Rentfrow et al UK music stereotypes

Group Processes & Intergroup Relations 2009 Vol 12(3) 329–344

You Are What You Listen To: Young People’s Stereotypes about Music Fans Peter J. Rentfrow and Jennifer A. McDonald University of Cambridge

Julian A. Oldmeadow University of York

Research suggests that young people use music to express themselves and to make claims about their identities. The current work considered the possible consequences of using music in this way. Using a sample of 80 British young adults, we aimed to replicate and extend previous research on the stereotypes that young people have about fans of various musical genres. It was hypothesized that individuals attribute similar psychological characteristics and social categories to fans of certain styles of music and that those distinct associations are generalizable. Results indicated that judges agreed on both the psychological (personality, personal qualities and values) and social (ethnicity and social class) characteristics of music fans, that the content of the music-genre stereotypes varied between genres, and that the stereotypes are geographically robust. The implications of this work for group processes and intergroup relations are discussed.

keywords

genre, music preference, social identity, stereotypes

Music is arguably one of the most common modes of self-expression among young people. Consider, for instance, people who wear T-shirts emblazoned with the names of their favourite bands, people who blare their music loudly so that others can hear, or people who adorn the walls of their rooms with pictures of their favourite artists. With the proliferation of social networking websites like Facebook and MySpace, where people can share whatever information about themselves they choose, music preferences are among the most common forms of information displayed. Indeed, there are numerous web-based music applications on Facebook such as iLike and Last.fm that log and display users’ music

listening habits on their web pages so that others can see which bands and songs users enjoy or listen to most (Facebook application directory, n.d.). In all of these instances, it appears that individuals are using music to make identity claims—public statements about who they are, who they want to be, and how they want others to perceive them. Author’s note Address correspondence to Peter J. Rentfrow, Department of Social and Developmental Psychology, the University of Cambridge, Free School Lane, Cambridge CB2 3RQ, UK [email: [email protected]]

Copyright © The Author(s), 2009 Reprints and permissions: http://www.sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav 12:3; 329–344; DOI: 10.1177/1368430209102845

Group Processes & Intergroup Relations 12(3)

Why do people choose to communicate information about their music preferences? A common reason adolescents give is that their music preferences represent who they are—their opinions, values, and lifestyles (North & Hargreaves, 1999; North, Hargreaves, & O’Neill, 2000; Rentfrow & Gosling, 2003). In fact, young people believe that music is a better communicator of their identity than the clothing they wear, the movies they watch, or the hobbies they pursue (Rentfrow & Gosling, 2003). From a social identity theory perspective (Tajfel, 1974; Tajfel & Turner, 1979), when individuals express information about their music preferences it effectively places them into a particular social category or group. Such self-categorization processes can in turn influence how individuals are perceived by others (Turner, Hogg, Oakes, Reicher, & Wetherell, 1987). Thus, one reason why people might broadcast information about their music preferences is because they believe that it will provide others with meaningful information about who they are. But when observers know what kind of music a person likes, what does it actually tell them about the person? What information does it conjure up? Drawing on recent work in the social psychology of music, this research examined the information communicated through music preferences. Specifically, we investigated the content and generalizability of the stereotypes young people have about fans of various music genres. Ultimately, this work aims to inform our understanding of how music can influence identity development and intergroup relations. What information might be communicated through music preferences? Music preferences could communicate at least two types of information about a person. First, it might communicate information about the social groups to which people belong. According to Frith (1981), people use music as a badge to represent their membership in a particular social group so as to differentiate themselves from individuals in other groups (see also Bryson, 1996; Dolfsma, 1999; North & Hargreaves, 1999; North et al., 2000; Tarrant, North, & Hargreaves, 2002). Therefore, sharing information about one’s music preferences effectively sends a message to others that the person

330

possesses attitudes, values, and beliefs that are in line with those of the members of that social group. For example, someone who expresses a preference for classical music is telling others that she is a member of the group of people who likes classical music and hence has the lifestyle, opinions, and preferences of people who belong to that group. Second, music preferences might communicate information about people’s unique psychological characteristics. A growing body of research on music preferences indicates that individuals prefer styles of music that reinforce and reflect aspects of their identities and personalities. For example, individuals high in sensation seeking prefer intense and stimulating music (e.g. rock and punk music) more than calm and conventional music (e.g. classical and jazz music; Litle & Zuckerman, 1986); males with low resting arousal and antisocial traits enjoy listening to arousing and rebellious styles of music (e.g. rock and rap music; McNamara & Ballard, 1999); and individuals who perceive themselves as creative and curious enjoy listening to complex and sophisticated music (e.g. classical and jazz music) more than conventional styles of music (e.g. pop music; Rentfrow & Gosling, 2003; Rentfrow & McDonald, in press; Zweigenhaft, 2008). Thus, in addition to communicating information about the social groups to which people belong, music preferences may also communicate information about individuals’ personalities and values. But what are the consequences of displaying one’s music preferences? What, if anything, does music preference information actually communicate? A handful of studies indicate that information about individuals’ music preferences influences how others perceive them. For example, Zillmann and Bhatia (1989) found that male participants perceived female targets that preferred classical music as attractive and sophisticated, whereas females with preferences for heavy metal music were perceived as rebellious and aggressive. Additionally, North and Hargreaves (1999) provided evidence suggesting that individuals have normative beliefs about the psychological characteristics of fans of different music genres (i.e. classical, indie pop, and chart pop). For instance, chart pop music fans were regarded as

