Musical Identity,

http://pom.sagepub.com/Psychology of Music

http://pom.sagepub.com/content/40/2/143The online version of this article can be found at:

DOI: 10.1177/0305735610386836

2012 40: 143 originally published online 14 January 2011Psychology of MusicAntonis Gardikiotis and Alexandros Baltzis

music preferences'Rock music for myself and justice to the world!': Musical identity, values, and

Published by:

http://www.sagepublications.com

On behalf of:

Society for Education, Music and Psychology Research

can be found at:Psychology of MusicAdditional services and information for

http://pom.sagepub.com/cgi/alertsEmail Alerts:

http://pom.sagepub.com/subscriptionsSubscriptions:

http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.navReprints:

http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.navPermissions:

http://pom.sagepub.com/content/40/2/143.refs.htmlCitations:

What is This?

- Jan 14, 2011 OnlineFirst Version of Record

- Mar 8, 2012Version of Record >>

at Aristotle University on October 19, 2012pom.sagepub.comDownloaded from

http://pom.sagepub.com/

http://pom.sagepub.com/content/40/2/143

http://www.sagepublications.com

http://www.sempre.org.uk

http://pom.sagepub.com/cgi/alerts

http://pom.sagepub.com/subscriptions

http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.nav

http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav

http://pom.sagepub.com/content/40/2/143.refs.html

http://pom.sagepub.com/content/40/2/143.full.pdf

http://pom.sagepub.com/content/early/2010/12/24/0305735610386836.full.pdf

http://online.sagepub.com/site/sphelp/vorhelp.xhtml


‘Rock music for myself and justice to the world!’: Musical identity, values, and music preferences

Antonis Gardikiotis and Alexandros BaltzisAristotle University of Thessaloniki, Greece

AbstractThe present study examined the relationship between music preferences, values, and musical identities in a sample of 606 Greek college students. Students indicated the importance of music in defining and evaluating themselves and their values on an abbreviated version of the Schwartz Value Survey (Schwartz, 1992). A typology of music preferences was revealed, with five factors: sophisticated and complex (e.g., jazz); native-Greek traditional (e.g., ‘rebetika’); sentimental and sensational (e.g., pop); established rebellious (e.g., rock); and non-mainstream dissonant (e.g., punk). Hierarchical regression analyses showed that values and perceived importance of music to self-definition (i.e., musical identities) contribute differentially in predicting the music preference structures, for example self-transcendence predicted established rebellious and conservation predicted sentimental and sensational; also musical identity was positively related to established rebellious and negatively to sentimental and sensational. These findings are discussed and interpreted within a psychological, as well as an interdisciplinary, theoretical framework.

Keywordsmusic genres, music preferences, musical identity, personal values, self-identity

Why do people listen to the music they do and which are the variables that predict people’s music likes and dislikes? Recent psychological literature that investigates why people listen to music mainly provides insights into the relationships between music preferences and mainly two sets of predicting variables: personality traits (e.g., Chamorro-Premuzic & Furnham, 2007; McCown, Keiser, Mulhearn, & Williamson, 1997; Rentfrow & Gosling, 2003); and social identi-ties (e.g., North & Hargreaves, 1999; North, Hargreaves, & O’Neill, 2000). Focusing on the individual level of analysis (see Hargreaves & North, 1997) the present study investigates the role of two variables that can significantly contribute to predicting music preferences.

Corresponding author:Dr Antonis Gardikiotis, School of Journalism and Mass Media Studies, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, 46 Egnatia St., Thessaloniki, 54625, Greece.[email: [email protected]]

Psychology of Music40(2) 143–163

© The Author(s) 2010Reprints and permission: sagepub.

co.uk/journalsPermission.navDOI: 10.1177/0305735610386836

pom.sagepub.com

Article



144 Psychology of Music 40(2)

Individuals may think that music plays a (primary or secondary) role in expressing themselves and constructing their self-image (Hargreaves, Miell, & MacDonald, 2002). This perception of a general function of music in self-definition (i.e., musical identity) may direct preferences to specific music genres. For example, individuals may listen to a specific music genre in order to be accepted (i.e., assimilated) by a social group (e.g., Hargreaves & North, 1997) or accordingly in order to feel different from other people. Can the importance that music has to the individual predict his or her music likes and dislikes?

Another important variable, which has not been investigated in music psychology literature, is personal values: can these guiding principles of individuals’ thought and behaviour (Schwartz, 1992) predict their music preferences? People holding specific values, for example openness to change (i.e., the motivation to search for new and exciting experiences), may choose to listen to specific music genres that provide such stimulation. Likewise, people holding the value of conformity (i.e., the motivation to be obedient and dutiful) may choose to listen to music that is congruent to what is consensually acceptable or traditional.

The present study aims to examine the relation between musical identities, personal values and music preferences (having defined first the territory of musical preferences in the specific population investigated).

Musical identitiesThere is ample evidence, the majority of which has been mainly developed in sociological and communication research, of the importance of music to the construction of self-identities, especially of young people (e.g., Arnett, 1991; Bleich, Zillmann, & Weaver, 1991; Frith, 1981; Hansen & Hansen, 1991; Krims, 2001; Laughey, 2006; Negus, 1996). During the last decade, though, a renewed interest in the relationship between music and identity has emerged in social psychological research. North and Hargreaves (1999) provided evidence that adolescents’ music preferences (of chart pop music) seemed to reflect an attempt to match their self-concept with perceptions of the people who typically listen to that style. They suggested that music func-tions as a ‘badge’ people use to make judgements of others but, at the same time, to express their own self-concepts (see also Frith, 1981). According to Hargreaves et al. (2002), people develop musical identities from early adolescence that are defined as components, among others (e.g., personality style or social roles), of self-images contributing to the construction of a more gen-eral self-identity. This synthesis of components forms the overall view that people have of them-selves. People may possess different images of themselves, such as ‘I am tall’, ‘I am a member of this family’, or ‘I am a rock fan’. Moreover, there is evidence that adolescents join musical sub-cultures as a means of defining themselves (North & Hargreaves, 1999).

Social identity approach (i.e., social identity theory; Tajfel & Turner, 1979, and self-categorization theory; Turner, Hogg, Oakes, Reicher, & Wetherell, 1987) suggests that people could under-stand the self in terms of personal identity, characterized by the idiosyncratic attributes of the individuals (e.g., ‘I am tall’, ‘I want to succeed’), and social identity, characterized by the norma-tive attributes of the social groups to which people belong (e.g., ‘I am European’, ‘I am a follower of the X political party’).

In the present study we examine both aspects of self-definition processes in musical identi-ties; that is, personal and social. We measure the cognitive and emotional aspects of personal identity – whether people think that music constitutes a part of the way they define themselves – and whether people perceive music contributing to the way they evaluate themselves. We also focus on the social aspect of self-identity; that is, whether people understand that their music



Gardikiotis and Baltzis 145

preferences place them at the core of a group of people with the same musical tastes. For these purposes relevant measures used in social psychological research are employed (for a review of measures of social and organizational identification, see Haslam, 2004).

We assume that music preferences are interrelated to both personal and social aspects of self-identity. People may prefer listening to a specific music genre or a song because the specific ‘mix’ between the lyrics, the rhythm, the orchestration, the harmony and the melody, and even the style of performance, expresses some inner thoughts about the way the individual views oneself. On the other hand, people may prefer listening to a specific music genre because belong-ing to that group of people with the same music preferences helps differentiate themselves from other groups, providing in this way a distinctive social identity.

