Brea Murakami, MM, MT-BC
A pdf of this submit might be accessed right here: https://www.imamusictherapist.com/wp-content/uploads/What-We-Owe-Every-Different-As-Music-Therapists.pdf
In June 2021, I revealed my first solo-authored journal article concerning the Music Remedy and Hurt Mannequin (MTHM), by which music therapists can delineate sources of hurt in music remedy observe (Murakami, 2021). I’m very pleased with the paper, which highlights a defining difficulty in medical music remedy: easy methods to determine and reply to hurt. However, the enjoyment of this milestone has been tainted by the actions of Michael Silverman, Lori Gooding, and Olivia Yinger. These three authors plagiarized my theoretical mannequin of their 2020 article “It’s…Sophisticated: A Theoretical Mannequin of Music-Induced Hurt” after I shared an early model of my manuscript with Michael Silverman in September 2019. Basically, their Music-Induced Hurt (MIH) mannequin reconfigures and re-labels the core elements of my Music Remedy and Hurt Mannequin, however they didn’t cite my mannequin even after acknowledging that they consumed and derived worth in my concepts.
I first found they’d plagiarized my work in July 2020 after I was scrolling by means of Twitter and found their Music-Induced Hurt (MIH) mannequin in a tweet from the @AmtaResearch account (AMTA, 2020a). This tweet led me on a journey by means of a number of moral dilemmas and put me face-to-face with the failures of our skilled techniques and leaders that allowed Silverman, Gooding, and Yinger to evade accountability for his or her actions. On this paper, I define the occasions I navigated to hunt justice and illustrate the shortcomings I skilled. I do know that my experiences usually are not remoted. Many different music therapists have discovered themselves in not possible moral dilemmas through which they might not discover decision, and I hope that my account offers an instance of systemic failure by which we would do higher by one another as an expert group.
Over the previous 5 years, I’ve developed the Music Remedy and Hurt Mannequin (MTHM) which outlines six potential sources from which hurt can come up inside a music remedy setting: 1) the music offered, 2) the music therapist, 3) the therapeutic software of music, 4) client-specific music associations, 5) the therapeutic relationship, and 6) ecological elements. An image of my mannequin is included beneath for reference.
The seeds of my mannequin started within the spring of 2015 after I was serving on the Illinois State Activity Drive advocating for music remedy licensure. In 2016, I floated the thought of doing my grasp’s thesis on a music and hurt associated subject, however a mentor dissuaded me from this subject as a result of lack of scholarly work on this space. On the time, the dialog round music and hurt was virtually nonexistent, to the purpose that many music therapists didn’t even contemplate that they had been able to inflicting or permitting hurt to happen of their observe. I used to be nonetheless within the subject and went on to develop an early model of the MTHM, which I offered on the American Music Remedy Affiliation (AMTA) convention in November 2017 with my colleague Daniel Goldschmidt. In response to our discuss, we had been invited by Cathy Knoll to document an episode of the AMTA Professional Podcast about my mannequin, which was launched in October 2018 (Murakami & Goldschmidt, 2018). I offered my mannequin the next 12 months in March 2018 on the WRAMTA convention (Murakami, 2018). After suggestions from these convention displays, I wrote and refined a manuscript I had drafted and I submitted this primary iteration of the MTHM paper to the journal Music Remedy Views (MTP) on July 14th, 2018. I didn’t find yourself publishing my manuscript at the moment with a view to extra absolutely develop my mannequin.