Rentfrow et al. young people’s stereotypes about music fans

physically attractive, conventional, and enthusiastic, while classical music fans were regarded as intellectual, traditional, and religious. More recently, Rentfrow and Gosling (2007) examined the content and validity of stereotypes about fans of 14 music genres. Their results indicated that people agree about the content of certain music stereotypes—particularly stereotypes about religious, classical, and rock music fans. The content of the stereotypes varied considerably between genres too. For example, the stereotype about the psychological characteristics of classical music fans was that they are friendly, hard-working, introverted, physically unattractive, intelligent and artistic, whereas the stereotype about rap music fans was that they are extraverted, relaxed, athletic, value social recognition, and drink beer and smoke marijuana. Furthermore, when each of the stereotypes was compared with the psychological characteristics of actual music fans, the results suggested that many of the stereotypes possess a kernel of truth. Thus, music preferences appear to communicate information about individuals’ psychological characteristics—their personalities, values, and preferences. Indeed, knowing the kinds of music people like apparently activates stereotypes that contain sundry information about who they are. But taken together, the results from those studies suffer from a couple of important limitations. First, all of the work examined only the psychological characteristics that people associate with music fans; none of the work examined the social and cultural categories that are associated with different music fans. A considerable amount of research has shown robust differences in music preferences as a function of social class (Han, 2003; Katz-Gerro, 1999; Mark, 1998; Snibbe & Markus, 2005; Van Eijck, 2001). For example, preferences for ‘highbrow’ music (e.g. classical, opera, and jazz) tend to be more common among the upper class and well educated, and ‘lowbrow’ music (e.g. country, gospel, and rap) tends to be most preferred among the working class and less educated. Research also indicates that music preferences vary between different ethnic groups (Denisoff & Levine, 1972; Dixon, 1981; Peterson & DiMaggio, 1975;

Russell, 1997). For example, in the US, Black people tend to display strong preferences for jazz and soul music, whereas White people have comparatively stronger preferences for rock, country, and classical music. Thus, given the differences in music preferences depending on the social category, it is reasonable to suppose that music-genre stereotypes contain information about the class and ethnicity of particular fans. Another issue is that we do not yet know the extent to which the stereotypes people have about music fans generalize across countries and cultures because each of the previous studies were conducted in a single geographic location. On the surface, the results from North and Hargreaves’ (1999) and Rentfrow and Gosling’s (2007) work appear very similar: in both studies, fans of pop music were regarded as conventional and energetic, and classical fans were regarded as sophisticated and conservative. However, there has not yet been a systematic cross-national comparison of the content of music-genre stereotypes. Without doubt, culture and environment affect music preferences; people living in certain places are exposed to styles of music that are different from the styles of music individuals living in other cities or countries are exposed to. Moreover, the social connotations attached to a particular style of music may be different, so that what is considered ‘cool’ in one place may be considered ‘uncool’ elsewhere. Thus, it is conceivable that agreement about and the content of music-genre stereotypes may be circumscribed to particular geographic areas. To determine whether that is indeed the case, it is necessary to examine whether the content of music-genre stereotypes generalizes across geographic locations.

Why Genres? In the current study we assessed stereotypes about music fans using music genres as the level of analysis. This decision was based on previous research which indicated that genres are the optimal level at which to study music preferences (Rentfrow & Gosling, 2003). In that research, participants were presented with 14 broad music genres and 66 sub-genres. Participants were

331


asked to indicate their preference for each of the music categories and with which musical styles they were most familiar. Analyses indicated that nearly all of the participants (97%) were familiar with the broader music genres but that very few (7%) were familiar with all of the specific sub-genres. Thus, genres, as opposed to sub-genres, appear to be the optimum level of analysis to examine music stereotypes because the overwhelming majority of people are familiar with them. Rentfrow and Gosling (2007) examined the content of stereotypes about fans of 14 music genres among a sample of university students in central Texas and found evidence for the existence of stereotypes about fans of many of those genres. That work was conducted in a region where certain styles of music are very popular (e.g. country, religious, and blues). However, the current research was conducted among a sample of young people in England, where some of these musical styles are not common at all. Thus, rather than assess stereotypes about fans of music genres that are uncommon in England, we restricted the focus to genres that are popular in both England and the southern US. This was important not only because it would be uninformative to measure stereotypes about fans of musical styles that participants were likely to be unfamiliar with, but also so that we could evaluate the extent to which stereotypes about common musical styles are similar. Therefore, we examined stereotypes about fans of six music genres that are common in both countries: classical, jazz, rock, pop, electronica, and rap.

Overview of current research The current study aimed to replicate and extend previous research on music-genre stereotypes by studying British young adults’ stereotypes and comparing them to those of university students in the US. The specific questions this work set out to address were: (1) to what extent do people agree about the psychological and social content of music-genre stereotypes?; (2) are stereotypes about particular genres distinct?; and (3) to what extent does the content of

332

the music-genre stereotypes generalize? Drawing on previous research, we hypothesized that individuals would be in agreement about the unique content of the music-genre stereotypes, especially for classical, rap, and rock fans, and that the content of the music-genre stereotypes would be similar in both the US and the UK.

Method Participants The sample consisted of 89 students from a sixth form college in Cambridge, UK. Due to incomplete data for nine participants, the final sample size included 80 participants. There were 61 (76.3%) females and 19 (23.8%) males with ages ranging from 16 to 17 (M = 16.3, SD = .5). The self-reported ethnicity was predominantly White (87.5%), followed by Asian (6.5%), Mixed Black (1.3%), and ‘Other’ (5%). Ninety per cent of the students were born in the UK. The selfreported socio-economic status of participants was predominantly middle class (61.3%), followed by upper middle class (18.8%), lower middle class (12.5%), and working or upper class (3.8% each).

