Personality Secrets in Your MP3 Player

Jeremy Dean writes "Once past saying 'hello' and 'how are you?' to someone you've just met, what is next? How do we make friends and get to know other people? Psychologists have talked about the importance of body language, physical appearance and clothing but they've not been so keen on what we actually talk about. A recent study put participants in same-sex and opposite-sex pairings and told them to get to know each other over 6 weeks (Rentfrow & Gosling, 2006). Analysing the results, they found the most popular topic of conversation was music. What is it about music that's so useful when we first meet someone and what kind of information can we extract from the music another person likes? "

Comments

Because...

[Pojut]

...music is supposed toc ome from the artists soul. Music explains an artists point of view on subjects.

If you and I like the same artists, chances are relatively high we hold the same views.

Not to mention when I'm blasting Emperor or Dimmu Borgir or Dying Fetus, you won't ask me to put on some Kenny G.

Re:Because...

[Fyre2012]

Sing from your fucking heart!!
I want my rockstars dead!!
Bill Hicks says it best =)

Re:Because...

[Pojut]

Anyone trying to analyze my personality through my music tastes could only come to two conclusions: Schizophrenic or Elitist Snob. I'm not sure whether either of them are wrong :)

EXACTLY. See, I may be into extreme metal, but I will never say I don't like something because it "isn't metal enough" However, I have met NUMEROUS people who would make that exact statement. It's not just the artists that I am interested in that others should be concerned with in terms of figuring out what kind of person I am...it should be how I react to the artists that YOU are into as well. Many people forget that I can learn more about them by judging their reaction to MY interests, rather than them TELLING me about theirs.

Music is essentially universal

[LiquidCoooled]

Music us everywhere, for the big global bands and artists there is generally something to discuss.
It breaks the ice.

Music is "easy"

[lonechicken]

Once you get past the introductions and the "I like everything except rap/metal/country (choose your typical singled out genre)", there's still plenty to talk about. Songs in general have a good combination of easy to understand qualitative concepts that extend beyond "this is better than that" to discuss. There's also the element of, "Hey we both like this ___, have you tried listening to ___?" Movies are the same way (as shown in that poll), though I'm a little surprised music beat movies by that much.

Re:Music is "easy"

[kthejoker]

There are a lot of reasons music is much better at judging than movies:

1) Music comes in much smaller and more discrete bites, and therefore more can be judged faster.
2) Music is easier to say "Yes" or "No" to. Most movies fall in grey areas, where you didn't like it, "but it had redeeming values" (or, corollary: it "wasn't perfect but it was still really good"). In short, people don't qualify their music tastes as much as their movie tastes.
3) Music, because it is generally easier to create, as a whole has a much larger spectrum. So niches are easier to find (and accentuate.) Again, more music means more niches.
4) And finally, music (again, because it's easier to create and has more niches) is more divided sociologically than movies are. When someone says, "I like country & western and I can't stand rap", they are making as much a statement about their sociological identity as they are about their music tastes. Someone who says "I like comedies, but I can't stand thrillers" isn't making the same kind of statement. And more to the point, there's nothing sociological that precludes someone from enjoying Pirates of the Caribbean or Superman Returns. For music, that's a lot less true.

In short, cinema as a whole must cater to drawing in as many fans as possible. Music simply doesn't need to cater to the whole, because the niche in and of itself can sustain music. Movies are "for the masses"; but if you don't like one thing of music, you can just try another.

Random sample

[pubjames]

Is this a random sample across all demographics and locations? I bet it isn't. It's probably one of those social science experiments where they draw sweeping conclusions about the whole of humanity by interviewing 30 college students.

Or am I too cynical?

High Fidelity

[Nasarius]

"What really matters is what you like, not what you are like. Books, records, films -- these things matter."

I don't think there's anything profound here.

[dpbsmith]

Music just has the right characteristics to be a good conversation topic.

Unless your a farmer or a meteorologist, you can't talk for more than a few seconds about the weather.

Sex, politics, and religion are way too dangerous.

But there is a lot of music, there is a lot to talk about, the chances are that two people selected at random know a lot more of the same music than the same books, the same movies, etc.

