Heavy Metal Under Study

The days of court battles, PMRC (Parents Music Resource Center), and accusations of satanic lyrics (and other “evils”) by Heavy Metal bands from religious fundamentalists and journalists alike may be long gone but that era has definitely left its mark on our favourite musical genre. You assume that a well-educated person, meaning a person with rich life experiences and the ability for critical thinking (rather than actual degrees – what I would call “reservoir toilet paper of the highest quality”), will be in a position to look back and laugh at the naive and ignorant society of the 80s. And most do.

But the stigma that Heavy Metal carried through to the 00s has become such mainstream that it attracted the attention of the higher levels of the academic and scientific communities.  Along come academic research and the New wave of “Metal Studies” (NWOMS – my own abbreviation!). After the ridiculous attack from the even more ridiculous ignorant PMRC in the early 80s, psychologists and other scientists decided to look into this social phenomenon in more detail.

Studies stripped down Heavy Metal; from song lyrics and MTV videos to stage presence. They looked for subliminal messages in songs of bands like Judas Priest and Twister Sister, the promotion of sex, drugs, and self-destructive behaviours and many more. Below are some scientifically derived (?) yet really hilarious conclusions about the Heavy Metal fans:

“. . .a mass following of youth, their denim clothes covered in studs and appliqué, their hair long and wild so as to swing freely when they shook their heads in time with the music – what they called head-banging”

Cashmore (1984, p. 37)

“Contingents of longhaired, denimed males . . . consuming large quantities of beer and playing imaginary guitar runs in sycophant homage to their alter egos performing on the stage”

Chambers (1985, p. 123) on the Reading and Knebworth festival goers

Now I am not saying these scientists were crazy for researching the relationship between Heavy Metal music preference and anti-social behaviours, suicide, anxiety, and depression. But as expected of poor and highly biased methodologies, studies offered conflicting evidence in all areas, be it psychological, social, or cultural and not many reliable conclusions. Brown (2011), from which the above quotations were extracted, reports that research has now shifted its focus from looking at Heavy Metal as a social problem to a more cultural and musicological approach (i.e. NWOMS).

This sort of research may not appeal or even be known to the average Heavy Metal fan and really, who cares what happens within the scientific/academic community, right? Well, it may sound boring but truth is that proper research approaches and methodologies undertaken by serious researchers who understand the Heavy Metal music and its “culture”, will manage to catch the attention of fans and educate them about the important aspects of their favourite genre.

My new found respect for the NWOMS derives mainly from people like Sam Dunn a Canadian musician, film director, and anthropologist (you probably know him as the director of Metal: A Headbangers Journey, Global Metal, and Iron Maiden: Flight 666) as well as Keith Kahn Harris a writer, sociologist, and music critic.

Heavy Metal music intrigues scientists and inspires research that may even lead to joke-like quotations like the above-mentioned, benefit to our own amusement. It might have given birth to strange phenomena such as head-banging, air guitar and provocative attire but at least it’s not responsible for plague-like phenomena such as women who want to be called “Lady”, have a weird fond of umbrellas or wish for you to hit them one more time!

__________________________________________________________________________________

Article reference:

Brown, AR (2011). Heavy Genealogy: Mapping the Currents, Contraflows and Conflicts of the Emergent Field of Metal Studies, 1978-2010. Journal for Cultural Research, 15 (3), 213-242.

__________________________________________________________________________________

Image credits:

http://en.wikipedia.org/

http://www.examiner.com

http://www.imdb.com

Read More

Brian Johnson Vs Bon Scott: A Scientific Approach to an Ongoing AC/DC Debate

We have all been there. And by "there" I mean have been part of the oldest debate in AC/DC history and probably one of the biggest in Rock history in general. Who is better, Bon Scott or Brian Johnson? 

Although record keeping was not common in the 70s (wonder why?), rumour has it that AC/DC is the best selling Rock band in the world with all their albums reaching a minimum(!) of platinum status. Their album Back in Black, which reached an unbelievable double diamond status, sold over 40 million copies, reaching the status of No. 1 best selling Rock album of all time (and No. 2 -sadly- album of all music genres after Jackson's Thriller). No offence to Michael Jackson or its fans but... Boohoooo!