Measures We were interested in the psychological and social characteristics people associate with different music fans. We could have explicitly asked participants to report their stereotypes of particular music fans, but we feared that doing so might elicit negative reactions, as some participants might have found it politically incorrect or socially undesirable to express a stereotype. So instead, we asked participants to provide ratings of the prototypical fan1 of the particular music genre to which they were assigned. Specifically, participants rated the prototypical fan on each of the Big Five personality dimensions and a list of descriptive adjectives and values. Ratings were also made on ethnic groups and social class. Each of the items was preceded by a sentence such as the following: ‘The average X music listener tends to be . . .’; or ‘Using the rating scale below, please indicate how likely you think people from different [ethnic groups; social classes] are to be fans of X music’,


where X was the music genre assigned to the participant. As we were interested in the associations that individuals naturally make about the fans of different musical styles, we did not provide prompts or definitions of the genres to participants.2 Ratings of the psychological characteristics associated with music fans were obtained using the same measures as Rentfrow and Gosling (2007). All of these scales asked participants to rate the items referring to personality traits, personal characteristics, and values on a Likert-type scale ranging from 1 (Extremely uncharacteristic) to 7 (Extremely characteristic). First, the FiveItem Personality Inventory (FIPI; Gosling, Rentfrow, & Swann, 2003) was used to obtain personality ratings of the average fan of a particular musical genre. This scale is composed of five items that refer to each of the Big Five personality dimensions.3 Each item presents two central descriptors, and then qualifies this definition with six adjectives that reflect the positive and negative poles of the dimension (e.g. ‘Extraverted, enthusiastic—that is, sociable, assertive, talkative, active, NOT reserved or shy’). Second, participants rated the prototypical music fans on seven personal attributes. Four of the personal quality items (artistic, athletic, intelligent, physically attractive) were taken from the Self-Attributes Questionnaire (SAQ; Pelham & Swann, 1989) and three were related to political and religious orientation (politically conservative, politically liberal, religious). Participants were asked to evaluate the prototypical music fan using a 7-point rating scale ranging from 1 (Extremely uncharacteristic) to 7 (Extremely characteristic). Information about the personal values associated with the music stereotypes was measured using 18 items from the Rokeach Values Survey (RVS; Rokeach, 1973), which had been carefully selected to accurately represent each of Rokeach’s value domains: terminal values and instrumental values (Rentfrow & Gosling, 2007). Ratings were made for: a comfortable life, a world at peace, a world of beauty, ambition, an exciting life, courage, family security, forgiveness, imagination, inner harmony, intellect, love, national security, salvation, self-respect, social recognition, true

friendship, and wisdom. Participants were asked to evaluate the values of the prototypical music fan using a 7-point rating scale ranging from 1 (Extremely uncharacteristic) to 7 (Extremely characteristic). In terms of ethnicity and social class, participants reported the degree to which people of each of 16 UK ethnicities (representing five categories: White, Asian, Black, Mixed Black, and Other) and five degrees of social class (working, lower middle, middle, upper middle, and upper) are fans of the assigned music genre. Participants rated each item relating to ethnicity and class on the likelihood that those people would be fans of the particular genre using a 7-point rating scale ranging from 1 (Extremely unlikely) to 7 (Extremely likely).

Procedure Participants were introduced to a study on the psychological characteristics associated with fans of different musical styles. Participants were randomly assigned to rate the prototypical fan of one of the six music categories. Ratings were made on personality characteristics, personal qualities, values, ethnicity, and social class. To eliminate the potential for contrast effects, each participant rated the prototypical music fan of only one genre. The number of raters for each group ranged from 12 to 14 (12 judges rated the prototypical pop fan, 13 rated the prototypical classical and rock fans, and 14 judges rated the prototypical jazz, electronica, and rap fans).

Results Establishing a benchmark for evaluating agreement about the music-genre stereotypes The first objective of this work was to determine the extent to which judges agreed about the content of the music-genre stereotypes. To that end, we calculated intraclass correlations (ICCs; Shrout & Fleiss, 1979) among the judges for each stereotype and construct type. These indexes reflect the degree to which judges associated similar psychological and social category characteristics with each of the prototypical music fans. To gauge the magnitude of the stereotype agreement results, we relied on the effect sizes

333


much as did the judges in Rentfrow and Gosling (2007). As shown in the sixth data column of Table 1, large consensus coefficients emerged for stereotypes about classical, rap, and rock music fans (mean ICCs (2, 1) = .50, .44, and .41, respectively) and moderate coefficients emerged for stereotypes about jazz, electronica, and pop music fans (mean ICCs (2,1) = .31, .29, and .25, respectively). Furthermore, as shown in the penultimate data row in Table 1, judgements about the content of the music stereotypes varied across the construct types. Judges agreed most about the social class of the music prototypes (mean ICCs (2,1) = .46), followed by personality (.39), ethnicity (.36), personal qualities (.32), and values (.32). Close inspection of the ICCs for each music stereotype within each construct type indicates that agreement varied considerably across the various genre-construct combinations. For example, high agreement was observed for the classical and rock music stereotypes on most of the construct types (ICCs(2,1) = .50 and .41, respectively), whereas for the pop music stereotype, agreement was high for personality (.34), social class (.34), and values (.28), but low for personal qualities (.13) and ethnicity (.15). Moreover, the results show that agreement varied

reported in Rentfrow and Gosling (2007) instead of statistical significance.4 Different benchmarks were used for each of the constructs investigated based on the mean consensus coefficients reported in Rentfrow and Gosling (2007; Table 1). The benchmarks were set at .21 for personality, .32 for personal qualities, and .18 for values. As no previous research has examined stereotypes about the ethnicity and social class of prototypical music fans, we set benchmarks for those constructs at .28 based on the mean consensus coefficients across the six genres and four construct types reported in Rentfrow and Gosling (2007; Table 1).

Do people agree about the content of the music-genre stereotypes? It was hypothesized that judges would agree about the content of the stereotypes of listeners of each of the six music genres. The ICCs for the genres and construct types shown in Table 1 reveal some support for that prediction. As can be seen in data columns one through five of Table 1, 23 of the 30 consensus correlations (77%) met or exceeded the empirically derived effect-size benchmarks, suggesting that the judges agreed in their ratings for several of the music-genre stereotypes across the construct types at least as

Table 1. Agreement among judges about the music-genre stereotypes Inter-judge agreement Rentfrow & Gosling (2007)†

The present study§ Big Five

Personal qualities

Values

Ethnicity

Social class

Mean

Mean

Classical Jazz Rock Pop Electronica Rap

.34 .32 .56 .34 .41 .35

.65 .40 .32 .13 .25 .08

.30 .22 .33 .28 .22 .53

.43 .40 .55 .15 .20 .36

.69 .18 .25 .34 .36 .74

.50 .31 .41 .25 .29 .44

.40 .24 .33 .15 .23 .30

Mean Benchmark

.39 .21

.32 .32

.32 .18

.36 .28

.46 .28

.37

.28

Music stereotype

Notes: Agreement was computed using ICCs (2,1). Mean ICCs were computed using Fisher’s r-to-z transformation. Coefficients greater than or equal to the consensus benchmarks derived from Rentfrow and Gosling (2007) are in boldface type. §N = 80; †N = 89.