You can care enough about music to have a spirited, passionate discussion about it, but few people care so much about it that disagreements could lead to violence, or even to the breakup of a budding friendship.

If you take someone home to meet your parents, you don't need to worry about whether that person's taste in music will match your parents or not.

Re:I don't think there's anything profound here.

[munrock]

Music is missing a very important characteristic, and that's presence.

When you're standing at the bus stop, you'll talk to the old lady waiting for the 86 about the weather, because it's there, or about the horrendous state of transport in your area, because it's immediate and common to you both. Unless there's a radio playing, you're not going to talk about music. If there is a radio playing, the best you can expect is "Turn that shit down."

In fact if you're standing at the bus stop listening to your MP3 player, having the earbuds/headphones on means "Do not disturb" to anyone who isn't socially maladjusted.

Ugh.

[swid27]

Well, that's probably (another) reason that I manage to have a hard time creating memorable "hooks" with other people; I have practically no interest in keeping up with or finding new music. (It isn't that I don't enjoy nearly all forms of music, mind you, it's just that, for me, there's approximately zero value in seeking out new things to listen to.)

On a related note, the common geek tendency to disparage everyone who doesn't have the same eXtreMely obscure/not-yet-trendy/running counter to current popular opinion taste in music as he/she does is very lamentable. Seriously, most people don't use their taste in music to define themselves, so judging people on that is very narrow-minded.

Re:Ugh.

[Meatloaf Surprise]

Seriously, most people don't use their taste in music to define themselves, so judging people on that is very narrow-minded.

I don't think it is that narrow minded to judge someone based on the type of music they listen to. For instance, someone with a taste in, say, pop and rap is probably someone who follows the popular trend and cannot think for themselves. However, someone with a more obscure taste in music is someone who would rather be unique and not follow the group, so to speak. I hope this doesn't too much like Mr. Caulfield, but it's pretty easy to tell if someone is a phony based on the type of music they listen to.

Re:Ugh.

[radtea]

Seriously, most people don't use their taste in music to define themselves, so judging people on that is very narrow-minded.

The article is about 18 year olds, many of whom do define themselves through their musical tastes. They are of necessity narrow and shallow--they have rarely killed or fought for their life, rarely had lovers or children or freinds die, rarely risked everything to achieve a dream. They haven't had time to do anything with their lives yet. And in the West there are few tribal institutions for them to attach their loyalty to: family is thankfully not very important, religion ditto, and while a few get latched onto sports teams of one kind or another the crass commercialism of popular sport is such that a tribal affilliation with a team is too lame even for the average teenager.

To be useful as a source of the tribal feeling that all humans crave a thing must be public and communal. What is more public and communal than music? One day the teens will grow up and find a tribe of their own that is based on genuine common interests, if they're lucky. But until then they will find solace in being part of a tribe defined by the music they listen to.

This is why so many bands are decried by their early followers as "sell outs" when they become popular. It is not the kind of music they are making that has changed, but the dillution of tribal feeling, of belonging, of being part of a select and special group, that causes the psychological pain.

Just note

[in2mind]

FTA

One really important caveat for this study was that the average age of the participants was around 18 so this finding might not hold in different age-groups.

When 50 or 70 year old persons meet they probably would talk other things.

You're defined by your subculture...

[Aptgetupdate]

and your subculture is most accurately represented by its music acts.

I can determine more about a person I meet from, "I like Brittney Spears and Justin Timberlake" or "I have two playlists: GWAR, and other" (including their willingness to admit either of those) than I can from half a dozen other interests and opinions.

Clothing often crosses subcultures, as do slang, political opinion, religious belief and behavior, but there are very people whose personality and approach to life will defy their music tastes. When was the last time you met a hyper-aggressive, Type-A asshole who lists smooth Jazz before Metallica?

Of course, when you meet someone who says they like "everything" and then proceeds to list mainstream rock AND mainstream rap, know the conversation doesn't need to proceed any further because they're a fucking toolbox.