Individuals strive for both belongingness and distinctiveness. According to optimal distinc-tiveness theory (Brewer, 2003), individuals have two universal human motives, the need on the one hand to feel similar to others and on the other hand to feel unique. Both these basic needs (inclusion/assimilation and differentiation/distinctiveness), functioning independently and in opposition to each other, determine social identification; in different situations one need may prevail over the other. When individuals strive for belongingness, they may prefer a music genre in order to feel they belong to a group of people listening to this music (North & Hargreaves, 1999); when they strive for distinctiveness, they may adopt various strategies, individual or social (Hornsey & Jetten, 2004). For example, they may prefer a music genre in order to differ-entiate themselves from their peers, or they may identify with a group that identifies itself against the mainstream. Hence by conforming to non-conformist group norms (in terms of music or other art preferences, even of diet or of clothing preferences), people serve their desire for belonging and for distinctiveness.

Values and music Values are important determinants of people’s attitudes and behaviour (Rokeach, 1973; Schwartz, 1992; see Schwartz & Bardi, 2001, for a review). Values describe and prescribe what we think is important to us in our lives. They are motivations, broad goals that apply across contexts and time. In other words, they are defined as desirable goals, varying in importance, that serve as guiding principles in people’s lives (Schwartz & Sagiv, 1995). Schwartz (1992) has presented a structural model of values describing their content and internal structure. The content of 10 value types is as follows: power, achievement, hedonism, stimulation, self-direction, univer-salism, benevolence, conformity, tradition and security (see Appendix for descriptions and sample items). According to the model, the 10 value types can be organized into four higher-level value types: (1) self-transcendence (universalism and benevolence) emphasizing accep-tance of others as equals and concern for their welfare; (2) self-enhancement (power and achievement) emphasizing pursuit of own success and dominance over others; (3) openness to change (self-direction and stimulation) emphasizing independent thought and action, and favouring change; and (4) conservation (security, conformity, and tradition) emphasizing sub-missive self-restriction to preserve the status quo. The theory has been tested in more than 200 samples from more than 65 countries (Schwartz, & Bardi, 2001). In the majority of samples, the distinctiveness of the values and their structural relations has been verified.

There is extensive sociological research indicating that there is a relation between music pref-erences, lifestyle and social status (e.g., DeNora, 2000; Frith, 1996; Laughey, 2006; North & Hargreaves, 2007a, 2007b, 2007c). As symbols of status and identity of groups (e.g., Bourdieu, 1984; Frith, 1996) music preferences – expressed also through consumption (e.g., concert




attendance, purchase of CDs and music magazines, radio listening etc.) – are related to ideologies and values (cf. Negus, 1996; Wicke, 1995). Furthermore, the study of subcultures also indicates that music preferences, as a constitutive element of the subcultural lifestyles and identities, are associated with certain values (e.g., rock with social awareness and rebelliousness, pop with certain values about gender roles and conformity, etc. – see for example Christenson & Peterson, 1988; Hebdige, 1972; Krims, 2001; Lewis, 1995).

Although there is not any psychological study examining how values predict music prefer-ences, there are some studies examining the relationship between music and attitudes. For exam-ple, research attention has been drawn to the relationship between rap or heavy metal music and a number of attitudinal tendencies: some studies show a correlation between listening to rap or heavy metal music and negative attitudes toward women, distrust and aggression (e.g., Rubin, West, & Mitchell, 2001). Others (Carpentier, Knobloch, & Zillmann, 2003) have found a relation-ship between various traits such as rebelliousness, disinhibition, and hostility, and listening to songs featuring defiant messages. In one of their studies where they examined the relationship between music preferences and various personality traits, Rentfrow and Gosling (2003) found that reflective and complex music (i.e., blues, jazz, classical, folk) was positively related to open-ness to new experience and to tolerance of others and negatively to conservatism; intense and rebellious music (i.e., rock, alternative, heavy metal) was positively related to openness to new experiences; upbeat and conventional music (i.e., country, soundtracks, religious, pop) was pre-ferred by socially-outgoing individuals. Values are interrelated with personality traits but at the same time they are different (Roccas, Sagiv, Schwartz, & Knafo, 2002). Although values may be conceived as a type of personality disposition (i.e., they are relatively stable across time and situ-ation, and also used to characterize and compare individuals) they are simultaneously different. Values are conscious goals evaluated in terms of importance, experienced as demands one places upon oneself. Hence they entail intentional commitment by the person more than personality dispositions do (Bilsky & Schwartz, 1994). Although Rentfrow and Gosling’s (2003) findings are not based on value measures, they can still inform this study’s hypotheses.

We assume that values will be related to music preferences. Values help people orientate themselves in life and so does music: music is continuously present in most of our daily life activities and, more importantly, it can provide and express meanings connected to right and wrong, as well as world and life views. People may emphasize dominance over other people, or be concerned with other people’s welfare, or they may want to pursue stimulant experiences, or to preserve the status quo. These motivations will lead people to search for music of certain content and form, compatible to their desired goals.

Structure of music preferencesFrom the listener’s standpoint some types of music seem to ‘go together’ and other seem to ‘go apart’: Christenson and Peterson (1988) propose that listeners organize genres into coherent groups and this is the way they ‘map the universe of music types’ (p. 283). These coherent groups of preferences – likes and dislikes – that map the music world are what Christenson and Peterson call ‘preference structures’ or ‘metagenres’. Wells and Tokinoya (1998), in their study on genre preferences of Western popular music by Japanese adolescents, identified three types of preference structures: listening (classical, jazz, country and easy listening); pop/dance (rap, top 40, soul, and techno); and heavy rock (heavy metal, rock, and punk). Deihl, Schneider and Petress (1983) located three preference structures: a high brow/traditional (classical music and




opera); a contemporary/progressive (rock, soul, punk and jazz); and a middle brow/traditional (big band, country, and folk).

In their psychological studies Rentfrow and Gosling (2003) confirmed a structure of four dimensions across multiple samples in United States: a factor called reflective and complex (blues, jazz, classical, folk); an intense and rebellious factor (rock, alternative, heavy metal); an upbeat and conventional factor (country, soundtracks, religious, pop); and an energetic and rhythmic factor (rap/hip-hop, soul/funk, electronica/dance). In a Dutch sample, Bogt, Raaijmakers, Vollebergh, Van Wel, and Sikkema (2003) revealed a five-factor structure underlying their sample’s musical preferences: pop/Dutch pop, Afro-American pop, elite, rock, and dance.

There seems to be substantial agreement among the studies exploring the structure of music preferences in North America and Europe (focusing, among others things, on music complex-ity, instrumentation, singing style or lyric themes; see Christenson & Roberts, 1998): most of these studies, at the very least, describe a four-factor structure, including a popular, chart-based factor, a rock factor, an elitist factor, and a rhythmic, dance factor. As a reminder, it should be noted that the preference structures, as in most factor-analytic research, are named after labels that inevitably capture some factors (i.e., genres) better than others and therefore should be used only as guides to the genres of each structure.

HypothesesMusic preferences can be related, among other things, to the significance music has to our-selves (i.e., our musical identities). We hypothesize that perceived importance of music to one’s definition and evaluation as an individual will be related to music genres that can pro-vide individual distinctiveness, for example the elitist genre (e.g., jazz or classical music) that conveys the meaning of a ‘high brow’ cultural consumption, or the rock genre that conveys the meaning of rebelliousness and anti-conformism (e.g., Hornsey & Jetten, 2004). On the other hand, a genre that is very popular and common will not provide such distinctiveness and therefore will be negatively related to an individual’s identity definition and evaluation. However, people may value music genres, such as popular music, exactly because they provide a sense of belonging (which will be reflected in the social aspect of identity measure; see Brewer, 2003), as North and Hargreaves (1999) have shown that it is the case of chart popu-lar music.

Because values are desirable goals that serve as guiding principles in people’s lives, we hypothesize that values will also be related to music genres that can satisfy these goals in some way. For example, people holding the value of openness to change will be more likely to value music char-acterized by complex structure (such as jazz and classical music). People holding the value of con-formity will be more likely to choose music that conforms to the consensual music standards of a society (such as pop). Moreover, conformity will be negatively related to music preferences such as the elitist or the rock genres because these preferences stand out in terms of frequency and anti-normative ideology, accordingly. People holding the value of self-enhancement will not be likely to value music that defies dominance and supports (to a degree) solidarity (such as rock music).