We have all heard arguments pro or against either one of them (Bon or Brian) in terms of singing abilities, performance, stage presence, showmanship, looks, style, energy, suitability to the band's style etc (the list is endless and frankly quite boring). 

A quirky Canadian Professor of Economics decided to take another approach to resolving this argument. He conducted an experimental study drawing together sciences such as Psychology, Physiology, and Sociology with experimental economics. It does sound a bit boring but his approach and results will surprise you.

In his experiment, he used the ultimatum game. I am not getting into details about the procedures but if you wish to learn more about it, I will put the reference at the end. Briefly, participants were randomly allocated into pairs with the roles of proposers or responders. The proposers were given a sum of money and were asked to choose how much of this money they would like to offer to their corresponding responder. The responder then accepts or rejects the offer. Simply put, if they accept, both proposer and responder receive their money. If the responder rejects the offer they both get nothing!

The basis for this is the assumption that people value fairness and don't just put their own wealth first, but also value other people's. And here you will ask: what does that have to do with AC/DC anyway?

In the experiment the pairs where split into two groups with one pair doing the "dealing" while listening to It's a Long Way to the Top sang by Bon Scott while the other pair listened to Shoot to Thrill sang by Brian Johnson assuming that different music types have different physiological and emotional effects on people that may guide decision making.

The findings of this strange if not creative experiment favoured Brian Johnson (sorry Bon Scott fans!). More offers were accepted in the Brian Johnson than the Bon Scott listeners leading to more efficient decision-making. Interesting I would say the least! So there you have it. From an economic perspective Brian Johnson deserves his current position (like we needed scientific support for that!) as the frontman of one of the best Rock N Roll bands.


I think the study is quite interesting, not considering the lack of control for psychological factors, a critique I am not getting into, rather letting you decide as a reader. So which one do YOU "choose"? Personally, I cannot, and refuse to choose between the two frontmen. I will not argue towards their greatness but I will say both were catalysts in the success that AC/DC are today.

For those that already rock, I salute you!

_________________________________________________________________________________

Article reference: Oxoby, RJ (2009). On the Efficiency of AC/DC: Bon Scott versus Brian Johnson. Economic Inquiry, 47(3), 598-602.
_________________________________________________________________________________

Image credits:

https://www.acdc.com/uk/

Read More

Mind Under Training (Introduction)

I realised that while I have been writing my extremely influential (!) articles, I still haven’t introduced myself properly. And since this blog is now more popular (who would have thought) than I expected, I feel that it is something I should have done already.

Well, I am an alien 25-year-old woman living in the graphic yet moody city of London, a psychologist under training (UK regulations require me to clarify), and attempting to get the infamous “Dr” title (?) in front of my name – we shall see! I have the same issues as the average 25-year-old woman, perhaps a lot more as you may see.

The two main things you should have probably realised about me by now (that is if you actually bothered reading my previous masterpieces) are that I am sarcastic (both towards self and others), ironic (mainly towards others), and I listen to Heavy Metal. And you would have probably inferred that I am a disdainful, arrogant Miss-Knows-It-All...and you would be probably right!

Just kidding, I don’t know everything, yet.

My main purpose in life is to listen, love, learn, and become genuinely open-minded (please refer to my pretentious open-mindedness post). I don’t really like the way the world operates (but who does anyway) and I am determined to change a fraction of it (i.e. a helpless hopeful idealist) with what I’ve got, which unfortunately is not that much. I kind of hate vanity (please refer to my generation: vanity post) but I have come to believe that we all have it somewhere in our DNA structure.

I am also not religious at all although I was meant to be (according to familial, societal, and global values but that’s another blog post altogether – watch this space). And here is where some of you may infer that I am Satan’s advocate (this blog is not for you then). Sorry to disappoint you, I am not that important (to Satan at least). I don't dance round a pentagram, naked, while holding a goat's head and singing Antichrist songs (although it would make a great movie). I just prefer Science over Fiction - although come to think of it science fiction movies have their merits too - but I will not get into a debate about this in the blog – ok maybe a little bit.

