The effect of social feedback on music preference

Abstract

Although much is known about musical preferences, they are still hard to explain and predict. Over the last two decades, scholars have suggested that the functions served by music should be considered when interpreting musical preferences. It is known that the degree of functionality and the strength of musical preferences are correlated. However, as correlation does not equal causation, the present study sought to clarify experimentally whether the degree of functionality really determines the strength of musical preferences. The potential of music to foster social relatedness was selected as one of the most basic functions of music and was at the basis of an experimental study. Participants indicated their favorite musical style and a favorite piece of music which they deemed capable of creating a strong social bond among devotees of that style. They were told that other devotees of the same style would subsequently be asked to rate – based on that piece – how much they would like to get to know the person who had named that piece and their degree of affinity for that person. False feedback was manipulated in two randomized groups: one group received very positive feedback from the other fans (suggesting high functionality of the piece) and the other received rather negative feedback (suggesting low functionality). At the end of the study, participants indicated how much they liked the piece they had named. As expected, participants in the high-functionality group gave higher preference ratings for their selected piece than participants in the low-functionality group. The results suggest that the degree of music’s functionality in everyday life is a determinant of musical preferences.

Keywords

false feedback favorite music functions music preference social relatedness

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Arnett

J. J.

(1995). Adolescents’ uses of media for self-socialisation. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 24, 519–533.

Behne

K.-E.

(1997). The development of “Musikerleben” in adolescence: How and why young people listen to music. In Deliège

Sloboda

(Eds.), Perception and cognition of music (pp. 143–159). Hove, UK: Psychology Press.

Boer

Fischer

(2012). Towards a holistic model of functions of music listening across cultures: A culturally decentered qualitative approach. Psychology of Music, 40, 179–200.

Boer

Fischer

Strack

Bond

Lam

(2011). How shared preferences in music create bonds between people: Values as the missing link. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 37, 1159–1171.

Chamorro-Premuzic

Swami

Cermakova

(2012). Individual differences in music consumption are predicted by uses of music and age rather than emotional intelligence, neuroticism, extraversion or openness. Psychology of Music, 40, 285–300.

Cumming

(2013). The new statistics: Why and how. Psychological Science, 25, 7–29.

Dissanayake

(2006). Ritual and ritualization: Musical means of conveying and shaping emotion in humans and other animals. In Brown

Volgsten

(Eds.), Music and manipulation: On the social uses and social control of music (pp. 31–56). New York, NY: Berghahn Books.

Finnäs

(1989). How can musical preferences be modified? A research review. Council for Research in Music Education, 102, 1–58.

Frith

(1996). Performing rites: On the value of popular music. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.

10.

Gregory

A. H.

(1997). The roles of music in society: The ethnomusicological perspective. In Hargreaves

D. J.

North

A. C.

(Eds.), The social psychology of music (pp. 123–140). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

11.

Hargreaves

D. J.

North

A. C.

(1999). The functions of music in everyday life: Redefining the social in music psychology. Psychology of Music, 27, 71–83.

12.

Hargreaves

D. J.

North

A. C.

Tarrant

(2006). Musical preference and taste in childhood and adolescence. In McPherson

G. E.

(Ed.), The child as musician: A handbook of musical development. (pp. 135–154). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

13.

Huron

(2001). Is music an evolutionary adaptation? In Zatorre

R. J.

Peretz

(Eds.), The biological foundations of music (pp. 43–61). New York, NY: New York Academy of Sciences.

14.

Larson

(1995). Secrets in the bedroom: Adolescents’ private use of media. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 24, 535–550.

15.

LeBlanc

(1982). An interactive theory of music preference. Journal of Music Therapy, 19, 28–45.

16.

Lehmann

A. C.

(1994). Habituelle und situative Rezeptionsweisen beim Musikhören. Eine einstellungstheoretische Untersuchung. Frankfurt, Germany: Lang.

17.

Merriam

A. P.

(1964). The anthropology of music. Evanston, IL: Northwestern University Press.

18.

North

A. C.

Hargreaves

D. J.

(2008). The social and applied psychology of music. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

19.

Rentfrow

P. J.

Gosling

S. D.

(2003). The do re mi’s of everyday life: The structure and personality correlates of music preferences. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 84, 1236–1256.

20.

Salganik

M. J.

Dodds

P. S.

Watts

D. J.

(2006). Experimental study of inequality and unpredictability in an artificial cultural market. Science, 311, 854–856.

21.

Schäfer

Sedlmeier

(2009). From the functions of music to music preference. Psychology of Music, 37, 279–300.

22.

Schäfer

Sedlmeier

Städtler

Huron

(2013). The psychological functions of music listening. Frontiers in Psychology, 4, 511. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00511

23.

Schäfer

Tipandjan

Sedlmeier

(2012). The functions of music and their relationship to music preference in India and Germany. International Journal of Psychology, 47, 370–380.