Finally we expect that, in examining participants’ music preferences, we will find at least four factors in the structure that will include a popular, chart-based factor, a rock factor, an elitist factor, and a rhythmic, dance factor as most relevant studies have shown (Christenson & Roberts, 1998).




MethodParticipantsA total of 606 students from three higher education institutions located in Thessaloniki, Greece, participated voluntarily in the study. From this initial sample, 10 participants were excluded because they had a large amount of missing data. Age ranged from 17 to 31 years (M = 20.91, SD = 2.53) with 303 female and 293 male participants. Participants studied technology (n = 74), social sciences (n = 71), humanities (n = 156), business (n = 184), education (n = 26) and animal science (n = 95).

Procedure Participants voluntarily completed the questionnaires in large classes just before the end of the courses they attended. They were informed that the survey was related to students’ music pref-erences and then answered in turn the music preferences items, the identity items, and the values scales.

Questionnaire – measuresMusic preferences. An initial pool of items that was created by data drawn from the charts of Greek and non-Greek music, and by taking into account different genres broadcasted by major radio stations, was tested in a pretest with an independent sample of students (n = 30, approached in the library by a research assistant) in order to produce the final questionnaire (no previous relevant research exists on the Greek case). The pretest was also meant to trace non-mainstream genres known to this population, but which are not visible in the media. In addition, the pretest was used to determine at least one typical representative singer or group for each genre or sub-genre, in order to avoid ambiguity concerning the meaning of the genres. The 24 items that came up from the pretest were: alternative, funk, blues, pop (contemporary, Western-style), Greek pop, rap/hip-hop, Greek rap/hip-hop, rock, Greek rock, hard rock/heavy metal, house, jazz, punk, reggae, rock ’n’ roll, soul/R&B, trance, world (ethnic) music, classical music, Greek folk (traditional), rebetika, laika, laika-pop, and Greek art-popular music.1 Participants were asked to indicate their liking or disliking of the 24 music genres (on a 5-point scale, 1 = I don’t like it at all to 5 = I like it very much).

Musical identities. Participants were asked to indicate how important the music they listen to is for themselves (on a 5-point response scales, 1 = I disagree completely to 5 = I agree com-pletely). The five items measure different aspects of identification with the first four items focusing on aspects of identification relating to self (i.e., how important is music to myself, as an individual) and the last item focusing on the social aspect of identification (i.e., how impor-tant is music to myself as a member of a group) (see Haslam, 2004). These items measure three aspects of musical identities: (1) the first two items reflecting the cognitive aspect of self-identification (adapted from Elemers, Kortekaas, & Ouwerkerk, 1999) were the following: ‘The music I listen to is an important reflection of who I am’, and ‘Listening to the music is an important part of my self-image’ (α = 0.61). (2) The next two items reflect the affective aspect of self-identification (adapted from Mael & Ashforth, 1992): ‘If someone praises the music I listen to, it would feel like a personal compliment’ and ‘If someone criticizes the music I listen to, it would feel like a personal insult’ (α = 0.65). (3) The last item reflects the social aspect of




identification: ‘I think that I am a typical member of the group of people listening to the same music as I do’ (adapted from Doosje, Ellemers, & Spears, 1995).

Values survey. Participants completed an abbreviated version of the Schwartz Value Survey that included 23 single values (Schwartz, 1992; see Appendix).2 Participants rated the importance of each value as a guiding principle in their life on a 7-point scale from ‘opposed to my values’ (−1), through ‘not important’ (0), to ‘of supreme importance’ (5). To ensure that values operate the same way as in previous studies (and since there are no relevant studies concerning the specific population), a principal axis analysis (with promax rotation) was performed revealing six factors (see Table 1). Three of these factors essentially reproduced three higher-level value types of Schwartz’s model: self-enhancement (power and achievement, α = 0.83), openness to change (self-direction, stimulation, and hedonism, α = 0.76), and conservation (security and conformity, α = 0.75). The other three factors comprised of value types that usually load on the social-transcendence type: one factor with mostly universalism items (i.e., equality, world at peace, respecting the earth, protecting the environment plus the social justice item); a second factor with mostly benevolent items (i.e., mature love, helpfulness, forgivingness); and a third factor with some benevolent items (i.e., honesty, true friendship, loyal). In order to employ a more parsimonious value structure on the data and following the rationale of the four higher-level value types of Schwartz’s model, we summated the three last factors in order to construct a self-transcendence scale (α = 0.88).

ResultsMeans and standard deviations of all variables and intercorrelations of all variables are shown in Table 2. There were no differences according to sample characteristics so these variables are not considered in subsequent analyses.

Music preferencesIn order to reveal the underlying structure of the music preferences an exploratory factor anal-ysis was employed since there are no previous relevant studies on the specific population. A principal axis factoring as an extraction method was employed because music preferences were not normally distributed (see Costello & Osborne, 2005).3 Promax method of rotation was used to allow for some correlation between the extracted factors. Based on the scree plot, subse-quent analyses applying principal axis factoring with promax rotation were carried out with 5, 6, and 7 factors. The solution with five factors was the most meaningful (see Table 3): item load-ings were above .40 (the lowest of them being .406), there were no cross loadings and there were no factors with fewer than three items (cf. Costello & Osborne, 2005). The total variance explained was 51.91% for the 5-factors solution.4 Following the approach by Rentfrow and Gosling (2003), the preference structures were named not only by the genres included in them, but also by the meaning they acquire within the context of the population under investigation.

The first factor (or preference structure), including pop, soul/R&B, rap/hip-hop, Greek pop, Greek rap/hip-hop, and laika-pop, was named ‘sentimental and sensational’. It includes genres related with the typical functions of pop music: its structure and content of lyrics facilitate its understanding and can be easily memorized; the typical themes of the lyrics refer to gender relationships and courtship and gratifying certain emotional needs. Interestingly (and some-how unexpectedly) the rap genres were included in this type of preference structure, indicating




Table 1. Principal axis factoring on values scale

Components

1 2 3 4 5 6

Protecting the environment, preserving nature

.833

A world of peace, free of war and conflict .756Social justice, correcting injustices, care for the weak

.469

Equality, equal opportunity for all .444Honouring parents and elders, showing respect

.799

Family security, safety for loved ones .616Obedient, dutiful, meeting obligations .529Self-discipline, self-restraint, resistance to temptations

.481

Sense of belonging, feeling that others care about me

.465

Authority, the right to lead or command .896Social power; control over others, dominance .866Influential, having an impact on people and events

.671

Wealth, material possessions, money .497An exciting life, stimulating experiences .937A varied life, filled with challenges, novelty and change

.807

Curious, interested in everything, exploring .502Enjoying life, enjoying food, sex, leisure, etc. .433Helpful, working for the welfare of others .692Forgiving, willing to pardon others .568Mature love, deep emotional and spiritual intimacy

.511

True friendship, close supportive friends .808Loyal, faithful to my friends .586Honest, genuine, sincere .430eigenvalues 6, 609 3, 041 2, 133 1, 479 1, 314 1, 064% explained 27, 54 12, 67 8, 88 6, 17 5, 47 4, 43Cumulative % explained 27, 54 40, 21 49, 10 55, 26 60, 74 65, 17

Note: Only factor loadings with values of .40 or higher (after Promax rotation) are shown.

that this genre has a meaning rather specific to the population studied. It should be noticed, however, that a good part of rap music has been well institutionalized through corporate annexation (cf. Neal, 1997) within the context of the recording and entertainment industry and integrated in the leisure economy. In a ‘sanitized’ version, rap has been used by the main-stream pop music industry to create some sensation, mixing typical sentimental lyrics with unusual non-verbal elements, hence the name of this preference structure.

