Musical tastes and personality

[sbp.livejournal.com]

Are musical tastes and personality related?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/7598549.stm

Doesn't seem to match me, but what do you think?

Comments

[alexmacpherson.livejournal.com]

I think music taste and personality are definitely linked - music taste constitutes a part of one' spersonality, really! - but that 'survey' is reductive bollocks. Also, where is r&b.

[bigcat23.livejournal.com]

hmm, I like tunes from all of those genres. So does that mean I have a multiple personality? And talk about stereotypes - reggae listeners ( ALL of which, of course, sit around all day every day smoking weed) are not hardworking, apparently.....I know a few exceptions to that.
What a load of rubbish, and a waste of money and time.

[jel-bugle.livejournal.com]

I think it has correctly identified tweevil by describing indie types as not gentle. I totally agree with the heavy metal personality, how noble we are.

[skyecaptain.livejournal.com]

I dunno, really they only messed up "creative" in the chart pop category:

"High self-esteem, not creative, hardworking, outgoing, gentle, not at ease."

[skyecaptain.livejournal.com]

"Chart pop? That's not a very creative response. Better dock 'em points."

[koganbot]

One of the most surprising things is the similarities between fans of classical music and heavy metal. They're both creative and at ease but not outgoing.

"The general public has held a stereotype of heavy metal fans being suicidally depressed and of being a danger to themselves and society in general. But they are quite delicate things."

Given that heavy metal and classical music both draw on the romantic composers of the 19th and early 20th centuries, it is indeed surprising that there should be similarities among their audience. But fortunately, neither are likely to be suicidally depressed or a danger to themselves, given their delicacy and introversion.

[koganbot]

Not a very good article (and probably not a very good study, but the article isn't much of a help in deciding this). "Questioned about aspects of their personality" is key. I simply don't believe that indie fans are not hardworking. I believe that they believe that what they put the most effort into doesn't count as work, since they don't get paid for it. Or they don't want to classify what they do as work. I wonder whether the questions actually ask the fans to rate their own propensity to work or whether the questions are about, say, how they do at jobs and other tasks, with the researchers then defining the results on a scale of how hard this means the person works.

Either way I don't trust the results. Also, wonder whether fans of chart-pop rate themselves as uncreative or whether the professor decides that, e.g., "takes drawing classes and writes short stories" equals "creative" whereas "puts a lot of thought into her hair and her clothes" does not register as creative. I suspect that professors' way of defining things and that of the people he studies would often match up, so in that sense his results are "valid." That is, both the professor and the fans of chart-pop believe that what the fans do doesn't count as creative. That still wouldn't make the study any good.

But then, I'm expressing my own prejudices here, about professors who use such questionaires and the questionaire itself, which I've not seen.

[skyecaptain.livejournal.com]

I think this gets back to something I was discussing with dickmalone and a few others 'round here re: the role of surveys in learning more about what we might call "group tastes." The main issue being that group's don't have a collective taste, rather their individual tastes align (part of what makes them identifiable as a group in the first place). Accordingly, I don't see how you could do a study of any real validity without doing fairly exhaustive qualitative analysis on individual subjects. I would think a more successful study would find groups of fans -- dedicated, casual, all sorts of 'em -- and sitting down with each one of them and having them just spill their guts about their lives, their thoughts, their opinions, their etc. The methodology and data collection would be a nightmare, and no one would find the results to "conclude" anything, because there likely be no significant correlations to be found in a "run this through SPSS" way -- or, there would be lots of correlations, but the nature of the study wouldn't allow for many obvious causal relationships. As it should be. (This is why I'd rather read what lots of people have to say for themselves than attempt a study on the people who may or may not say anything. And anyway, what people say may or may not line up with how they really listen, their motivations for presenting the personality they do, etc. etc. etc.)

[skyecaptain.livejournal.com]

Um, someone can go through and copy edit that mess if they like.

[poptasticuk.livejournal.com]

I'm none the wiser - they don't cover non-chart pop :(