled in? What are the crucial sensory systems for describing these frames of reference? How might selected disruptions or perturbations help to test this? In order to investigate these questions, four dancers were recorded performing newly generated and learned movement phrases using an optical motion capture system. The collected data has undergone a preliminary analysis that points towards some possible benefits ranging from: an increase in the scientific understanding of how movement is planned and executed to offering an enhanced understanding of how to encourage artistic variability of movement and expand movement vocabularies.

[5] Rosaleen McCarthy from the Department of Experimental Psychology, University of Cambridge was interested in those aspects of the first person cognitive experience she could discover through a systematic disruption of memory and imagery for dance sequences. To explore this she set up some simple dual task experiments with the dancers using imagined movement sequences combined with simple motor and verbal tasks. Evidence for disruption by specific secondary tasks was detected by slowing and reported breakdown of the mental imagery process. Such dual task methods are potentially able uncover the cognitive 'toolkit' employed by choreographers and/ or dancers.  One of her aims was to gather information that might be useful to Wayne in communicating movement generating exercises to his dancers; e.g. what sort of instruction/ stimuli he might choose to give and in what order.

What has not been so well detailed above is the investigative work of the social anthropologist James Leach who has been researching the relations between interdisciplinarity, creativity and knowledge production across all the ACE / AHRB Fellowships. James was more closely aligned with our project than with most of the others and spent many hours observing our collaborative research and interaction. The results of this have partially emerged in the context of the Interdisciplinary Design Workshop organised by James in March at Cambridge involving several of this project's participants (see Output of Research section). More results of his work will no doubt emerge soon and have a positive influence on future planning and support for this area of mutual arts and science research.

Output of research:

Please indicate any publications or other forms of public output, which have arisen from the research.  Outputs that are in preparation should be identified with an asterisk.  Where the output differs significantly from that outlined in your application, please provide details. Please also indicate if any other dissemination such as conference papers, seminars or lectures has taken place or is planned for the future.

Presentations and Publication related to symposia:

Presentation: Wayne McGregor, Laila Diallo, Matthias Sperling, Scott deLahunta, Alan Wing, Rosaleen McCarthy. "Choreography and Cognition: an exploration of mind and movement through science and dance". Winchester Festival of Art and Mind. 5-7 March 2004. The Festival of Art and Mind was a major public forum for the presentation of our joint research project in the context of a three-day programme involving artists and scientist including V.S. Ramachandran, Anthony Gormley, Daniel Glaser, A.S. Byatt, Guy Claxton and Brian Eno.

Presentation and Proceedings: Kristen Hollands, Alan Wing & Andreas Daffertshofer. "Principal Components Analysis of Contemporary Dance Kinematics". Proceedings of the 3rd IEEE EMBSS UK &RI PostGraduate Conference in Biomedical Engineering & Medical Physics. University of Southampton, August 9-11, 2004.

Presentation and **Proceedings: Kristen Hollands, Alan Wing & Andreas Daffertshofer. "Principal components in contemporary dance movements". Society for Neuroscience Conference. San Diego, USA, October 23-27, 2004.

Presentation and Proceedings: Scott deLahunta. "Choreography and Cognition: A joint research project". Art and Science: Proceedings of the XVIII Congress of the International Association of Empirical Aesthetics. Eds. João Pedro Fróis, Pedro Andrade & J. Frederico Marques. Lisbon: IAEA2004. September 2004. pp. 169-173. This presentation was part of a panel organised by Kate Stevens of the MARCS Auditory Laboratories, University of West Sydney, Australia where the only other funded joint arts and science research project connecting choreography and studies of cognition that we are aware of has been taking place. This was an invaluable opportunity to exchange information and make future plans involving our two projects. (http://www.ausdance.org.au/unspoken/).

Presentation: Wayne McGregor. "The Science of Making Dances". Royal Institute of Great Britain. 27 October 2004.

Publications not related to symposia:

Scott deLahunta. "Separate Spaces: some cognitive dimensions of movement". Species of Spaces (a DIFFUSION eBook Series). London: Proboscis. 2004. http://diffusion.org.uk/.

**Alan Blackwell, Scott deLahunta, Wayne McGregor and John Warwicker. "Transactables". Performance Research, On The Page Issue. Eds. Ric Allsopp and Kevin Mount. Vol. 9, No. 2. (upcoming winter 2004).

**Phil Barnard and Scott deLahunta. "Parsing dance phrases: some observations on variation and insight". Tanz im Kopf: Jarbuch 15 der Gesellschaft für Tanzforschung. Wilhelmshaven: Florian Noetzel-Verlag (upcoming winter 2005).