The second preference structure, including blues, jazz, classical, and world (ethnic) music, was named ‘sophisticated and complex’ because its appreciation signifies cultivated skills and knowledge that is not commonly accessible, for example through the education system or by heavy exposition to it through the mass media. From this point of view, this preference con-struct presupposes certain qualities.



Tabl

e 2.

Mea

ns, s

tand

ard

devi

atio

ns, a

nd in

terc

orre

latio

ns o

f all

vari

able

s

MSD

12

34

56

78

91

01

1

Iden

tific

atio

n 1

. ID

13

.24

.83

2.

ID2

2.4

8.9

3.3

2**

3.

ID3

2.7

41

.05

.83

**.2

8**

Valu

e ty

pe 4

. se

lf-en

han

cem

ent

1.6

61

.28

.12

**.2

4**

.07

5.

self-

tran

scen

den

ce3

.59

1.0

2.0

2−.

04

−.0

5−.

20

** 6

. op

enn

ess

to c

han

ge3

.97

.82

.15

**.0

9*

.03

.14

**.2

8**

7.

con

serv

atio

n3

.53

.96

.08

.03

.04

.03

.55

**.1

4**

Mu

sic

gen

res

8.

Sent

imen

tal a

nd s

ensa

tiona

l3

.30

.93

.03

−.0

6.0

9*

.09

*.0

5.0

8.2

3**

9.

Soph

isti

cate

d an

d co

mpl

ex3

.10

.95

.01

.03

−.0

4−.

07

.13

**.1

5**

−.0

9*

−.1

6**

10

. N

on-m

ain

stre

am d

isso

nan

t2

.69

.91

−.0

2.0

3−.

05

.01

.16

**−.

01

−.1

6**

−.0

2.3

1**

11

. Es

tabl

ish

ed r

ebel

liou

s3

.55

.84

−.0

1.0

3−.

11

**−.

17

**.1

7**

.19

**−.

09

*−.

19

**.4

1**

.34

**1

2.

Tra

diti

onal

3.3

2.8

7−.

01

−.0

6−.

04

−.2

3**

−.0

1.2

2**

.11

**−.

01

.21

**−.

05

.28

**

** C

orre

lati

on is

sig

nifi

can

t at t

he

0.0

1 le

vel (

two-

taile

d).

* C

orre

lati

on is

sig

nifi

can

t at t

he

0.0

5 le

vel (

two-

taile

d).

Not

e: ID

1 =

Iden

tity

(cog

niti

ve a

spec

t), I

D2

= Id

entit

y (a

ffect

ive

aspe

ct),

ID3

= id

entit

y (s

ocia

l asp

ect)

. Sen

timen

tal a

nd

sen

satio

nal

: pop

, sou

l/R

&B

, rap

an

d h

ip-h

op, g

r.

pop,

gr.

hyb

rid.

/sop

his

ticat

ed a

nd

com

plex

: blu

es, j

azz,

cla

ssic

al, w

orld

. / N

on-m

ain

stre

am d

isso

nan

t: pu

nk,

tran

ce, f

un

k, h

ouse

, alte

rnat

ive,

har

d ro

ck/m

etal

./ e

stab

lish

ed

rebe

lliou

s: r

ock,

gr.

roc

k, r

ock’

n’r

oll,

gr. a

rt /

nat

ive-

folk

trad

itio

nal

: rem

beti

ko, l

aika

, tra

diti

onal

.





Table 3. Principal axis factoring on music preferences

Genres Preference structure

1Sentimental and sensational

2Sophisticated and complex

3Non-mainstream dissonant

4Established rebellious

5Native-Greek traditional

Pop .800Soul/R&B .762Rap/hip-hop .724Greek pop .709Greek rap/hip-hop .654Laika-pop .570Blues .925Jazz .839Classical music .697World (ethnic) music .656ReggaePunk .779Trance .696Funk .632House .628Alternative .572Hard rock / heavy metal .497Greek rock .776Art-popular .627Rock .584Rock ’n’ roll .406Rebetika .776Greek folk (traditional) .601Laika .519Eigenvalues 5.313 3.013 2.116 1.228 .789% explained 22.14 12.55 8.82 5.12 3.29Cumulative % explained 22.14 34.69 43.51 48.63 51.91Cronbach’s alpha .828 .819 .765 .708 .679

Note: Only factor loadings with values of .40 or higher (after Promax rotation) are shown.

The third preference structure, including punk, trance, funk, house, alternative and hard rock/heavy metal, was named ‘non-mainstream dissonant’, because, on the one hand, it scored low on the preference scale (M = 2.69), and on the other hand the genres included in this con-struct have low visibility in the media. This type of preferences also indicates some distancing from mainstream preferences: people with high scores in this construct are well aware of the fact that their choice is dissonant with the majority of preferences.

The fourth preference structure, including rock, rock ’n’ roll, Greek rock, and art-popular, was named ‘established rebellious’, because it is related to stereotypes of a divergent musical culture (Lewis, 1995). In the Greek context, rock music is considered to be a socially-critical genre and is related to certain lifestyles and subcultures. However, given its integration in the mainstream recording industry, its visibility in the mass media, and the fact that today only older (than students) people may be intrigued (if at all) by these types of music, this preference structure articulates a culture that is rather ‘bending societal norms than smashing them’ (cf. Lewis, 1995).

Finally, the fifth preference structure, including rebetika, laika, and Greek folk, was named ‘native-Greek traditional’. This preference structure signifies an affiliation to what is considered to




be ‘genuine Greek music’ (although from a technical – historical and musicological as well – point of view there are several influences from other cultures) and it incorporates certain culture-spe-cific social and historical processes embedded in the culture of the country as collective experiences.

Hierarchical regressions of music preference structuresHierarchical regression analyses were performed on all five types of preference structure. Musical identities are assumed to be more important variables than personal values in predict-ing music preferences and, hence, identity variables were entered in the first step and value types in the second (see Table 4).The analyses on the sophisticated and complex preference structure (i.e., blues, jazz, classical, and world) showed that the best predictors of this prefer-ence construct were the self-transcendence and the conservation values. The more people hold values that emphasize serving the interests of others (i.e., understanding and tolerating other people, seeking social justice and equality for other people, and being helpful, loyal, and honest) the more they tend to give high scores to this type of preference structure. On the other hand, the less people hold values of conservation (i.e., conforming and valuing social harmony) the more they tend towards the sophisticated and complex preference structure.

Interestingly, analyses on the established rebellious preference structure (i.e., rock, Greek rock, art-popular, and rock ’n’ roll) showed that all variables had significant relationships with this structure. Perceived importance to self predicted this type of preference structure, with the cognitive and the affective scales having a positive relationship and the social scale having a negative relationship. People value the established rebellious preference, partly because they think and feel that it is an integral part of their self-image; they also value it as long as it does not position them within a social group with the same music preferences. Analyses also showed that all value types had significant relationships with this preference structure (self-transcen-dence and openness to change with a positive sign and self-enhancement and conservation with a negative sign). The less individuals emphasize the values of conformity and security as well as the values of own success and dominance, the more they tend toward this preference structure. In a mirror image, the more they value tolerance and interest in others’ welfare and the more they value change, independent thought and stimulation, the more they tend to value this preference structure.

Analyses on the non-mainstream dissonant preference structure (i.e., punk, trance, funk, house, alternative, hard rock/heavy metal) showed that the values of openness to change (posi-tively) and conservation (negatively) significantly predicted scores of this structure: the more people are open to change and to stimulation, and the less they value conservation of social harmony and status quo, the more they tend towards non-mainstream dissonant preferences. This is consistent with similar findings from research on the relationship between patterns of behaviour or attitudes and/or personality traits and the preference for types of music with these qualities (e.g., Chamorro-Premuzic & Furnham, 2007; Rentfrow & Gosling, 2003).

