For a while, I thought music was harmful, due largely to pervasive and arbitrary earworms. More recently, I started to find that earworms are ephemeral and lawful. A contrarian belief held like the former for years gets stuck as part of my identity, but maybe I should find the truth.
“Music is harmful” is hard to measure and verify. “Listening to music is harmful” is both easier to measure and more readily useful, for you can make a randomised controlled trial out of it.
Methods
Given that I deliberately listen to music only on rare occasion, it’s easy, in my case, to let a column of random booleans in a spreadsheet dictate whether I listen to music each day. Sometimes I forgot to listen to music when the spreadsheet said I should, and sometimes I heard a lot of incidental music on days when the spreadsheet said I should abstain. To account for both cases, I kept a record of whether I actually did listen to music each day. Whether I actually listened to music is the explanatory variable, which ended up 50% correlated (phi coefficient) with whether the random boolean generator said I should.
The response variables are my mood — −1 to 1 — and the song stuck in my head — one of four categories:
no song (N)
a song played back deliberately (D)
a song I heard recently (R)
any other song (O)
Both response variables were queried by surprise, 0 to 23 times per day (median 6), constrained by convenience.
Analysis
I ran the experiment over 51 days. In all analysis here, I exclude three long intervals (11 days, 5 days, 4 days) of consecutive musical abstention due to outside constraints, leaving 31 days to examine.
Given these measurements, we can find the effects of listening to music by comparing the averages from days with music to those from days without music. It seems plausible that the effects of music lag or persist past the day of listening. Perhaps the better averages to compare would come from
music days, plus days just after music days, versus
all other days
What kind of harm do I expect to see from listening music?
It could worsen my mood.
It could make earworms play for more of the time, i.e. increase the ratio of D+R+O to N.
It could make more of my earworms accidental, i.e. increase the ratio of R+O to N+D.
It could make whatever particular music I listen to show up more often as accidental earworms, i.e. increase the ratio of R to O.
Results
What does my data say about all that?
Music
No music
Music + next day
>1 day since
Days
8
23
16
15
Average mood
0.29
0.22
0.28
0.19
Total D+R+O
43
140
96
87
Total N
16
39
34
21
Total R+O
34
111
77
68
Total N+D
25
68
53
40
Total R
3
17
13
7
Total O
31
94
64
61
It appears that listening to music, in the short-term:
makes me a tad happier
makes earworms play in my mind for slightly less of the time
makes accidental earworms (as contrasted with deliberate earworms, or mental quiet) play slightly less of the time
has a weak, ambiguous effect on which songs I get as accidental earworms
Result 1 makes sense, but deserved testing, just to be sure. Results 2 and 3 go against my intuition. I’m less sure what to make of result 4, especially given that it’s harder to measure — judging an accidental earworm as “recent” depends on a threshold of recency, which I left ambiguous, and on my memory of what songs I’ve heard recently, which can mess up on occasion.
How harmful is music, really?
Link post
For a while, I thought music was harmful, due largely to pervasive and arbitrary earworms. More recently, I started to find that earworms are ephemeral and lawful. A contrarian belief held like the former for years gets stuck as part of my identity, but maybe I should find the truth.
“Music is harmful” is hard to measure and verify. “Listening to music is harmful” is both easier to measure and more readily useful, for you can make a randomised controlled trial out of it.
Methods
Given that I deliberately listen to music only on rare occasion, it’s easy, in my case, to let a column of random booleans in a spreadsheet dictate whether I listen to music each day. Sometimes I forgot to listen to music when the spreadsheet said I should, and sometimes I heard a lot of incidental music on days when the spreadsheet said I should abstain. To account for both cases, I kept a record of whether I actually did listen to music each day. Whether I actually listened to music is the explanatory variable, which ended up 50% correlated (phi coefficient) with whether the random boolean generator said I should.
The response variables are my mood — −1 to 1 — and the song stuck in my head — one of four categories:
no song (N)
a song played back deliberately (D)
a song I heard recently (R)
any other song (O)
Both response variables were queried by surprise, 0 to 23 times per day (median 6), constrained by convenience.
Analysis
I ran the experiment over 51 days. In all analysis here, I exclude three long intervals (11 days, 5 days, 4 days) of consecutive musical abstention due to outside constraints, leaving 31 days to examine.
Given these measurements, we can find the effects of listening to music by comparing the averages from days with music to those from days without music. It seems plausible that the effects of music lag or persist past the day of listening. Perhaps the better averages to compare would come from
music days, plus days just after music days, versus
all other days
What kind of harm do I expect to see from listening music?
It could worsen my mood.
It could make earworms play for more of the time, i.e. increase the ratio of D+R+O to N.
It could make more of my earworms accidental, i.e. increase the ratio of R+O to N+D.
It could make whatever particular music I listen to show up more often as accidental earworms, i.e. increase the ratio of R to O.
Results
What does my data say about all that?
It appears that listening to music, in the short-term:
makes me a tad happier
makes earworms play in my mind for slightly less of the time
makes accidental earworms (as contrasted with deliberate earworms, or mental quiet) play slightly less of the time
has a weak, ambiguous effect on which songs I get as accidental earworms
Result 1 makes sense, but deserved testing, just to be sure. Results 2 and 3 go against my intuition. I’m less sure what to make of result 4, especially given that it’s harder to measure — judging an accidental earworm as “recent” depends on a threshold of recency, which I left ambiguous, and on my memory of what songs I’ve heard recently, which can mess up on occasion.