STANDARD OF TASTE
中文

THE READING

What a month of listening says, in words you can argue with.

This reading speaks to you about what a listener's recent plays might mean. It names patterns and offers readings; which one is right, if either, is yours to say. The hearing tests describe only what you did.

Why this works, and where it might not

The reading rests on an argument. Here it is in full, each step labelled with what supports it.

  1. 1Mood influences what people choose to hear.EVIDENCEDKnobloch & Zillmann (2002), "Mood management via the digital jukebox", Journal of Communication 52(2), doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.2002.tb02549.x; population-level patterns in Park, Thom, Mennicken, Cramer & Macy (2019), Nature Human Behaviour 3, doi:10.1038/s41562-018-0508-z.
  2. 2The influence runs both ways: people choose music that matches a feeling and music that changes it.EVIDENCEDKnobloch & Zillmann (2002): participants put in a bad mood chose energetic, joyful music for longer.
  3. SoSo the same listening pattern can come from opposite feelings: a reading cannot decode one person's feeling from their listening, but it can name the pattern, and the person supplies the feeling.INFERENCE
  4. 3Almost nobody can describe their own taste in words beyond naming genres and artists.EVIDENCED, qualitatively
  5. 4People do not already have words for how their recent feelings show up in what they reach for.ASSUMED
  6. ThereforeYour recent taste carries cues about what you have been feeling, and because almost nobody can describe their own taste, putting its pattern into words gives you language for how those feelings show up in what you reach for.INFERENCE
OBJECTION
The strongest objection is the Barnum effect: people accept generic descriptions as accurate about themselves, so a reader agreeing proves nothing.Forer (1949), "The fallacy of personal validation", Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology 44(1).
REPLY
The reply is receipts and arguability: every line of the reading points at specific plays, so it is true of this listening and not of everyone, and the reader can reject any line.
HELD OPEN
One objection has no full answer: putting the reasons for a preference into words can change the preference.Wilson & Schooler (1991), "Thinking too much", Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 60(2), 181–192. Held open, not answered.