Sentimental and sensational preference structure (i.e., pop, soul/R&B, rap/hip-hop, Greek pop, Greek rap/hip-hop, laika-pop) was predicted by both perceived importance to self-identity and values. The less participants think that music constitutes an integral part of their self-definition, and the less they think that an insult or a praise of these preferences can affect their personal feelings, the more they value this preference structure. However, the more they think that they belong to the group of people with the same music preferences, the more they like this structure. Also, the more they value conformity and security, and dominance and own success, the more they tend toward the sentimental and sensational type.




Tabl

e 4.

Sum

mar

y of

hie

rarc

hica

l reg

ress

ion

anal

yses

for

vari

able

s pr

edic

ting

mus

ic p

refe

renc

es (

N =

596

)

Vari

able

Soph

isti

cate

d an

d co

mpl

exEs

tabl

ish

ed

rebe

lliou

sN

on-m

ain

stre

am

diss

onan

tSe

nti

men

tal a

nd

sen

sati

onal

Nat

ive

Gre

ek

Tra

diti

onal

βt

βt

βt

βt

βt

Step

1 I

D1

.16

2.0

5*

.26

3.4

3**

*.0

6.7

6−.

10

1.3

1.1

31

.72

# I

D2

−.0

2.4

8.0

71

.51

.07

1.5

4−.

10

2.1

5*

−.0

61

.40

ID

3−.

15

1.9

8*

−.3

14

.21

***

−.1

01

.13

.21

2.7

2**

−.1

31

.77

#St

ep 2

ID

1.1

11

.45

.21

2.9

3**

.01

.12

−.1

62

.10

*.1

31

.73

# I

D2

−.0

1.1

2.1

12

.59

**.0

71

.63

−.1

22

.66

**−.

01

.18

ID

3−.

10

1.3

1−.

26

3.6

7**

*−.

06

.76

.24

3.2

7**

*−.

13

1.7

1 S

elf-

enh

ance

men

t−.

04

.86

−.1

63

.75

***

−.0

5.9

7.1

02

.09

*−.

19

4.2

8**

* S

elf-

tran

scen

den

ce.2

54

.57

***

.26

5.0

4**

*.0

1.2

7−.

05

.97

.18

3.2

9**

* O

pen

nes

s to

ch

ange

.0

71

.61

.10

2.3

8*

.19

4.1

7**

*.0

51

.13

−.0

51

.20

Con

serv

atio

n−.

21

4.1

2**

*−.

23

4.6

5**

*−.

17

3.4

1**

*.2

54

.89

***

.03

.63

ID1

= Id

enti

ty (c

ogn

itiv

e as

pect

), ID

2 =

Iden

tity

(affe

ctiv

e as

pect

), ID

3 =

iden

tity

(soc

ial a

spec

t).

Not

e: In

tera

ctio

ns

betw

een

iden

tity

item

s an

d va

lues

str

uct

ure

s di

d n

ot s

ign

ifica

ntly

pre

dict

mu

sic

pref

eren

ces

and

are

not

sh

own

in th

e ta

ble.

For

sop

his

tica

ted

and

com

plex

: R2

= .0

1 (n

s) fo

r st

ep 1

; ΔR

2 =

.12

(p <

.00

1)

for

step

2. F

or e

stab

lish

ed r

ebel

liou

s: R

2 =

.04

(p <

.00

1)

for

step

1; Δ

R2

= .1

0 fo

r st

ep 2

(p <

.00

1).

For

non

-m

ain

stre

am d

isso

nan

t: R

2 =

.01

(ns)

for

step

1; Δ

R2 =

.06

(p <

.00

1)

for

step

2. F

or s

enti

men

tal a

nd

sen

sati

onal

: R2

= .0

2 (p

< .0

1.)

for

step

1; Δ

R2 =

.07

(p <

.00

1) f

or s

tep

2. F

or n

ativ

e G

reek

trad

itio

nal

: R2

= .0

1 (n

s) fo

r st

ep 1

; ΔR

2 =

.09

(p <

.00

1) f

or s

tep

2.

*p <

.05

; **p

< .0

1; *

**p

< .0

01

; #

p <

.08

.




Finally, the analyses on the native-Greek traditional preference structure (i.e., rebetika, laika, and Greek folk) showed that values (i.e., self-enhancement and self-transcendence) and, in part, self-identity predicted this structure. The less individuals pursue their own relative success and dominance over others, the more they are inclined towards this preference structure. Moreover, the more they emphasize acceptance of, and concern for, others, the more they tend to value this structure. Finally, albeit in a marginally significant way, the cognitive aspect of identification predicted positively and the social aspect of identification predicted negatively this preference structure.

DiscussionIt was evident in the present study that musical identities and personal values are related to music preferences. These findings add to our understanding of the reasons why people listen to music and provide new insights to the psychological research of music. The study also aimed to map the music preference structures characteristic of the population under investigation: the factor analytic results revealed the four-preference structure, commonly found in most studies of the relevant literature, plus a native-Greek traditional structure.

Structure of music preferencesThe music preference structures revealed in the present study have many similarities to previ-ous studies. Generally the four-factor core structure was replicated; most studies have produced a popular, chart-based factor, a rock factor, an elitist factor, and a rhythmic, dance factor (see Christenson & Roberts, 1998). For example, Rentfrow and Gosling (2003) confirmed this structure: their analysis revealed a factor they called reflective and complex (blues, jazz, classi-cal, folk), an intense and rebellious factor (rock, alternative, heavy metal), an upbeat and con-ventional factor (country, soundtracks, religious, pop), and an energetic and rhythmic factor (rap/hip-hop, soul/funk, electronica/dance). In the present study an elitist factor was evident, the sophisticated and complex (including blues, jazz, classical, and world (ethnic) music); a second rock factor the established rebellious (rock, rock ’n’ roll, Greek rock, and art-popular); a third popular factor, the sentimental and sensational (pop, soul/R&B, rap/hip-hop, Greek pop, Greek rap/hip-hop, laika-pop); a fourth rhythmic factor, the non-mainstream dissonant (punk, trance, funk, house, alternative, hard rock/heavy metal); plus a last factor, the native-Greek traditional (rebetika, laika, and Greek folk). A difference, then, is the additional factor containing genres that pertain to the local musical culture (the native-Greek traditional factor). Another difference lies in the fact that some music genres that, in other studies, loaded on a different factor (e.g., in Rentfrow & Gosling’s (2003) study rap music loaded on a factor together with soul and dance music) in the present study loaded on a different factor (e.g., rap music loaded together with pop music).

Because listeners of one music genre tend to listen to other genres as well, it is also important to investigate the relationships among the preference structures rather than preferences for single genres. Looking at the intercorrelations among preference structures one can see signifi-cant positive correlations between sophisticated and complex, established rebellious, non-mainstream dissonant, and native-folk traditional structures of preferences (i.e., among all structures minus the sentimental and sensational). This signifies that there is a great deal of common music preferences. However, sentimental and sensational was the only preference structure that had negative correlations with sophisticated and complex and established rebel-lious suggesting that these types of preferences are incompatible.




