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...

[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 "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?

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.

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.

[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.

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.