By controlling the type of music that a person listened to I believed that the music would help to shape what animal a person perceived the music to best represent. Due to the large array of animals, I anticipated that I would need to classify the animals into two groups: carnivores and herbivores. In addition, I assumed that the group herbivore1 would be present in both groups.
There are many different kinds of music in our society. Music affects many people’s lives. This can be seen through people’s clothes, appearance, and actions. Furthermore, the type of music a person listens to can effect their actions. At a rock concert, one would see people crowd surfing, moshing, and head banging. These three actions are both aggressive and powerful. On the other hand, at a symphony the spectators would sit back and enjoy the music, in a laid back and relaxed demeanor. Because of these two observations I came to the conclusion that when people listened to rock/heavy metal music, the animal that they associated with this type of music would be a predator, probably a carnivore.1In addition, when people listened to the classical music, the animal that they thought of would be an animal that is preyed upon.Perhaps this animal would be a herbivore.2
1Omnivores are a mixture of carnivores and herbivores. If one food supply runs low, that can turn to the other supply.
2Carnivore literally means the “eaters of flesh.” This hunter requires a considerable ability to learn. Predators are crafty and are able to improve the techniques of ambushing, capturing and hunting. The carnivore is normally associated with being a powerful
3Herbivores are animals that feed only on plants.
I administered this experiment on thirty people and they all participated in the experiment in my bedroom. I felt that this would be a quiet environment with as little distractions as possible. This was meant to stop the influence of any outside sources. At the beginning of the experiment, I told the person that they were to identify the first animal that came to mind while they were listening to the different types of music. None of the people in this experiment participated in my first experiment using inkblots and music. No one was aware of what type of music they would be listening to.
Each person listened to two different kinds of music and was asked to associate an animal with each type of music. First, the person listened to classical music, Beethoven’s “Requiem.” They listened for two to three minutes and I turned off the music and asked them what animal they felt best represented the music that they just listened to. Then for about five minutes, I talked with the person to get their mind off the first type of music that they had just listened to. Next, the person listened to heavy metal music, Pantera’s “Cemetery Gates,” and the same procedure was followed.
Each person was asked to identify one animal with each type of music. With people that listened to Pantera’s “Cemetery Gates,” the results were as follows:
In this study out of the 10 different groups of animals, 7 of the groups were carnivores,1 of the groups was a herbivore, and 2 of the groups were omnivores.
With the people that listened to Beethoven’s “Requiem,” the results were as follows:
In this study out of 12 different, 3 groups were carnivores, 7 of the groups were herbivores, and 2 of the groups were omnivores.
I am a very stubborn person and I do not like to admit defeat or when I am wrong.This is why I did not change the type of music that I used in this experiment from the first experiment I performed, which I used inkblots and music together.I wanted to try to prove that the reason that my first experiment failed was the inkblots, not the type of music that I choose. Therefore, I am happy to say that this time my hypothesis and experiment was a success.
I noticed something interesting in this experiment. After listening to Beethoven’s “Requiem,” eight people said butterfly. In my first experiment with inkblots, butterfly was the response of 15 out of the 40 people who