In order to explain the correlations among most of the preference structures we can draw on the concept of cultural omnivorousness. Peterson (1992) indicated that the elite-to-mass perspective is not an adequate explanatory framework of media consumption (including music). According to the elite-to-mass perspective, the stratification hierarchy includes the educated elite – the ‘high brow’ – at the top, with well-refined preferences and an ignorant and stimulus-seeking mass at the bottom – the ‘low brow’ (Peterson, 1992). Analyzing distinct groups of occupations and ranking them in terms of their music preferences, Peterson found that the higher status occupational groups showed high rates of participation in non-elite activities, and it was difficult for them to indicate only one favourite genre of music. Peterson (1992) concluded that, instead of the elite-to-mass, the omnivore-to-univore perspective (in terms of cultural consumption and taste) fits best with the data and can explain the contemporary status hierarchy. Similarly, accord-ing to Bourdieu (1984), the range of preferences increases as one is moving to the upper steps of the status hierarchy ladder, since the access to a wider range of cultural and artistic forms increases too: the higher the status, the greater the availability of cultural capital. Recent empiri-cal research in various countries like Australia, France, Great Britain, Spain, and several others has confirmed this approach (Lizardo & Skiles, 2008; but see North & Hargreaves, 2007b). From this point of view, if ‘status is gained by knowing about, and participating in (that is to say, by consuming) many if not all forms’, as Peterson indicates, omnivorous preference is ‘a way to assert an identity’ (Peterson, 1992, p. 252). The students in our research have access to a wide range of cultural forms and it is not surprising that they showed an inclination towards cultural omnivorousness (evident in the intercorrelations among most of preference structures).

Musical identity and music preferencesGenerally, the results suggest that perceived musical identities are related to music prefer-ences. Interestingly, different aspects of musical identities are differentially related to differ-ent preference structures. Individual aspects of musical identity predicted established rebellious, sentimental and sensational, and, partially, folk-native traditional preference structures. It is interesting to note that, while both cognitive and affective identity items had a positive relationship with the established rebellious structure, they had a negative relation-ship with the sentimental and sensational one. Hence, while the more listeners think that the music they listen to is a part (with consequences to self-evaluation) of self the more they value the established rebellious types of music and the less they value sentimental and sensa-tional. However, the reverse pattern was evident for the social aspect of self-identity: the more listeners think that music positions them at the core of a social group with the same music preferences, the more they tend toward the sentimental and sensational structure and the less toward the established rebellious one. People that like to listen to sentimental and sensa-tional type of music believe that this type of music does not have any positive evaluative consequences for themselves as individuals. At the same time, however, it describes them as typical members of the group of people that like the same type of music, satisfying an assimi-lation need (Brewer, 2003; see also North & Hargreaves, 1999). Future research could exam-ine whether this type of music has a core dimension of enjoyment (more in terms of relaxation and discharge which of course can be experienced with other people) more than established rebellious type of music has. The latter type of music can provide a sense of distinctiveness to individual identity (Hornsey & Jetten, 2004) by conveying positive meanings, connotations, feelings, and representations (such as rebelliousness) that are eagerly assimilated by young people (something that was not confirmed for sophisticated and complex type of music as it was hypothesized). Hence an analysis of the contents that these types of music convey and




the perception of these contents by the listeners are needed. Additionally, established rebellious has become a more private hypothesis than it was few decades ago when rock music, for example, was an integral part of youth’s collective identity. It has also become less crystallized – that is, more diffused – compared to the ’60s and mid ’70s in Greece, when – given the politi-cal and social circumstances in the country – this music culture was more commonly identified with the image of a rebellious youth in the major urban areas (cf. Lewis, 1995). There was a similar tendency for folk-native traditional listeners to perceive the music they listen to as important to their self-definition (the cognitive aspect) but less important for their definition as a group member.

Interestingly, the social aspect of musical identity did not come up as such an important deter-minant of music preferences. This is perhaps because the context of data collection did not create an intergroup situation, for example by asking the respondents to make comparisons with people listening to different kinds of music (see North & Hargreaves, 1999). In a comparative, intergroup context, respondents’ reactions would normally serve ingroup differentiation; that is, increasing ingroup’s and lessening outgroup’s evaluation. Perhaps participants wanted to defy a conformist image of themselves (‘I listen to what other people do’) in order to achieve individual distinctive-ness (for example, a common theme in rock music is non-conformism). Also, it can be noted that people’s music preferences vary according to their moods, social situation and other constantly-changing circumstances (Hargreaves et al., 2002). Hence respondents’ reactions to the identity measures of the present study could also be related to a number of other relative variables.

Values and music preferencesPersonal values that people hold also proved to be strongly related with their musical prefer-ences. Self-transcendence positively predicted the sophisticated and complex, established rebel-lious, and folk-native traditional preference structures. The more listeners hold values of understanding and tolerating other people (i.e., to be motivated to seek social justice, peace around earth, and preservation of the environment, to provide help and forgiveness to the peo-ple), the more they tend towards these types of preferences.

Self-enhancement values were found, as expected, to be negatively related to established rebellious and folk-native traditional preference structures. The less people pursue relative own success and dominance over other people (i.e., to have social power and authority, wealth and material goods, and influence over other people), the more they incline towards these prefer-ences. It is noteworthy that self-enhancement had the only significant (positive) correlation with sentimental and sensational preference structure.

Openness to change was found to predict established rebellious and non-mainstream disso-nant types of preferences. The more people are motivated to live a life with stimulation and new experiences, and to be curious and ready for explorations, the higher the scores they give to these preference structures.

Conservation was found, as expected, to be negatively related to sophisticated and complex, established rebellious, and non-mainstream dissonant types of preference. The less people are motivated to be obedient, dutiful, and self-disciplined, to honour the elderly and value family security, the more they hold these preferences. However, the sentimental and sensational pref-erence structure was positively related to conservation value type. Hence the more listeners value conformity to social harmony and status quo, the more they tend toward the sentimental and sensational preference structure (for similar results see Rentfrow & Gosling, 2003). It is reasonable to assume that the content of these preference structures is compatible with listen-ers’ values.




Conclusively, it is evident that values and musical identities differentially predict students’ music preferences. Following a different analytical approach, we can comment on these findings by looking at each preference structure separately: the sophisticated and complex preference structure was related to self-transcendence (positively, similarly to Rentfrow & Gosling, 2003) and to conservation (negatively). The established rebellious type of preference was related to both musical identity and personal values. The former suggests that listeners of these types of music think that these specific genres characterize them as individuals (and not as group mem-bers, satisfying individual distinctiveness). Moreover, all values were related to this preference structure: self-transcendence and openness to change in a positive way and conservation and self-enhancement in a negative way (see Rentfrow & Gosling, 2003). The non-mainstream dis-sonant type of preference had the lowest preference scores and it depended on students’ open-ness to change (positively) and conservation (negatively). The sentimental and sensational preference structure was also related to both musical identity and values. Those who listen to this music think that this specific type of preference characterizes them more as group members and less as individuals. Also, self-enhancement and conservation values positively predicted this music structure. Finally, the native-folk traditional preference structure was marginally related to self-identity (cognitive aspect). Also, it was related negatively with self-enhancement values and positively with self-transcendence values.

Music preferences can be placed on the two dimensional (i.e., openness to change vs. conser-vation and self-transcendence vs. self-enhancement) map of Schwartz’s (1992) value model (see Figure 1 for a graphic representation): the four music preference types can be placed in the quadrant between openness to change and self-transcendence (the non-mainstream dissonant type on the openness to change axis, the native-folk traditional and the sophisticated and com-plex types on the self-transcendence axis, and the established rebellious type in between) while the sentimental and sensational stands alone in the quadrant between self-enhancement and conservation.

Music preferences and everyday lifeThere is a recent growing strand of research focusing on the way music preferences correlate with certain choices people make in their everyday life (see, e.g., DeNora, 2002; North & Hargreaves, 2007a, 2007b, 2007c; Sloboda, O’Neill, & Ivaldi, 2001). We focus here particu-larly on North and Hargreaves’ (2007a) research which we find to be more relevant to our study. They examined the relationship between musical preferences and a number of different lifestyle choices, for example interpersonal relationships, living arrangements, beliefs, criminal behaviour (in their following research they focused on music fans’ media preferences, leisure interests, travel, finances, employment, health, drinking, etc). Some of their findings can be meaningfully viewed under the light of the present data. For example, North and Hargreaves (2007a) found that the fans of disco and DJ-based music (similar to the present sentimental and sensational structure) were least likely to be vegetarian. The weak relationship between the sentimental and sensational structure and openness to change found in the present study may be meaningfully relevant to this finding. In their study North and Hargreaves found that fans of disco and DJ-based music were less likely to recycle compared to classical music and blues fans. In the present study the sophisticated and complex structure (including classical music and blues genres) was positively related to self-transcendence (protecting the environment being one of the core values). Moreover, in North and Hargreaves’ study, a distinction was evident among the music fans in terms of their conservative or liberal beliefs. Fans of classical music, opera and blues (similar to the present sophisticated and complex structure) hold more liberal




beliefs (e.g., exploitation of alternative energy sources, state-funded health care) compared to fans of hiphop/rap and DJ-based music (similar to the present sentimental and sensational structure). Accordingly, in the present study, the sophisticated and complex structure was related to self-transcendence (e.g., to preserve the environment, care for the weak).