334


within each of the construct types. For example, there was high agreement about the personality characteristics and values of all the prototypical music fans (all ICCs exceeded the benchmarks), but only agreement about the personal qualities of the prototypical classical, jazz, and rock fans met or exceeded the benchmark.

Are the music-genre stereotypes unique? Given that judges associated very similar characteristics with each of the prototypical music fans, we expected the content of the stereotypes to vary by music genre. To test this prediction, we computed the average ratings for each of the psychological and social category constructs within each genre. Then we performed fi ve between-genre Multivariate Analyses of Variance (MANOVAs), one for each set of constructs. The results revealed large main effects of music genre on stereotype content (Fs > 4.04, ps < .001). Power analyses indicated that the probability of detecting an effect was 95% or greater in 32 out of the 40 comparisons (80%). Overall, the results provide strong evidence for the uniqueness of each of the stereotypes and suggest that the specific stereotypes associated with the genres are quite different from one another. What are the psychological profiles of each of the music-genre stereotypes? A MANOVA on judges’ ratings of the personality characteristics associated with each of the prototypical music fans revealed a significant overall main effect (F(25, 257.83) = 6.36, p < .001), and tests of between-subjects differences revealed significant main effects for all five personality dimensions (Fs(5, 73) > 3.28, ps < .01). The prototypical classical and jazz music fans were both rated high on Agreeableness and Emotional Stability, but the prototypical jazz fan was rated significantly higher on Extraversion and Openness and lower in Conscientiousness (mean t(25) = 3.88, p < .001). Prototypical fans of both rock and electronica were rated high on Extraversion and Openness, moderate on Agreeableness, and low on Conscientiousness and Emotional Stability. The shapes of the personality profiles for the prototypical pop and rap fans were fairly similar, as fans of each were rated high on Extraversion,

moderate on Emotional Stability, and low on Openness, but the prototypical pop music fan was rated significantly higher on Agreeableness and Emotional Stability than was the rap music prototype (mean t(23) = 2.98, p < .05). To determine the extent to which the musicgenre stereotypes varied in terms of personal qualities, we conducted a MANOVA on judges’ ratings of the personal qualities associated with each of the prototypical music fans. A significant overall main effect of genre was observed (F(35, 271.65) = 5.80, p < .001), and tests of between subjects differences revealed significant main effects for all the personal qualities except for politically liberal (Fs(5, 70) > 2.72, ps < .05). Ratings of the prototypical classical and rap music fans were very different, with the classical fan rated significantly higher on political conservatism, intelligence, religiosity, and artistic ability, and lower on athletic ability than the prototypical rap music fan (mean t(23) = 4.92, p < .001). The shapes of the profiles for rock and electronica were generally similar, as both were rated low on conservatism and religiosity and moderate on intelligence and attractiveness; however, the prototypical rock fan was rated significantly lower on athletic ability (t(25) = –2.59, p < .05) and higher on artistic ability (t (25) = 2.16, p < .05) than was the prototypical electronica fan. A MANOVA on judges’ ratings of the psychological values associated with each of the prototypical music fans revealed a significant overall main effect (F(90, 276.18) = 4.04, p < .001), and tests of between-subjects differences revealed significant main effects in music-genre popularity for all of the values except friendship (Fs(5, 73) > 2.46, ps < .05). Compared to the other musicgenre stereotypes, the classical music fan was rated significantly higher on intellect, wisdom, and national security (mean ts(24) = 5.84, 5.59, 3.68, ps < .01, respectively), and lower on excitement and social recognition (mean ts(24) = –5.43, –3.49, ps < .01, respectively). In contrast, the prototypical rap fan was rated significantly higher than the other prototypes on social recognition and self-respect (mean ts(24) = 4.96, 3.28, ps < .01, respectively), and significantly lower on beauty and forgiveness (mean ts(24) = –5.48, –4.17, ps < .01, respectively). Consistent with results

335


for the other construct types, judges’ ratings of the prototypical rock and electronica fans were generally quite similar.5 To which social and ethnic categories are prototypical music fans thought to belong? The second objective of this research was to extend previous research on music-genre stereotypes by examining the social and cultural categories associated with different music fans. A MANOVA on judges’ ratings of the ethnic groups most likely to listen to each of the six music genres revealed a significant overall main effect (F(25, 261.54) = 5.18, p < .001), and tests of betweensubjects differences revealed significant main effects in music-genre popularity for all five ethnic groups except ‘other’ (Fs(5, 74) > 2.40, ps < .05). The music-genre preferences for each ethnic group, shown in Figure 1, highlight several differences. For example, judges’ ratings of the prototypical pop, rock, and electronica music fans suggested that such fans were more likely to be White than any other ethnicity (mean ts(24) = 5.31, 2.72, 3.29, ps < .05, respectively). In contrast, judges’ ratings of the prototypical rap

music fan indicated that such fans were more likely to be Black or Mixed Black than any other ethnicity (mean ts(24) = 3.97, 3.62, ps < .05, respectively), and ratings of the prototypical classical music fan indicated that such fans were more likely to be White than any other ethnicity (mean t(24) = 3.86, p < .001). A MANOVA on judges’ ratings of the social class groups most likely to listen to each of the six music genres revealed a significant overall main effect (F(25, 261.54) = 4.90, p < .001), and tests of between-subjects differences revealed significant main effects in music-genre popularity for all five social class groups except middleclass (Fs(5, 74) > 4.28, ps < .01). Figure 2 displays the social class groups to which each of the prototypical music fans are thought to be members. The music-genre stereotypes converged in the middle-class group, suggesting that all the musical styles are more or less equally common among members of that group. However, the stereotypes were most distinct for the two lowerclass and two upper-class groups. Specifically, judges’ ratings of the prototypical classical fan were significantly higher for upper-middle

Figure 1. Ethnic groups to which each of the six prototypical music fans are believed to be members.

