A study of more than 36,000 people from around the world concluded that musical tastes and personality type were closely related.
The research, which was carried out by Professor Adrian North of Heriot Watt University, Edinburgh in the UK suggested classical music fans were shy, while heavy metal fans were gentle and at ease with themselves.
Fans of Indie music had low self-esteem and were not hard working, fans of Rap music had high self-esteem and were outgoing. Country & Western fans were hardworking and outgoing, Reggae fans were creative but not hardworking, and fans of chart pop had high self-esteem, were not creative, but where hardworking and outgoing.
Which one are you?
From link
I've long been fascinated about what makes people respond so differently to the same thing when it comes to music. I almost started a thread about it here in the past, so I'm glad you have in a way with this thread. I would think the divisions are a lot more finely grained than whether you like indie or rap etc. etc. because people usually like things over multiple genres, although of course there are preferences. My first thought would be that a basic division, all things being equal, is whether you primarily (though not always and not exclusively) respond to music or primarily (same caveat) respond to lyrical content. Also whether you experience music primarily in your head or primarily more viscerally. I think I'm primarily engaged with music over lyrics, and experience it primarily at a visceral level. And I'd bet that maps back to personality and experience somewhere without a doubt. Which doesn't mean of course that I don't love great lyrics and connect to some songs because of them, or think about music analytically, because I very much do on both counts. I'm just talking about my fundamental and instinctive connection with music.
It might be fun to pick Queen songs and figure out why we like them, love them or hate them and see if anything in the way of a supportable theory emerges from the chaos. I'd bet gender would be a significant enough factor too. And I'd bet age would be much less so.
Basically, I reckon these studies aren't worth the funding or effort put into them. That's a fair whack of people who have been asked, but still not a fair proportional representation of how people behave according to their musical tastes. As GratefulFan intimates, there are folk who like a variety of music with some preferences over others. I reckon that for every single one who was asked, there will be at least one or two who are exactly like me, for example:
I love rock, like a little metal, a little classical and admittedly some cheesy pop. I absolutely despise rap but like some soul and hip-hop. I am completely indefferent when it comes to country but don't mind a little easy listening and some jazz. Folk is hit and miss but there are some Scottish tracks that simply make me proud to be Scottish. Obviously, Queen are my preference, but they are primarily rock with a mix of just about everything else. If you need any stats to go with this, I am 30, male, like going out and spending time with family and close friends, work hard and am creative in my job but lazy concerning and uninspired by other aspects of day-to-day life, i.e DIY, cooking and housework. I am avid when it comes to collecting stuff, though, and do keep things reasonably clean and tidy. My collections must either be by genre and alphabetised or, in the case of Queen, be chronological.
So where the hell would I fit in this breakdown of attributes?
Was that even part of the Prof's hypthesis?
36,000 people out of the billions and billions of folk there are in the world does not make for enough evidence to conclude that anything is closely related. And this is what the taxpayer is funding, is it?