On September sixth, 2019, I obtained an e-mail from Michael Silverman through which he acknowledged listening to my and Daniel Goldschmidt’s podcast concerning the MTHM and requested a assessment copy of my first MTP manuscript. Within the e-mail Silverman acknowledged listening to the podcast, saying he “LOVED” it. He particularly promised to “not steal” my work and to “appropriately cite” my contribution. A screenshot of the e-mail is copied beneath:
I assumed that their mission was associated to state job drive actions and I despatched the paper draft the identical day. I continued to work on the manuscript and re-submitted an up to date model to the journal Music Remedy Views on June fifth, 2020. A month in a while July ninth, 2020, I turned conscious that Silverman, Gooding and Yinger (2020) revealed an article entitled, “It’s… Sophisticated: A Theoretical Mannequin of Music-Induced Hurt” within the Journal of Music Remedy (JMT) through a tweet by @AmtaResearch (AMTA, 2020a). Upon reviewing their paper, I used to be confused as to why my MTHM was not cited or acknowledged after the e-mail change between Silverman and myself 10 months earlier. Within the spirit of due diligence, I confidentially consulted with mentors and a consultant of the AMTA Ethics Board earlier than starting the casual ethics course of. On July twenty eighth, 2020 I first contacted the authors and the JMT journal editor relating to the omission of my work. The JMT Editor reported that in response to the Committee on Publication Ethics that the journal abides by, my concern was primarily an writer difficulty and really helpful that I communicate with them straight.
I contend that Silverman, Gooding, and Yinger plagiarized my mannequin by not citing it as an influential issue within the improvement of the Music-Induced Hurt (MIH) mannequin. In doing so, they violated AMTA Code of Ethics merchandise 3.9: “Give credit score when utilizing the concepts and works of others (AMTA, 2019).” The quantity of proof that they violated the AMTA Code of Ethics is overwhelming. The three authors did not cite my MTHM as an influencing issue regardless of writing of their article, “We cultivated the MIH mannequin utilizing numerous current frameworks.” With out citing my mannequin of their article, they’re unfairly taking credit score as being the primary, seminal framework by which students can conceptualize music-related hurt inside a unified mannequin. Particularly, the core elements which can be theorized as sources of hurt inside (therapeutic) music experiences are basically the identical in each fashions. I’ve included their diagram of the Music-Induced Hurt (MIH) mannequin beneath for reference (Silverman, Gooding, & Yinger, 2020).
Though the visible points of the MIH mannequin and the MTHM are totally different at face worth, the overlap between our two fashions is apparent. These shared elements and interactions inside their MIH mannequin and my MTHM particularly embody:
- Music
- Deliverer/MT-BC
- Recipient/Consumer
- Intra/Interpersonal Relationship/Therapeutic Relationship
- Ship-Music Associations/Therapeutic Utility of Music
- Recipient-Music Associations/Consumer-Particular Music Associations
Their MIH mannequin additionally consists of an Interaction issue that aligns with the Ecological Elements of my last MTHM, however I don’t attribute these similarities to plagiarism as a result of the manuscript I shared with Silverman didn’t embody the Ecological Elements. I acknowledge that the meant scope between these two fashions is barely totally different. That being mentioned, their mannequin inherently holds a medical focus that can not be ignored. All three authors are board-certified music therapists they usually cite an awesome quantity of medical music remedy analysis as the muse of their mannequin.
Moreover, Silverman, Gooding, and Yinger practiced discrimination towards my scholarship by not citing the 2018 AMTA Professional Podcast that clearly influenced their pondering. If the preliminary model of my mannequin had been revealed in MTP in 2018, then it’s extra seemingly that they might have cited my work. I imagine that their lack of quotation is because of unfair bias towards gray literature, with out considerate consideration of the benefit of my concepts. Gray literature is outlined as materials that’s produced “on all ranges of presidency, teachers, enterprise, and business in print and digital codecs, however which isn’t managed by business publishers” (Gray Literature Report, n.d.).
