Research framework and multilingual expert survey on professional assessment practice, material suitability, documentation and differentiated resource use in stringed-instrument bow making.
Pretest · 11–25 October 2026: Please answer the questionnaire from your professional experience and use the comments function on each page to report unclear wording or technical problems.
Objective and relevance of the planned study
The planned study examines how the amount of source material, the calculated number of bow blanks and the number of bows that can be made in practice relate to one another.
Administrative point of departure
A uniform quantity-based conversion value can serve as an administrative point of departure. Whether it also adequately represents the number of bows that can actually be made is the subject of the planned study.
Calculation approach currently under discussion
A standardised calculation uses timber volume and predefined dimensions to derive a theoretical number of bow blanks and bows.
Evidence base for robust decisions
The study systematically examines whether material- and use-related criteria affect how many blanks can be used in practice and how the calculated quantity should be interpreted.
Equal timber volume does not necessarily mean equal practical usability.
Potential decision value
The study adds documented empirical evidence to the geometric calculation and supports its regulatory interpretation.
Conceptual test model
The study is intended to determine whether and in what form these additional influences should be considered in a robust assessment. The representation is conceptual; it does not assume that all influences can already be expressed as validated numerical factors.
Distinguishes the theoretically calculated quantity from material professionally assessed as practically suitable for defined applications.
Makes assessment criteria, uncertainty and differences in professional judgement visible and reviewable.
Can help avoid both overestimating usable material and excluding material that may be suitable for differentiated uses.
Possible contribution to decision-making
Depending on the findings, the evidence may support confirmation of a single factor, refinement through a range, differentiated factors, or a supplementary adjustment for material suitability.
The value of the study lies in empirically testing the underlying assumption rather than anticipating its outcome.
Conceptual research model. No survey or study results are presented.
Purpose
The project examines how specialists assess individual Paubrasilia echinata bow blanks and existing stringed-instrument bows, which material characteristics influence professional decisions, and how those assessments vary according to degree of expression, position, intended use and quality segment.
Systematic documentation of specialist knowledge relating to material selection, working behaviour, condition, repairability, restoration and professional appraisal.
Assessment of more than twenty anatomical, structural, visual and physical characteristics according to degree of expression, position and intended quality segment.
Two coordinated survey routes make similarities and differences between bow makers, violin makers, dealers and other experienced specialists visible.
Contribution of the study
The survey provides the professional basis for distinguishing between bow blanks that can be obtained in theory and material that is actually usable in bow making. By identifying which material characteristics and physical properties are accepted for different quality segments, the study contributes the empirical basis for a suitability factor that can complement purely volumetric conversion models and support a more realistic, differentiated and resource-efficient assessment of wood stocks.
Method and current status
The project records professional judgement in a structured and multilingual form. It is currently being validated and pretested; no final study results are presented on this website.
Two coordinated survey routes for bow makers and for violin makers, dealers and other experienced specialists, supplemented by free-text responses and expert interviews.
Assessment by degree of expression, position on the stick, intended use and quality segment, including explicit “Cannot assess” and “Not applicable” options.
A small group of specialists is reviewing terminology, translations, questionnaire routing and usability before the international survey is distributed more widely.
Planned outputs include a methods report, an analytical study and a concise policy-relevant summary. Small professional and regional groups will be interpreted cautiously.
Research position
The project starts from the need to protect wild populations of Paubrasilia echinata and does not relativise illegal origin or trade. Its purpose is to add documented professional knowledge to botanical, conservation-science and regulatory evidence, and to examine under which verifiable conditions legal, traceable and resource-efficient use may be possible. The survey does not replace population research and does not predetermine a regulatory conclusion.
Interpretation framework
The findings will document professional assessment practice. They will not, on their own, establish binding technical, economic or legal standards.
Multilingual access
Terminology is aligned across the language versions so that material characteristics, positions, degrees of expression, quality segments and response categories retain the same professional meaning.
DeutschPretest öffnen (mit Kommentaren)
EnglishOpen the Pretest (with Comments)
PortuguêsAbrir o pré-teste (com comentários)
FrançaisOuvrir le prétest (avec commentaires)
EspañolAbrir la prueba piloto (con comentarios)
日本語事前テストを開く（コメント機能付き）
ItalianoApri il pretest (con commenti)
简体中文打开预测试（可添加评论）
Survey interface
The survey combines route-specific guidance, standardised image references and position-specific assessment matrices in a consistent multilingual interface.
These images illustrate selected question formats. Please use the current pretest questionnaire to assess the content and functionality.
Project responsibility
Contact details, review documents and the concise institutional summary are provided here.
A concise overview of the project’s purpose, methodological contribution, current status and intended outputs for institutional and scientific reviewers.
Open one-page summary