336


and upper-class groups than for working-class (mean t(26) = 7.55, p < .001), lower-middleclass (mean t(26) = 6.69, p < .001), and middleclass groups (mean t(26) = 4.49, p < .001). In contrast, judges’ ratings of the prototypical rap fan suggested that such fans were significantly more likely to be members of working-class and lowermiddle-class groups than middle-class (mean t(26) = 3.39, p < .01), upper-middle-class (mean t(26) = 5.72, p < .001), and upper-class groups (mean t(26) = 11.16, p < .001). Furthermore, the prototypical pop music fan was rated as significantly more likely to be working, lower middle, and middle class than upper middle (mean t(22) = 2.63, p < .05) or upper class (mean t(22) = 4.27, p < .001). Compared to the other social class groupings, the prototypical electronica and rock fans were rated as least likely to be upper class (mean ts(24) = 3.77, 3.63, ps < .01, respectively).

Do the music-genre stereotypes generalize across geographic regions? The third objective of this study was to examine the extent to which the content of the musicgenre stereotypes generalizes across geographic

regions. Toward that end, we conducted correlational analyses comparing the content of the music-genre stereotypes obtained from the current sample of British college students with the content of the stereotypes obtained from Rentfrow and Gosling’s (2007) sample of university students in the US. Specifically, correlations of the stereotype profiles for personality, personal qualities and values, as well as the three sets of constructs combined, were computed across the two samples. Rentfrow and Gosling did not examine the social and cultural characteristics of the different musicgenre stereotypes so we could not examine their generalizability. As can be seen in Table 2, the psychological characteristics of the music-genre stereotypes were virtually identical in the two samples. Specifically, as shown in the last data column, the greatest convergence emerged for the rap stereotype, followed by classical, rock, electronica, pop and jazz. Furthermore, the last data row of Table 2 shows that convergence was high for all of the psychological constructs. Judges agreed most about personal qualities, followed by personality and values. Closer inspection revealed considerably less convergence for the

Figure 2. Social class groups to which each of the six prototypical music fans are believed to be members.

337


Table 2. Cross-sample convergence of music-genre stereotype content Cross-sample convergence for: Music stereotype

Big five (N = 5)

Personal qualities (N = 7)

Values (N = 18)

Combined (N = 30)

Classical Jazz Rock Pop Electronica Rap

.60 .32 .97** .66 .96** .84*

.98** .87* .81* .34 .85* .92**

.83** .74** .75** .82** .72** .90**

.84** .72** .81** .78** .80** .86**

Mean

.83

.87*

.80**

.81**

*p < .05; **p < .01. Notes: Results are correlation coefficients between (1) aggregate stereotype profile from current study and (2) aggregate stereotype profile reported in Rentfrow and Gosling (2007) for each music-genre stereotype.

Big Five personality characteristics associated with the prototypical jazz fan and the personal qualities of the pop music fan.

Discussion This work aimed to replicate and extend previous research on music-genre stereotypes (North & Hargreaves, 1999; Rentfrow & Gosling, 2007; Zillmann & Bhatia, 1989). It was expected that participants would agree about the psychological, social, and cultural content of the stereotypes, that the stereotypes would be distinct, and that the content of the stereotypes would generalize across the two geographic regions. Overall, the results were consistent with our expectations. Inter-judge agreement about the content of the music-genre stereotypes exceeded most of the benchmarks, suggesting that young people have clearly defined stereotypes about the psychological and social category characteristics of prototypical music fans. Furthermore, inter-judge agreement about the content of each of the music genre stereotypes was higher in the present study than in Rentfrow and Gosling’s (2007) study involving American university students. Multivariate analyses indicated that the content of the stereotypes varied considerably. Some stereotypes were similar on certain constructs (e.g. the personality characteristics attributed to rock and electronica fans), but each of the stereotypes displayed distinct profiles overall (especially the prototypical classical and rap music fans).

338

Consistent with our predictions, large differences emerged for the cultural and social category characteristics attributed to each type of music fan. In fact, agreement was generally stronger for ethnicity and social class characteristics than for psychological characteristics, suggesting that music-genre stereotypes may carry more information about social categories than psychological characteristics. Finally, comparisons of stereotype content between British participants’ and American university students’ ratings showed very high convergence. With few exceptions, the content of the stereotypes was virtually identical for each of the music genres across all of the psychological constructs. It is important to reiterate that none of the participants were provided with definitions or exemplars of the genres they rated. Nonetheless, participants in both countries attributed the same characteristics to each music fan, indicating that the music-genre stereotypes are highly robust.

Implications and future directions These findings indicate that there are pervasive beliefs about the characteristics of people who listen to particular styles of music. The fact that two different samples associate similar psychological and social characteristics with fans of the same music genres shows the generalizability of the results and might suggest that music-genre stereotypes are common. The results might also suggest that the stereotypes have some basis in


reality. This is because the related research by Rentfrow and Gosling (2007) showed that many of the American-based stereotypes do have a kernel of truth, or sense of validity, to them. Because of the high degree of convergence with the current results, this may also be the case for stereotypes in the UK. However, this is merely a hypothesis that has yet to be tested. Furthermore, that young people place so much importance on music and use it as a badge to convey information about themselves and the social groups to which they belong raises a number of new and important questions. Where do music-genre stereotypes come from? The connections that people make between music and psychological and social category characteristics are probably influenced by their experiences with music, contact with individuals who have different music preferences, and the mass media. In many ways, music performers embody and reinforce the image associated with a particular style of music, and as such, communicate information about the characteristics of the fans of the music. In addition, several studies indicate that communication plays an important role in stereotype formation. For example, Haslam (1997) has shown that stereotypes are more consensual following group discussions, and others have shown that stereotypes become more polarized and extreme through communication (e.g. Thompson, Judd, & Park, 2000). Music has been shown to be a relatively common topic of conversation, particularly among young people (Rentfrow & Gosling, 2006), and the strong consensus we observed in music stereotypes may reflect this. It would be interesting for future research to see whether the genres for which the most consensual stereotypes emerged in this study (classical, rap, and rock music) are also the most commonly talked about. Are the music-genre stereotypes accurate? One drawback of the present investigation is that we do not know whether the music-genre stereotypes are accurate. Several of the stereotypes examined by Rentfrow and Gosling (2007) displayed some