Publications about the project by non-team members:

Olga Wojtas. "Flexible Fellows take to the floor". The Times Higher Education Supplement. 6 November 2003.

Tony Tysome. "Dancers offer clue to brain functions". The Times Higher. 6 February 2004.

Catherine Hale. "The Science of Making Dances". Dance Gazette. Issue 2. 2004, pp. 16-19.

Sanjoy Roy. "AtaXia". Contemporary. Issue 65. 2004, pp. 34-27. A review of the performance (see other list below), but also contains substantive detail about the research collaboration.

**Emma Crichton-Miller interviewed members of the team in may 2004, and some of this material will be included in a general piece on sci-art for the December issue of Prospect Magazine.

Other public events:

A Joint Presentation organised by James Leach involving Wayne McGregor, Liala Diallo, Scott deLahunta, Alan Blackwell, Rosaleen McCarthy at the Cambridge Social Property Seminar Series: Interdisciplinary Design Workshop 1. Cambridge. 19 March 2003.

Radio:

BBC Radio 3 Sunday Feature – pre-recorded interview with Rosaleen McCarthy and Wayne McGregor as part of a piece on the Fellowships and sci-art collaborations broadcast on 17 October.

Publicity related to premiere of AtaXia 3-5 June 2004, Sadler's Wells:

The research collaboration is mentioned in the following selection.

Previews: The Times (29 May); What's On In London (26 May). 

Reviews: The Guardian (4 June); The Times (7 June); The Observer (6 June); Islington Tribune (4 June); Independent on Sunday (13 June); The Stage (10 June); Financial Times (7 June); Independent (8 June).
 
Television: BBC 2 Newsnight Review – Friday 4 June.

Radio: BBC Radio 4 Front Row – Wayne McGregor interviewed by Mark Lawson on Tuesday 1 June; BBC Radio 3 Nightwaves – pre-recorded interview with Wayne McGregor, Judith Mackrell, Professor Alan Wing broadcast on 1 June; BBC London The Tessa Dunlop Show – Wayne McGregor and Sarah Seddon Jenner interviewed on Sunday 23 May.

AtaXia continues touring nationally as well as internationally including Lyon, Helsinki, Beijing and Amsterdam. The research collaboration was mentioned in a New York Times review (28 September) following performance in the Lyon Dance Biennial.

Project Website:

We have registered the following domain name: http://www.choreocog.net to be the documentation website for the project. The site will serve as the main general point for information about and dissemination of the joint research outcomes as well as where future developments, e.g. research activites, networks, etc. might be made public.

The contents of the site will include: Introduction/ Project Description; Research Diary (September through February); On Line Experiments (with video streaming); AtaXia Section: images, press and articles; Related Links.

The site has had basic information on line since the premiere of AtaXia in early June, but the official site launch is now scheduled for 15 November 2004.

Divergences from application

One of the unusual characteristics of this funding scheme was that expectations for "tangible output" were minimal. Therefore, we made a modest proposal in our application to publish documentation on a cd-rom or DVD and a written article in an upcoming issue of Performance Research. It should be evident from the above that public output has far exceeded this. Rather than a cd-rom or DVD it was decided that a dynamic website would be a better choice for the widest distribution possible of the documentation via the Internet.

Section B: Impact and Relevance of the Research: 

(we were asked to assess the impact on a scale of no, low, moderate, high impact and not applicable)

(1) What impact has the research project had on the development of the Fellow's academic knowledge or research activity and that of the scientist(s) engaged on the project?

Fellow: High Impact
Scientist(s): Moderate to High Impact

The impact of the project on the development of Wayne McGregor's choreographic work has been significant, stimulating new and challenging questions related to the generation and shaping of choreographic material; through the enhanced understanding of the cognitive processes at play in the creative process. This does not mean that Wayne has become a 'scientist' in the professional sense on a par with the collaborators, but through extended one-on-one interaction and exchange, both Wayne and the dancers have had the opportunity to develop fresh and unique perspectives that will inform their work for some time to come.

It was not the aim of the 'scientists' to become choreographers in the professional sense, but gaining a better understanding of how the form of a dance emerges from its inception has arguably had an impact on their experience of going to see contemporary choreography. This benefit is not so visible in the "output of research", which focused mainly on domain specific research value derived collaboratively; but the implication of this goes beyond the project. Furthermore, the project offered a unique opportunity for the scientists to interact with each other in facing common problems. 