I love great music (sorry to disappoint people but some genres out there are not music) and that means I love music developed by people playing real, tangible instruments (please refer to my Why I choose Heavy Metal post). I listen to Rock N’ Roll if I am allowed to sum it all up under that term (quoting the great Lemmy). I spend most of my money on gigs as these offer me the “high” other people get from drugs. Which brings me to another point: Drugs kill people – some do slower than others. End of story.

In order to learn, I travel...a lot, mostly in Europe; not because of choice but because of money (under training, remember?). People who die with no such experiences (mainly due to choice), do so incomplete. I try to love art (sometimes it's much harder than it seems), and I do, most of it. I also believe that if mind is the door to the unconscious and the unseen, then books are the key. So I read quite a lot (from trashy magazines to scientific journals). Also I write (as you can see from this blog) and I think I do that pretty well (think).

Finally, I am proud of myself (surprised?) for mainly one reason: I have reached a point where I can “see” through my big head and have an insight, a meta-cognition (for the fellow psychologists ...under training) of my stupid/wrong/stereotypical/weird thoughts, actions, and dispositions, the same ones that I see everyday around me in other people. For a self-obsessed person like me that’s not a happy place to be, at all! The good thing is that I can take a step forward and talk about it in a blog – for the whole world to see – and show what an insightful, open-minded, really really smart person I am (see above re issues). What I write here in this blog, do not necessarily exclude me.

Plainly put, I am just writing what most people already think/know/observe/realise/do not admit about themselves, others, and society. I criticise and judge as a result of disappointment, contempt, and hope at the same time – in a vain attempt to:

1. Cover with words my own self-doubt and the little voice in my head;

2. Minimise my attention-seeking behavioural patterns and the feelings these cause by doing it in a useful and entertaining way;

3. Achieve self-affirmation;

4. Provoke thinking.

So, don’t shoot the messenger, just enjoy the debate. Oh, and give peace a chance!
_________________________________________________________________________________

Read More

My First Scientific Publication

Newly diagnosed heart failure: Quality of life, mood, and illness beliefs 


Objectives. This study sought to examine how patients’ mood and quality of life (QoL) change during the early high-risk period after a diagnosis of heart failure (HF) and to identify factors that may influence change.


Design. A within-subjects, repeated-measures design was used. Assessments took place within 4 weeks of diagnosis and 6 months later.


Methods. One hundred and sixty six patients with HF completed assessments of their mood, QoL, and beliefs about HF and its treatment. Correlation analysis was conducted between the variables and analysis of variance and t-tests were used to assess differences in categorical variables. To examine which variables predicted mood and QoL, hierarchical multiple regressions were conducted.


Results. At follow-up, patients’ beliefs indicated a realization of the chronicity of their HF, however their beliefs about the consequences of having HF did not change and their satisfaction with their treatment remained high. QoL and anxiety improved significantly over time but there was no significant change in depressed mood. As would be expected, improvement in symptoms was a key factor in improved mood and QoL. Other significant explanatory variables included age, comorbid chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, depressed mood, patients’ beliefs about the consequences of their HF and their concerns about treatment.


Conclusion. The present study provides an insight into how patients’ beliefs about their illness and treatment, and changes in these variables, affect QoL and mood in the short term after diagnosis and initiation of treatment. The study demonstrates that in addition to symptoms, patients’ emotional state and QoL change significantly in the early period following a new diagnosis of HF. Importantly, the association of these changes with psychological factors suggests that closer  attention to patients’ beliefs about their HF and its treatment at the time of diagnosis have the potential to improve QoL and aspects of mood at least in the short term.
_________________________________________________________________________________
Reference: Mulligan, K. et al. 2011, British Journal of Health Psychology
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.2044-8287.2011.02047.x/abstract
_________________________________________________________________________________
Image credit: http://healthglee.com

Read More