The three authors proceed to disregard different elements that stop them from acknowledging the seriousness of their actions. Earlier to this 12 months, I had seemed as much as the three authors as leaders within the music remedy group, however now lots of their actions really feel corrupt. For instance, all three authors function affiliate editors for the journal through which they revealed their paper. Studying the “Positionality and Privileges” part within the paper they plagiarized me in is particularly ironic. On this part, the authors explicitly “acknowledge [their] privileges, experiences, and voices associated to the event of the [MIH] mannequin.” Moreover, they refuse to acknowledge that cryptomnesia (i.e., inadvertent plagiarism) would possibly clarify their beliefs (Gingerich & Sullivan, 2013), regardless of Silverman clearly stating that he (at the least) consumed and located benefit in my concepts through the AMTA Professional Podcast. So as to add to my confusion, Silverman has since cited my work in his 2021 presentation on the GLR/MWR Digital convention, however has ignored my requests to amend the unique JMT article to quote the AMTA Professional Podcast.
The three authors’ plagiarism is a severe transgression that ought to disappoint all music therapists. The science and observe of music remedy advantages when good concepts are available for everybody to contemplate, implement, and supply suggestions on as a group. We be taught from others within the music remedy discipline through an open stream of knowledge. When doing so, we have to preserve an correct throughline of the place concepts originated. Failure to appropriately cite authors disregards the trouble and benefit of unique concepts that transfer information ahead. I really feel strongly that my mannequin helps music therapists articulate their worth to decision-makers in advocacy efforts that had initially spurred my curiosity on this subject. As such, I initially disseminated my MTHM through much less formal convention displays and podcasts in favor of extra speedy software. Though I brazenly communicated my concepts, I believed that members of my group would reciprocate my efforts by citing my work.
Silverman, Gooding, and Yinger’s failure to quote my concepts has had a number of repercussions on my profession. First, the precise timeline by which the subject of hurt unfolded within the music remedy discipline has been obscured within the peer-reviewed literature. By declining to quote my work, Silverman, Gooding, and Yinger took benefit of my standing as an early-career educational and my generosity with a view to elevate themselves. Moreover, I used to be left with no choices when attempting to publish my MTHM article within the well-established journal, Music Remedy Views (MTP). After my manuscript had been accepted by three peer reviewers, I used to be given no sensible choice however to withdraw my manuscript on the final stage earlier than publication when the MTP editors insisted that I cite Silverman, Gooding, and Yinger. The editors maintained their place on this level regardless of agreeing that my submission’s timestamps preceded Silverman et al.’s publication. It was not possible for his or her paper to have influenced my very own. As a substitute, the MTP editors insisted that I cite the authors, my plagiarizers, on a technicality as a result of their paper had been revealed earlier than mine, even after I shared the chronology of the state of affairs as much as that time. Consequently, the publication date of my paper was pushed again by a number of months as I looked for another peer-reviewed journal to publish in, additional obscuring the precise timeline of this subject.
I’ve introduced my considerations on to the authors a number of instances, however they’ve constantly denied that my mannequin had any affect on their MIH mannequin. My first try at casual decision occurred on August fifth, 2020 after I had a forty five minute Zoom dialog with Michael Silverman through which he categorically denied a number of instances that my mannequin influenced their pondering. Once I requested for proof that their MIH mannequin existed earlier than emailing me in September 2019, he screen-shared and confirmed me hand-drawn variations of their mannequin’s evolution saved to Google Drive. Nevertheless, these footage had been titled with dates that had been two weeks after he had emailed me on September sixth, 2019. After submitting a proper ethics grievance towards Silverman, Gooding, and Yinger with the AMTA Ethics Board on September third, 2020, Carol Shultis, the co-chair of the ethics board who was dealing with this case, despatched me a abstract of their formal response to my grievance which acknowledged:
“Whereas we reviewed numerous further papers throughout the conceptualization and writing of our article, these papers weren’t included as citations or references as a result of they didn’t affect our pondering or ideas. For instance, we learn and critically appraised Marik and Stegemann (2016), Watt-Jones (2010), Lozon and Bensimon (2014), and Brown, et al. (2016), amongst others. Whereas we learn and critically appraised these research, we didn’t cite these research as they didn’t influence our pondering, ideas, or work. This was additionally the case for Brea Murakami’s ideas. Furthermore, that is frequent observe in scholarly work: Authors sometimes assessment an excessive amount of literature however not all that literature impacts their work and requires a quotation.”