In trying to provide an interpretive framework for some of their findings, North and Hargreaves (2007a) suggest that music fans can be divided on a liberal–conservative dichot-omy. Interestingly values have been found to be correlated with political and ideological prefer-ences. Barnea and Schwartz (1998) found, for example, that Israeli voters supporting parties assumed to promote liberal ideologies attributed high importance to openness to change values and low importance to conservation values. Future research investigating the relationships among values, political ideologies and music preferences could provide some relevant insights.

The present study explored music preference structures; however, there is such a large variety within distinct music genres that future research could examine the relationships among values (since there are not any relevant studies), musical identities, and alternative band or style prefer-ences. Of course in order to fully explore the variables that contribute to predicting music prefer-ences one must synthesize other possible determinants. One can focus on the way music is perceived by listeners and on how this perception matches their desires and needs. Future research should also measure and test the role of mediating psychological processes (hypothe-sized to be present in the current study), such as the distinctiveness and assimilation needs. Similarly, listeners may provide the reasons why they listen to music (see the approach of uses and gratifications; Rubin, 2002). There is some evidence, for example, that people listen to music in order to change their mood (MacNamara & Ballard, 1999). Future research could deal with a related question: the relationship between music preferences, emotional well-being, and values.

Opennessto change

Conservation

Self-enhancement

Sophisticatedand complexEstablished

rebelliousNative-folktraditional

Sentimental andsensational

Self-transcendence

Non-mainstreamDissonant

Figure 1. Location of music preferences on Schwartz’s (1992) value model.




It is reasonable to assume that people motivated by different values may use music in different ways in order to regulate their mood. For example, people that consider preservation of envi-ronment as a guiding principle in their lives may reach a positive affective experience with dif-ferent music compared to people who consider wealth and material possessions as their guiding principle. Another research question could be whether the relationship between values and music preferences affects consumers’ behaviour. Grunert and Juhl (1995), for example, using Schwartz’s value model, found that people with pro-environmental values are more likely to purchase organic foods compared to other people. Based on the present study’s data one may expect that a music genre from the sophisticated and complex structure (e.g., jazz music, see also Rentfrow & Gosling, 2003) will sound favourably to a pro-environmentalist in an organic food store and will affect their buying intentions. One can also focus at the macro level (or the ideological level of analysis, according to Doise, 1986) or look at the situation of the music industry and the market.

A large part of recent psychological research has focused on the influence of personality dispositions on music preferences (e.g., Chamorro-Premuzic & Furnham, 2007). The present study focused on another individual level variable that affects music preferences. Values, like personality traits, help people orientate in life. However, values entail intentional commitment by the person more than personality traits do (Bilsky & Schwartz, 1994), and hence the present study deals with the importance of conscious and deliberate processes linked with music prefer-ences. It does not provide a comprehensive explanatory account of a theory of music preferences – the non-representative character of the sample undermines generalization to a non-student population – but it does shed some light to the relationships between music preferences, musi-cal identity and values. Overall, it is evident that the importance that young people ascribe to music as a way of self-definition and the values they hold are related to their music preferences.

Notes

1. For classical music it was established in the pretest that there is no point in differentiating between pre-classical (e.g., renaissance or baroque) and post-classical music (e.g., romantic or serial). The Greek folk (traditional) genre includes demotica (rural folk music from continental Greece) and island folk music as well. Rebetika is a kind of urban popular music developed by the end of the 19th and the beginning of the 20th century by marginal social groups, based initially on a modal musical system from Arab, Turkish and Byzantine origin and later influenced by the Western tonal system (Papageorgiou, 1997). Laika (developed during the post-war era) is a ‘lighter’ form of urban popular music, based mainly on the Western tonal system and disseminated by the recording and film industry, as well as by radio and television. Laika-pop is a hybrid genre based mainly on Western-style pop music, and incorporating also some elements of Arabic origin, as well as elements from rebetika and laika genres (the main features of this genre are the simple rhythmic patterns, the use of naïve melodic and conventional harmonic structures, as well as the sentimental lyrics). The Greek art-popular music (entechno) is a genre devel-oped in the ’60s that combines poetry by celebrated writers with specific musical styles (frequently including complex harmonies, polyrhythm, and counterpoint).

2. Measures of the value of tradition have been omitted due to a technical error.3. Moderate correlations were evident among variables (Bartlett’s test of sphericity was statistically signifi-

cant at p < 0.001). There was no problem of multicollinearity (the determinant was 1.31E-05). Finally, the Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin measure of sampling adequacy (0.823) indicated that the factor analysis could result in distinct and reliable factors.

4. The 6- and 7-factor solutions explained 57.68% and 58.32% of the variance accordingly but there were essentially less meaningful.




References

Arnett, J. (1991). Heavy metal music and reckless behavior among adolescents. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 20, 573–592.

Barnea, M. F., & Schwartz, S. H. (1998). Values and voting. Political Psychology, 19, 17–40.Bilsky, W., & Schwartz, S. H. (1994). Values and personality. European Journal of Personality, 8, 163–181.Bleich, S., Zillmann, D., & Weaver, J. (1991). Enjoyment and consumption of defiant rock music as a func-

tion of adolescent rebelliousness. Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic Media, 35, 351–366.Bogt, Y. T., Raaijmakers, Q., Vollebergh, W., Van Wel, F., & Sikkema, P. (2003). Youngsters and their musical

taste: Musical styles and taste groups. The Netherlands’ Journal of Social Sciences, 39, 35–52.Bourdieu, P. (1984). Distinction: A social critique of the judgment of taste. Cambridge, MA: Harvard

University Press.Brewer, M. B. (2003). Optimal distinctiveness, social identity, and the self. In M. Leary & J. Tangney (Eds.),

Handbook of self and identity (pp. 480–491). New York: Guilford.Carpentier, F. D., Knobloch, S., & Zillmann, D. (2003). Rock, rap, and rebellion: Comparisons of traits

predicting selective exposure to defiant music. Personality and Individual Differences, 35, 1643–1655.Chamorro-Premuzic, T., & Furnham, A. (2007). Personality and music: Can traits explain how people use

music in everyday life? British Journal of Psychology, 98, 175–185.Christenson, P. G., & Peterson, J. B. (1988). Genre and Gender in the structure of music preferences.

Communication Research, 15, 282–301.Christenson, P. G., & Roberts, D. F. (1998). It’s not only rock’ n’ roll: Popular music in the lives of adolescents.

Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press.Costello, A. B., & Osborne, J. W. (2005). Best practices in exploratory factor analysis: four recommenda-

tions for getting the most from your analysis. Practical Assessment, Research and Evaluation, 10, 1–9.Deihl, E. R., Schneider, M. J., & Petress, K. (1983). Dimensions of music preference: A factor analytic study.

Popular Music & Society, 9, 41–49.DeNora, T. (2000). Music in everyday life. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DeNora, T. (2002). The role of music in the daily lives of women: The case of intimate culture. Feminism

and Psychology, 12, 176–81. Doise, W. (1986). Levels of explanation in social psychology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Doosje, B., Ellemers, N., & Spears, R. (1995). Perceived intragroup variability as a function of group status

and identification. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 31, 410–36.Ellemers, N., Kortekaas, P., & Ouwerkerk, J. (1999). Self-categorization, commitment to the group and

group self-esteem as related but distinct aspects of social identity. European Journal of Social Psychology, 29, 371–389.