The impact on the individual collaborating scientists, their academic knowledge and research activity, has also been very significant. Alan Wing and Kirsten Hollands, for example, have gained a better understanding of Principle Components Analysis through applying it to complex dance movements. Alan is also in the process of applying for another grant inspired by the Choreography and Cognition project to better understand predictive synchronization. The 'parsing' experiment Phil Barnard and Tony Marcel devised is, as far as we know, something that has never been done before and it has thrown up some intriguing questions that Phil feels are worth further exploration. Alan Blackwell has two HCI (human computer interaction) students currently working on developing ideas for an interactive choreographer's sketchbook drawing on the research Alan did on the project. With her practice in clinical neuropsychology, most of Rosaleen McCarthy's experience is with patients with disabilities, but this project was an opportunity for her to extend and explore the skills and abilities of individuals who are movement 'experts'. Her interest in the interaction between dancers and choreographer is leading to further research collaborations exploring the interplay between linguistic and non-linguistic communication and expression.

(2) What impact do you think this project has had or will have on the development of the careers of the Fellow and the scientist(s) attached to the project?  

Fellow: Moderate to High Impact
Scientist(s): Moderate to High Impact

Trying to be realistic, in terms of careers, it is not yet clear how the project will play out over time and what the evidence for career enhancement will be. As noted above, the impact on Wayne McGregor on his research process and understanding of communication and creative processes has been high. Undoubtedly Wayne's career has benefited; but longer-term IMPACT is harder to assess. This may be due to the fact that a six-month research project is does not give enough data to enable us to extrapolate at the level of career progress. The same is true for some of the scientists, in particular for Phil Barnard and Tony Marcell it is not clear how this project will directly benefit their careers.

On the other hand, Rosaleen McCarthy has already participated in one Sci-Art project so this project builds on her already established commitment to radical cross-disciplinary projects. Alan Wing is seeking to link with an Arts Institution for further collaboration (it should be noted that the unsuccessful EPSRC Choreography and Cognition network bid was lead by Alan Wing and Kirsten Hollands from SYMON in Birmingham). Kristen Hollands will base the first chapter of her PhD on the research they did on the project – so the project has had a large impact on the development of her career. And clearly, as the co-director of Crucible, the Cambridge University network for research in interdisciplinary design and collaboration, Alan Blackwell has derived a career benefit from his participation in the project, which has also contributed directly to his own research into the cognitive dimensions of notational systems.

We have also made a strong connection with the Australian project at the MARCS Auditory Laboratories, University of West Sydney referred to in the "output of research" which may result in further career opportunities.

(3) What impact has the research had in advancing creativity, insights, knowledge or understanding in the areas of the creative and performing arts and science and engineering? How is this of interest and value to the research community and other audiences?

Research Community: Moderate to High Impact
Wider Audiences: Moderate to High Impact

The project involved an open and supportive sharing of skills and perspectives between the scientists as well as across the Arts-Science divide. The research process had a wonderful dynamic and playful aspect, partly because we were all participating in a studio/rehearsal room setting rather than in a formal seminar or office. My opinion was that this unusual context encouraged speculation and novel ideas: the choreographer and dancers could be brave with their bodies and the scientists could take intellectual risks as well. In the course of our discussion days with the AHRB we agreed that the organisation of the project, with Scott deLahunta acting as our central co-ordinator, provided an excellent model for interdisciplinary research.  Of course, it is difficult to respond to questions of impact and value on the basis of a six-month research project.. The degree of outcomes and public visibility achieved so far suggest that we will achieve longer-term positive results in relation to the question posed. 

(4) What impact may your project have on wider collaboration between the subject areas of the creative and performing arts and science and engineering?  What impact has the award made in developing a research culture that supports the cross-fertilisation of ideas within the host institution?  

Wider collaboration: Moderate to High Impact
Cross-fertilisation of ideas: Moderate to High Impact

While similar to the previous questions, here we may be able to specify a number of indications that the impact will be at the very least MODERATE and perhaps HIGH. However, the high visibility, interest from others in the field, the unusual science and choreography mix (sci-art projects have tended to involve music and visual arts more than theatre and dance), the success of the particular approach/ methodology to initiating and sustaining productive dialogue and exchange and the fact that this can be shared with others. In addition, the ongoing efforts to co-write and present outcomes in the context of "hybrid discourse" all suggest that this project will have a moderate to high future impact on wider collaboration.

In addition to a strong teaching component, the Department of Experimental Psychology, the project host, is a 5* (RAE rating) research organisation that has always sought to engage with innovative new ways of thinking about and applying experimental psychology. The positive results of the Choreography and Cognition project will be used to stimulate future such collaborations perhaps on a larger scale.

END/ END/ END/ END