validity. Given that the content of the stereotypes was very similar across the studies, it seems reasonable that at least the psychological characteristics associated with the music fans may be valid. However, it is not clear whether the stereotypes about the ethnicity and social class of music fans are accurate. Past research indicates that White people prefer classical and rock music and that Black people prefer jazz, soul, and rap (Denisoff & Levine, 1972; Dixon, 1981; Russell, 1997). Those results are very similar to the pattern of results shown in Figure 1, suggesting that perhaps there is some truth to this aspect of the stereotype. Also, the current study’s patterns of stereotypes about fans of classical music and social class are on par with findings of relationships between tastes and social status (e.g. Katz-Gerro, 1999; Van Eijck, 2001). It stands to reason that if particular music genres are consistently and consensually associated with particular social categories, members of those categories will develop preferences for those genres in the process of forming their social identity (Turner et al., 1987). Nevertheless, future research that systematically compares the content of the music-genre stereotypes with the demographic characteristics of music fans is necessary for evaluating this aspect of the music stereotypes. Are there moderators of music-stereotype content? The participants in this study were predominantly White and middle to upper middle class. Consequently, the music-genre stereotypes we obtained may be different from the stereotypes that non-White working- and lower-middleclass young adults have about music fans. It is interesting to note that all of the music-genre prototypes were rated as almost equally likely to be White and middle class, suggesting that individuals (who are the same ethnicity and social class as the participants) enjoy most styles of music. However, large differences emerged in participants’ ratings about the likelihood that the prototypes were non-White and lower or upper class. This may reflect another instance of the well-documented outgroup homogeneity effect (e.g. Judd & Park, 1988). It would be interesting to examine the extent to which the same patterns

339


of results emerge among young adults who are not White or middle class. One interesting question for future research is whether the content of the music stereotypes varies as a function of individuals’ music preferences. For example, do people who enjoy listening to rap music rate the prototypical rap fan any differently than do people who enjoy jazz? Previous research suggests that people have more favourable impressions of others who share their music preferences (e.g. North & Hargreaves, 1999; Tarrant et al., 2002), which is consistent with social identity theory. Unfortunately, however, our sample size was too small to allow us to examine this issue. A related question is whether individuals who enjoy the same styles of music perceive more variability in the characteristics of fans of their preferred music than do people who do not enjoy that music. Thus, future research in this area could examine the extent to which inter-judge agreement about a particular music-genre stereotype differs between fans and non-fans of the music. Do music-genre stereotypes contribute to identity development? According to DeNora (2000), individuals engage in a reflexive process of remembering and constructing their identities while listening to music, which can serve as a form of self-affirmation and discovery. That is, the themes and images evoked by preferred styles of music may resonate with individuals because they recognize these qualities in themselves, or because they wish to embody them. This is consistent with research revealing links between music preferences and personality. For example, extraverted individuals prefer styles of music that are upbeat, energetic, and have a lot of vocals, and athletic individuals enjoy styles of music that are intense and stimulating (Rentfrow & Gosling, 2003; Rentfrow & McDonald, in press). Furthermore, Tarrant and colleagues (2002) have proposed that the ‘meta-information’ associated with a style of music may be one of the factors that young people find appealing. To the extent that individuals are attracted to a style of music, they may align their personal self-image with the perceived characteristics associated with that music.

340

Thus, music may function as a vehicle for identity development and affirmation that goes beyond the tangible image (e.g. clothing) to include personal characteristics and values, and reaffirm ethnic and class identities. What impact might music-genre stereotypes have on peer relations and intergroup processes? Given that individuals place considerable importance on music and that they are able to glean useful information about other people on the basis of their music preferences, it is interesting to consider the potential effects of such information on interpersonal relationships. Are people with similar music preferences more likely to get along and experience satisfying relationships with each other than individuals with radically different music preferences? A recent study by Delsing, ter Bogt, Engels, & Meeus (in press) found that close friends were more likely to share similar preferences for music than were less intimate friends. Additionally, Wood (2005) found that university roommates who had similar music preferences reported more satisfaction with their roommates and a greater desire to continue living together than did roommates with different music preferences. These studies provide evidence for the potential importance of music preferences in interpersonal relationships and point to the need for future research that explores the reasons why music influences the quality of relationships and whether such effects generalize across various types of relationships. The current research suggests that the reasons may be broader than simply agreeing on what music is played in shared environments. Music may facilitate relationships by matching personalities, values, and identities. Beyond interpersonal relationships, music and its associated stereotypes may play an important role in intergroup relations. Stereotypes are important not just for what they imply about people, but for what they allow people to achieve collectively (Haslam, Turner, Oakes, Reynolds, & Doosje, 2002). But one problem with stereotypes as collective tools is that they are generally perceived as prejudiced and people are hesitant to use them overtly—particularly in relation to ‘natural’