Too bad for those who don't listen to music much

[The Fun Guy]

Even though I sing in a church choir, I don't listen to music much, and I don't own any kind of personal music player, except for my old Walkman, gathering dust in the back of a drawer somewhere. When I have the radio on in the car, it's either talk radio, a book on tape or a lecture on tape (currently 9 hours into a 15-hour seminar on Dante's "Comedia").

I'm very knowledgable about art, history, literature, science, religion, politics, cooking, gardening, hunting, woodworking, and a jillion other things. I like to learn about things that interest other people, and I like to talk about things that interest me. I can hold a conversation and engage in a discussion with someone who holds a different viewpoint, without being disagreeable or opinionated. I have a lot of interests, but music isn't one of them.

But because I don't listen to music, the most obvious middle ground is closed to me. I have no idea who any of the big music stars are these days, and do not recognize a hit tune when it is played for me. Even worse, when I say, "I don't listen to music.", it's assumed that I am a completely uninteresting shlub who's leisure hours are filled with TV sitcom reruns.

Music and Personality

[logicnazi]

It doesn't surprise me that what music you like correlates with certain personality types. However, I think the assumption that people are making, that what music you like reflects something deep about you, is totally bullshit.

Musical preferences, like many other preferences, are formed as much by associations and practice as anything else. Often we might not like something at first or be neutral to it but then when your friends keep putting it on you associate it with good times (or just by repetition) and start to like it. One reason that our musical preferences say things about us is that it reflects on who are friends were and what sort of environment we grew up in. Another reason is that these very societal stereotypes affect what music we are likely to be open to liking.

For instance I know several people who weren't particularly into jazz (never really listened to it at all) but they view themselves as intellectuals and having heard that jazz is so complex and deep if you only know how to listen to it they decided to start listening to jazz. Of course they eventually started to get into but I think they could have done the same thing with Britney Spears if they had honestly believe that the music was really deep and complex.

In other words how we feel about music is often just a reflection about the societal stereotypes we have about that sort of music.

If you don't believe me try and think of how many people you know who claim to hate country music who have ever given it a really fair chance? Same with rap. However, pick a song they think they 'should' like and they will give it a much better chance. Particularly with rap and country our likes/dislikes have a lot to do with our attitudes to social class.

I know many people won't believe me because it very much *feels* like you are responding to something in the music. However, just think about how strong the placebo effect can be and how good we are at tricking ourselves and ask whether this is a plausible explanation.

Re:Likes country: emotionally stable

[Bassman59]

Country: the music of tolerance.

Re:A human being != a personality

[Rithiur]

It may not be important for *you* to know how to make friends, but it helps to understand how humans generally act in social situation. There are variety of ways to use this kind of information to help people have better lives, therapy being most notable.

Say what you will, but humans are automatons to certain extent, enough to have predictable behavioral patterns.

Re:A human being != a personality

[HappySqurriel]

Do you want to know how to make friends, or do you want to make friends?

Do you want to know how to do math, or do you want to do math?

For many people in the world the answer is do math because they have never seen it as being particularly difficult; as an example, until my forth year of mathematics in university I never bought a text book because the material was obvious. As hard as it is for most of us to understand there are millions of people in this world who have difficulty making friends, getting into romantic relationships, and functioning in a work place; by studying how personal relationships are formed, and how people interact, you can figure out a way to help people with their own issues. There is value in this work regardless of whether you see it.

science != a personality

[greg_barton]

It's completely absurd. Not everything is meant to be turned into cold science.

What's absurd is ascribing emotional motivations to science. Science is not "cold." It just is. I could call it "warm, lovely science" and that would be just as valid.

Re:Myers-Briggs Jung

[petro6]

I would tend to agree. Personality profiles based on the Big 5 personality traits (MBTI only has 4, but I think isn't far from the type of personality assessment described in this study) is like taking a piece of a person's attitude at a given time and applying it roughshod to the person's entire life.
Usually such measurements require heavy self-assessment and a mindful subject can make themselves seem however they want (even with "lie detector" questions).
I'm curious to read the study, but I put little stock in Personology...erm... personality psychology.

Re:Great idea for next /. poll

[MikeTheMan]

Code monkey offer buy you soda, tell you sweater look nice...