I attempted to schedule a casual mediation assembly with the three authors with Shultis serving as a mediator. Sadly, the assembly by no means occurred due to formal and casual limitations that eroded my belief within the Ethics Board insurance policies and Shultis’ administration. Formally, a number of casual mediation processes as Shultis defined them suppressed my potential to advocate for myself. For instance, Shultis initially defined that whereas I used to be allowed to have a consultant on the mediation assembly, that they might not communicate on my behalf. As a substitute, she defined that they could possibly be on the decision for me to seek the advice of with throughout breaks from the mediation assembly. She solely relented after my consultant had an prolonged dialog along with her about why representatives exist. Moreover, all events would have been required to conform to a non-disclosure settlement, by which I couldn’t entry, use, or disclose particular particulars of the mediated dialog in perpetuity, theoretically barring me from looking for exterior mediation or authorized counsel.
Moreover, Shultis’ actions undermined the integrity of her position as a co-chair of the ethics board, main me to develop into disillusioned with the ethics grievance course of. A number of instances Shultis shared condescending opinions that led me to mistrust her neutrality relating to my grievance. For instance, after I voiced concern that Silverman et al.’s article featured a sentence much like my very own writing, she commented that I ought to take it as a praise that my writing was pretty much as good as extra established students. In one other dialog, she commented that she didn’t see the conceptual similarities between our two fashions, elaborating that my mannequin could be higher utilized to medical music remedy courses, whereas theirs could be higher taught in psychology of music courses. Most troubling was Shultis’ failure to ever acknowledge Gooding’s obvious battle of curiosity in her twin roles as President Elect and respondent to my grievance. In her position as President Elect of the American Music Remedy Affiliation (AMTA Bylaws Article IV, Part 7; AMTA, 2020b), Gooding is the communication liaison between the Board of Administrators and the Ethics Board. Both Shultis was unaware of Gooding’s battle of curiosity resulting from her personal lack of understanding concerning the AMTA Bylaws relating to her board, a obvious oversight in itself, or Shultis obscured Gooding’s twin roles.
Moreover, Shultis’ responses to our communications had been typically staggered by a number of weeks or months and I typically needed to provoke communication to get updates. All being mentioned, my formal contact with the ethics board spanned 9 months from submitting my formal ethics grievance in September 2020 to withdrawing my grievance in June 2021. No progress had been made towards any decision. I lastly determined to desert the AMTA ethics grievance course of as a useless finish. As a last step, in June 2021 I emailed the three authors individually with my previously-prepared mediation assertion to no response. Moreover, I’ve shared my perspective of my ethics expertise with Shultis straight, with no response from her.
The previous 12 months of navigating this moral dilemma has been emotional for me. I’ve felt gaslit and personally doubted the moral basis of the music remedy career that I’ve been part of for half of my life. I’ve come to phrases that it was by no means attainable for me to realize formal decision by means of the ethics course of as it’s at present arrange. It was tough for me to pursue significant accountability after I was repeatedly handled as a authorized legal responsibility as a grievant. Probably the most irritating a part of this journey is understanding that I had each benefit to completely pursue justice. I don’t worry direct retaliation from the authors, this example doesn’t influence my livelihood, and I’ve documented proof of my grievance. I’ve no dependents to take care of and have been in a position to give my full consideration and persistence as I waded by means of the “correct” channels. And nonetheless, I couldn’t discover decision and I’ve robust doubts anybody might.