categories, such as gender and race, to which people are assigned without choice (Crandall & Beasley, 2001; McConahay, 1986). However, in contrast to other research we have conducted on stereotypes of such groups, participants in this study had very little resistance to completing the tasks and expressing generalizations about music fans. This is also evidenced in the full use of scale range and highly polarized means. Thus, perhaps stereotypes of music fans are not shunned in the same way that gender or racial stereotypes are. Stereotypes of music fans may be perceived as legitimate because music preferences are presumably a choice—they relate to contractual rather than imperative identities (Duveen, 2001). Furthermore, music is a rich stimulus that is readily imbued with a range of meanings that, while not readily apparent, seem somehow valid (consensual). This is potentially important for intergroup relations because music stereotypes may function as a ‘proxy’ for stereotypes of social categories. If music preferences can be linked to certain characteristics and values on the one hand, and to certain social categories on the other (e.g. ethnicity and class), then they may act as a bridge connecting the two. Take rap and classical music, for example. These genres were the most differentiated in terms of certain personality characteristics (agreeableness and conscientiousness), personal qualities (intelligence, conservativeness) and personal values (wisdom, intellect, beauty, harmony). At the same time, classical and rap music were most associated with Black and Mixed Black ethnicities (as the least and most preferred music respectively) and also the most correlated with class (positively and negatively respectively). Through their assumed affinity for rap music, then, Blacks and the lower classes were indirectly characterized as unintelligent, disagreeable, lazy, and aggressive—stereotypes that we would be unlikely to elicit explicitly if we asked directly about these groups. Further research is called for to investigate the potential role of music stereotypes in prejudice against ethnic and class groups. However, it is important to distinguish between feature-to-ethnicity and ethnicity-to-feature

inferences. It may be the case that people do not rely on music preference stereotypes to the same extent that they rely on group, or ethnic, stereotypes; therefore it would be helpful to examine this empirically.6 Finally, future research should explore the impact that music stereotypes have not only on people’s impressions of one another, but also on their interpersonal and intergroup behaviour. In situations where people’s music preferences are only one of many pieces of information available, the additional information might allow for individuals’ personal identities to become salient (Tajfel & Turner, 1979). If so, then individuals’ behaviour, as well as their interaction partners’ perceptions of them, might display more heterogeneity than when only individuals’ social musical identity is salient. More generally, the associations between music preferences, personality characteristics and group membership suggest that music may be a particularly fruitful focus for research investigating the links between personal and social identities (Postmes & Jetten, 2006).

Conclusion Drawing on research in music psychology and intergroup relations, we examined the content and generalizability of stereotypes about six types of music fans. It is evident from the results that young people have firm beliefs about the psychological characteristics and social and ethnic categories of different music fans and that those beliefs are geographically robust. Given that individuals use music as a vehicle for self-expression, the need to understand the role music plays in social relations is apparent; the current work provides a first step in developing an understanding of the impact music can have on interpersonal and intergroup relations.

Notes 1. The use of the term ‘prototypical’ might make it appear that we were asking the participants to form a stereotype. However, we did not offer any guidance about what that stereotype might be. This study was most concerned with the amount of consensus about the stereotypes that

341


2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

individuals might hold about a typical fan of a particular music genre and thus the use of the term was acceptable for the research questions asked and types of analyses used. This approach was selected for two reasons: first, definitions or lists of prototypical bands for the genres would have reflected our own associations, which could have inadvertently influenced participants’ ratings. Second, results from previous research suggest that preference ratings for music-genre labels (e.g. jazz and heavy metal), and musical excerpts representing the genres (e.g. Time Out, by Dave Brubeck, and Fight Song, by Marilyn Manson), are highly correlated (Rentfrow, 2008). These results suggest that similar referents come to mind when individuals are presented with the same undefined music genres. The Big Five personality dimensions are the result of decades of empirical research on the structure of personality (e.g. Goldberg, 1992; McCrae & Costa, 1999; Wiggins, 1996) and correspond to the following dimensions: Extraversion (defined by characteristics such as sociability and energy), Agreeableness (friendliness and warmth), Conscientiousness (organized and dependable), Neuroticism (anxious and emotionally unstable), and Openness (intellectual and creative). For the number of participants and variables examined in the present study, an ICC > .08 is the threshold for statistical significance at p < .05. Our effect-size benchmarks are considerably larger and therefore more conservative than this threshold, but by comparing the present results with results from previous work, we obtain more precise information about the magnitude and meaningfulness of the present findings. Graphs of the psychological profiles on the Big Five personality dimensions, personal qualities, and personal values for the six music-genre stereotypes may be obtained by contacting the first author. We thank David Schneider for bringing this point to our attention.

Acknowledgements We are grateful to David Schneider and an anonymous reviewer for helpful comments on a previous version of this article.

342

References Bryson, B. (1996). Anything but heavy metal: Symbolic exclusion and musical dislikes. American Sociological Review, 61, 884–899. Crandall, C., & Beasley, R. (2001). A perceptual theory of legitimacy: Politics, prejudice, social institution and moral value. In J. Jost, & B. Major (Eds.), Psychology of legitimacy: Emerging perspectives on ideology, justice and intergroup relations (pp. 77–102). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Delsing, M. J. M. H., ter Bogt, T.F. M., Engels, R. C. M. E., & Meeus, W. H.J. (in press). The role of music preferences in early adolescents’ best friendship formation and stability. Journal of Adolescence. Denisoff, R. S., & Levine, M. H. (1972). Youth and popular music: Test of taste culture hypothesis. Youth and Society, 4, 237–255. DeNora, T. (2000). Music in everyday life. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Dixon, R. D. (1981). Musical taste cultures and taste publics revisited: A research note of new evidence. Popular Music and Society, 8, 2–9. Dolfsma, W. (1999). The consumption of music and the expression of values: A social economic explanation for the advent of pop music. American Journal of Economics and Sociology, 58, 1019–1046. Duveen, G. (2001). Representations, identities, resistance. In K. Deaux & G. Philogene (Eds.), Representations of the social: Bridging theoretical traditions (pp. 257–270). Malden, MA: Blackwell. Facebook application directory (n.d.). Retrieved April 6, 2008, from http://www.facebook. com/apps. Frith, S. (1981). Sound effects: Youth, leisure, and the politics of rock ’n’ roll. New York: Pantheon. Goldberg, L. R. (1992). The development of markers for the Big-Five factor structure. Psychological Assessment, 4, 26–42. Gosling, S. D., Rentfrow, P. J., & Swann W. B. (2003). A very brief measure of the Big-Five personality domains. Journal of Research in Personality, 37, 504–528. Han, S. K. (2003). Unraveling the brow: What and how of choice in music preference. Sociological Perspectives, 46, 435–459. Haslam, S. A. (1997). Stereotyping and social influence: Foundations of stereotype consensus. In R. Spears, P. Oakes, N. Ellemers, & S. A. Haslam (Eds.), The social psychology of stereotyping