Frith, S. (1981). Sound effects: Youth, leisure, and the politics of rock’n’roll. New York: Pantheon.Frith, S. (1996). Performing rites. On the value of popular music. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Grunert, S. C., & Juhl, H. J. (1995). Values, environmental attitudes, and buying of organic foods. Journal

of Economic Psychology, 16, 39–62.Hansen, C. H., & Hansen, R. D. (1991). Constructing personality and social reality through music:

Individual differences among fans of punk and heavy metal music. Journal of Electronic and Broadcasting Media, 35, 335–350.

Hargreaves, D. J., & North, A. C. (Eds.) (1997). The social psychology of music. New York: Oxford University Press.Hargreaves, D. J., Miell, D., & MacDonald, R. A. (2002). what are musical identities, and why are they

important? In R. A. MacDonald, D. J. Hargreaves, & D. Miell (Eds.), Musical identities (pp. 1–20). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Haslam, S. A. (2004). Psychology in Organizations (2nd ed.). London: Sage.Hebdige, D. (1972). Subculture, the meaning of style. London: Methuen.




Hornsey, M. J., & Jetten, J. (2004). Individual within the group: Balancing the need to belong with the need to be different. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 8, 248–264.

Krims, A. (2001). Rap music and the poetics of identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Laughey, D. (2006). Music and youth culture. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Lewis, G. (1995). Who do you love? The dimensions of musical taste. In James Lull (Ed.), Popular music and

communication (pp. 134–151). Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.Lizardo, O., & Skiles, S. (2008). Cultural Consumption in the fine and popular arts realms. Sociology

Compass, 2, 485–502.Mael, F. A., & Ashforth, B. E. (1992). Alumni and their alma mater: A partial test of the reformulated

model of organizational identification. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 13, 103–123.McCown, W., Keiser, R., Mulhearn, S., & Williamson, D. (1997). The role of personality and gender in

preferences for exaggerated bass in music. Personality and Individual Differences, 23, 543–547.MacNamara, L., & Ballard, M. E. (1999). Resting arousal, sensation seeking, and music preference.

Genetic, Social, and General Psychology Monographs, 125, 229–250.Neal, M. A. (1997). Sold out on soul: The corporate annexation of Black popular music. Popular Music and

Society, 21, 117–135.Negus, K. (1996). Popular music in theory. An introduction. Cambridge: Polity Press.North, A. C., & Hargreaves, D. J. (1999). Music and adolescent identity. Music Education Research, 1, 75–92.North, A. C., & Hargreaves, D. J. (2007a). Lifestyle correlates of musical preference: 1. Relationships, living

arrangements, beliefs, and crime. Psychology of Music, 35, 58–87.North, A. C., & Hargreaves, D. J. (2007b). Lifestyle correlates of musical preference: 2. Media, leisure time,

and music. Psychology of Music, 35, 179–200. North, A. C., & Hargreaves, D. J. (2007c). Lifestyle correlates of musical preference: 3. Travel, money,

education, employment, and health. Psychology of Music, 35, 473–497.North, A. C., Hargreaves, D. J., & O’Neill, S. A. (2000). The importance of music to adolescents. British

Journal of Educational Psychology, 70, 255–272.Papageorgiou, F. T. (1997). Popular music and the music industry in Greece. In A. J. Ewbank &

F. T. Papageorgiou (Eds.), Whose master’s voice? The development of popular music in thirteen cultures (pp. 67–98). London: Greenwood Press.

Peterson, R. A. (1992). Understanding audience segmentation: From elite and mass to omnivore and univore. Poetics, 21, 243–258.

Rentfrow, R. J., & Gosling, S. D. (2003). The do re mi’s of everyday life: The structure and personality correlates of music preferences. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 84, 1236–1256.

Roccas, S., Sagiv, L., Schwartz, S., & Knafo, A. (2002). The Big Five personality factors and personal values. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 28, 789–801.

Rokeach, M. (1973). The nature of human values. New York: Free Press.Rubin, A. M. (2002). The uses-and-gratifications perspective of media effects. In D. Zillmann & J. Bryant

(Eds.), Media Effects: Advances in theory and research (2nd ed., pp. 525–548). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Rubin, A. M., West, D. V., & Mitchell, W. S. (2001). Differences in aggression, attitudes toward women, and

distrust as reflected in popular music preferences. Media Psychology, 3, 25–42.Schwartz, S. H. (1992). Universals in the content and structure of values: theoretical advances and empiri-

cal tests in 20 countries. In M. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 25, pp. 1–65). New York: Academic Press.

Schwartz, S. H., & Bardi, A. (2001). Value hierarchies across cultures: Taking a similarities perspective. Journal of Cross Cultural Psychology, 32, 268–290.

Schwartz, S. H., & Sagiv, L. (1995). Identifying culture-specifics in the content and structure of values. Journal of Cross Cultural Psychology, 26, 92–116.




Sloboda, J. A., O’Neill, S. A., & Ivaldi, A. (2001). Functions of music in everyday life: An exploratory study using the Experience Sampling Methodology. Musicae Scientiae, 5, 9–32.

Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. (1979). An integrative theory of intergroup conflict. In W. G. Austin & S. Worchel (Eds.), The social psychology of intergroup relations (pp. 33–47). Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole.

Turner, J. C., Hogg, M. A., Oakes, P. J., Reicher, S. D., & Wetherell, M. S. (1987). Rediscovering the social group: A self-categorization theory. Oxford: Blackwell.

Wells, A., & Tokinoya, H. (1998). The genre preferences of western popular music by Japanese adoles-cents. Popular Music and Society, 22, 41–53.

Wicke, P. (1995). Rock music. Culture, aesthetics and sociology. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Appendix. Value items and value types

Value type Description Items

Power Social power Social power; control over others, dominanceAuthority Authority, the right to lead or command

Achievement Wealth Wealth, material possessions, moneyInfluence Influential, having an impact on people and events

Hedonism Enjoying life Enjoying life, enjoying food, sex, leisure, etc.Stimulation Varied life A varied life, filled with challenges, novelty and change

Exciting life An exciting life, stimulating experiencesSelf-direction Curious Curious, interested in everything, exploringUniversalism Equality Equality, equal opportunity for all

World at peace A world of peace, free of war and conflict Protecting the environment Protecting the environment, preserving nature

Benevolence True friendship True friendship, close supportive friendsSocial justice Social justice, correcting injustices, care for the weakMature love Mature love, deep emotional and spiritual intimacyHelpfulness Helpful, working for the welfare of othersForgivingness Forgiving, willing to pardon othersHonesty Honest, genuine, sincereLoyal Loyal, faithful to my friends

Conformity Obedience Obedient, dutiful, meeting obligationsSelf-discipline Self-discipline, self-restraint, resistance to temptationsHonouring parents and elders Honouring parents and elders, showing respect

Security Family security Family security, safety for loved onesSense of belonging Sense of belonging, feeling that others care about me

Antonis Gardikiotis is Assistant Professor of Social Psychology and the Mass Media at the School of Journalism and Mass Media Studies of the Aristotle University of Thessaloniki (Greece). His research covers various areas of social psychology and intergroup communication.

Alexandros Baltzis is Assistant Professor of the Sociology of the Arts at the School of Journalism and Mass Media Studies of the Aristotle University of Thessaloniki (Greece). His research is focused on the cultural industries, on the impact of globalization on the production of culture, and on the factors influencing cultural consumption. He has published several articles, book chapters and papers in the fields of the sociology of culture and the arts, the sociology of music and the sociology of education.



Documents

Musical Identity,