I can’t think about what number of different music therapists haven’t had the identical alternatives to pursue accountability. Anecdotally, I do know that I’m not the one music therapist who has been wronged by one other skilled and let down by the AMTA ethics grievance course of. Though I’m deeply invested in music remedy, our skilled discipline has been unhealthy for some time now. I’ve heard first- and second-hand accounts of “horror tales” about poor instructional packages, internships, and dealing situations which have left many music therapists burnt out or cynical. These circumstances make music therapists much less accessible to our shoppers, each emotionally through burnout or actually when clinicians go away the workforce. I understand how not possible taking the following step ahead can really feel when techniques are working towards your finest curiosity, reasonably than supporting progress. However, we can’t sit by doing nothing.
Shifting ahead, it’s clear that we have to reform how interprofessional ethics are dealt with. My solely ask is that we as a gaggle replicate on how this example might need gone in another way and the way we as a company can do higher. When you have had experiences that resonate with mine, I encourage you to not develop into bitter with the techniques and those that have failed us. After the frustrations of the previous 12 months, I perceive much more deeply the tasks I’ve to my college students and colleagues as certainly one of many pillars of our group. Pillars assist and elevate a constructing, stabilizing it by means of earthquakes and storms. Equally, the pillars of the music remedy career are alleged to tackle heavy and essential tasks with thoughtfulness, competence, and integrity. It’s demoralizing that Silverman, Gooding, and Yinger didn’t fulfill their obligations to me as a fellow member of the scientific group and that Shultis was not in a position to present the procedural assist I used to be looking for. However by means of their actions, I’ve higher realized how not to behave when others carry difficult info to me.
As leaders, we’re the primary guard for ensuring we’re staying accountable to the group values we’re performing in service of. If somebody has the braveness to problem me within the spirit of these shared values, I strive my finest to pay attention and be considerate. I ought to all the time contemplate that the individual I’m speaking to is attempting to make issues somewhat higher. As music therapists, we’re all pillars of our group, whether or not it’s supporting our shoppers, our colleagues, or our college students. Wanting upward, re-centering our shared values and performing with intentionality is the one path I can see ahead.
References
- American Music Remedy Affiliation (2019). American Music Remedy Affiliation code of ethics. https://www.musictherapy.org/about/ethics/
- American Music Remedy Affiliation [@AmtaResearch]. [2020a, July 9]. These music remedy researchers developed a theoretical mannequin for music-induced hurt (MIH). Study extra concerning the elements informing MIH and easy methods to defend towards them: https://is.gd/GXw5T9 #mtresearch #musictherapy @AMTAInc @OUPAcademic [Image attached] [Tweet]. Twitter.
- American Music Remedy Affiliation. (2020b, November 21). American Music Remedy Affiliation bylaws. https://www.musictherapy.org/members/bylaws/
- Gingerich, A. C., & Sullivan, M. C. (2013). Claiming hidden reminiscences as one’s personal: A assessment of inadvertent plagiarism. Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 25(8), 913-916. https://doi.org/10.1080/20445911.2013.841674
- Gray Literature Report (n.d.). What’s gray literature? https://www.greylit.org/about
- Murakami, B., & Goldschmidt, D. (2017, November 16-19). Music and hurt: What we all know and what we have to know. [Conference presentation]. AMTA 2017 Convention, St. Louis, MO, United States.
- Murakami, B. (2018, March 1-3). A framework for understanding the potential for hurt inside music remedy. [Conference presentation]. WRAMTA 2018 Convention, Ontario, CA, United States.
- Murakami, B., & Goldschmidt, D. (Hosts). (2018, October). Potential hurt in music remedy? [Audio podcast]. https://amtapro.musictherapy.org/?p=2100
- Murakami, B. (2021). The Music Remedy and Hurt Mannequin (MTHM): Conceptualizing hurt inside music remedy observe. ECOS, 6(1), 003-003. https://doi.org/10.24215/27186199e003
- Silverman, M.J., Gooding, L. F., & Yinger, O. (2020). It’s…sophisticated: A theoretical mannequin of music-induced hurt. Journal of Music Remedy, 57(3), 251-281. https://doi.org/10.1093/jmt/thaa008