and group life (pp. 119–143). Malden, MA: Blackwell. Haslam, S. A., Turner, J. C., Oakes, P. J., Reynolds, K. J., & Doosje, B. (2002). From personal pictures in the head to collective tools in the world: How shared stereotypes allow groups to represent and change social reality. In C. McGarty, V. Yzerbyt, & R. Spears (Eds.), Stereotypes as explanations: The formation of meaningful beliefs about social groups (pp. 157–185). New York: Cambridge University Press. Judd, C. M., & Park, B. (1988). Out-group homogeneity: Judgments of variability at the individual and group levels. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54, 778–788. Katz-Gerro, T. (1999). Cultural consumption and social stratification: Leisure activities, musical tastes, and social location. Sociological Perspectives, 42, 627–646. Litle, P., & Zuckerman, M. (1986). Sensation seeking and music preferences. Personality and Individual Differences, 7, 575–577. Mark, N. (1998). Birds of a feather sing together. Social Forces, 77, 453–483. McConahay, J. B. (1986). Modern racism, ambivalence, and the Modern Racism Scale. In J. Dovidio & S. Gaertner (Eds.), Prejudice, discrimination, and racism (pp. 91–125). New York: Academic Press. McCrae, R. R., & Costa, P. T., Jr. (1999). A five-factor theory of personality. In L. A. Pervin & O. P. John (Eds.), Handbook of personality: Theory and research (2nd ed., pp. 139–153). New York: Guilford. McNamara, L., & Ballard, M. E. (1999). Resting arousal, sensation seeking, and music preference. Genetic, Social, and General Psychology Monographs, 125, 229–250. North, A. C., & Hargreaves, D. J. (1999). Music and adolescent identity. Music Education Research, 1, 75–92. North, A. C., Hargreaves, D. J., & O’Neill, S. A. (2000). The importance of music to adolescents. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 70, 255–272. Pelham, B. W., & Swann, W. B., Jr. (1989). From self-conceptions to self-worth: On the sources and structure of global self-esteem. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57, 672–680. Peterson, R. A., & DiMaggio, P. (1975). From region to class, changing locus of country music: A test of the massification hypothesis. Social Forces, 53, 497–506.

Postmes, T., & Jetten, J. (Eds.) (2006). Individuality and the group: Advances in social identity. London: Sage. Rentfrow, P. J. (2008). An evaluation of different methods for assessing music preference. Unpublished data, University of Cambridge. 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. Rentfrow, P. J., & Gosling, S. D. (2006). Message in a ballad: The role of music preferences in interpersonal perception. Psychological Science, 17, 236–242. Rentfrow, P. J., & Gosling, S. D. (2007). The content and validity of music-genre stereotypes among college students. Psychology of Music, 35, 306–325. Rentfrow, P. J., & McDonald, J. A. (in press). Preferences, personality and emotion. In P. N. Juslin & J. A. Sloboda (Eds.), Handbook of music and emotion: Theory, research, applications. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Rokeach, M. (1973). The nature of human values. New York: Free Press. Russell, P. A. (1997). Musical tastes and society. In D. J. Hargreaves & A. C. North (Eds.), The social psychology of music (pp. 141–158). Oxford: Oxford University Press. Shrout, P. E., & Fleiss, J. L. (1979). Intraclass correlations: Uses in assessing rater reliability. Psychological Bulletin, 86, 420–428. Snibbe, A. C., & Markus, H. R. (2005). You can’t always get what you want: Educational attainment, agency, and choice. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 88, 703–720. Tajfel, H. (1974). Social identity and intergroup behaviour. Social Science Information, 13, 65–93. Tajfel, H., & Turner, A. C. (1979). An integrative theory of intergroup conflict. In W. G. Austin & S. Worchel (Eds.), The social psychology of intergroup relations (pp. 33–47). Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole. Tarrant, M., North, A. C., & Hargreaves, D. J. (2002). Youth identity and music. In R. MacDonald, D. Hargreaves, & D. Miell (Eds.), Musical identities (pp. 134–150). New York: Oxford University Press.

343


Thompson, M. S., Judd, C. M., & Park, B. (2000). The consequences of communicating social stereotypes. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 36, 567–599. Turner, J. C., Hogg, M. A., Oakes, O. J., Reicher, S. D., & Wetherell, M. S. (1987). Rediscovering the social group: A self-categorization theory. Oxford: Blackwell. Van Eijck, K. (2001). Social differentiation in musical taste patterns. Social Forces, 79, 1163–1184. Wiggins, J. S. (1996). The five-factor model of personality: Theoretical perspectives. New York: Guilford. Wood, D. (2005). Music preferences and personality among college roommates. Unpublished data, University of Illinois, Urbana Champaign. Zillmann, D., & Bhatia, A. (1989). Effects of associating with musical genres on heterosexual attraction. Communication Research, 16, 263–288. Zweigenhaft, R. L. (2008). A do re mi encore: A closer look at the personality correlates of music preferences. Journal of Individual Differences, 29, 45–55. Paper received 6 May 2008; revised version accepted 17 September 2008.

344

Biographical notes peter j. rentfrow is a lecturer in the Department of Social and Developmental Psychology at the University of Cambridge, and a Fellow and Director of Studies at Fitzwilliam College. His research concerns person–environment interactions, focusing on how personality is expressed through preferences for music, literature, and film. In another line of work, he studies the geography of personality, focusing on regional differences in attitudes, values, and dispositions. jennifer a. mcdonald is a PhD candidate in the Department of Social and Developmental Psychology at the University of Cambridge. Her work is focused on studying individuals’ music selections, investigating personality correlates of music preferences as well as potential contextual and affective antecedents of music listening. julian a. oldmeadow is a lecturer in the Department of Psychology at the University of York. His research is in the areas of intergroup relations and social inequality, with a focus on the formation and functions of stereotypes.