Can some types of music cause an increase in crime?

[Lemon&Lime]

Is it true that so-called "gangsta rap" style music, which often reference gun crime/power/gangs in their lyrics, are to blame for the increase in knife/gun crime?

Three articles from well-known sources as reference -

Article from respected British newspaper the telegraph, arguing that rap music glamorises gun violence -
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1418104/Rap-music-glamorises-gun-violence.html

New York Times article arguing a similar point -
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/03/us/03hiphop.html

Psychological study/report -
http://cognitive-psychology.suite101.com/article.cfm/rap_musics_psychological_effects

A random interesting fact - crime in general has decreased by around 10% in Britain within the last 5 years. So is the increased media coverage of crime a factor?

[Nekowolf]

They said rock and roll was the Devil's music, too.

Music on its own does nothing. Violence comes from deeper issues.

[supersimoholic]

I think that if the wrong person listens to it and thinks it's "cool" this person could influence other people to also think that it's "cool"... Because we all know that some people need to be accepted and if violence is cool then they are cool for being violent...

But before anyone says "you could say the same about computer games" well, not really... because in computer games, you know that the person is pretend, and what they do isn't real. Where as in songs, it's a real person singing about real situations, and they look up to these people because they are famous...

[fakepeeps7]

I don't know for sure. But if listening to some kinds of music (like classical) can be good for you, I don't think it's that much of a stretch to say that "angry" music could have a detrimental effect.

[TRIriana]

Is it true that so-called "gangsta rap" style music, which often reference gun crime/power/gangs in their lyrics, are to blame for the increase in knife/gun crime?

Two articles from well-known sources as reference -

Article from respected British newspaper the telegraph, arguing that rap music glamorises gun violence -
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1418104/Rap-music-glamorises-gun-violence.html

New York Times article arguing a similar point -
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/03/us/03hiphop.html

A random interesting fact - crime in general has decreased by around 10% in Britain within the last 5 years. So is the increased media coverage of crime a factor?


What Nekowolf said, it's highly doubtful that rap music can increase gun/knife crime. The article from the NYT had a doctor saying as much, and the article from the Telegraph was just a quote from Blunkett stating his personal opinion, which doesn't make the idea more valid than anyone else's.

[amandatea]

A person is going to do what they're going to do.. This is based on their personality/decisions/perhaps events in their lives that put them in a certain situation....

Saying that music causes their behaviour is a convenient excuse to demonize said genre of music and it is ridiculous.

[Lemon&Lime]

Here's another interesting article - a psychological study on the effects of rap music. Going to edit my original post to add this as a reference.

http://cognitive-psychology.suite101.com/article.cfm/rap_musics_psychological_effects

I personally think that music can definately influence someone's perception of crime, particularly if you listen as a child/teenager because those are some of the crucial points in your life where you begin to form your opinions, ideals, who you are. I mean, there is a huge amount of evidence that witnessing domestic abuse as a child for exampel can lead to an increased chance of someone committing crime themselve. So why not listening, as opposed to seeing?

[TRIriana]

Here's another interesting article - a psychological study on the effects of rap music. Going to edit my original post to add this as a reference.

http://cognitive-psychology.suite101.com/article.cfm/rap_musics_psychological_effects

I personally think that music can definately influence someone's perception of crime, particularly if you listen as a child/teenager because those are some of the crucial points in your life where you begin to form your opinions, ideals, who you are. I mean, there is a huge amount of evidence that witnessing domestic abuse as a child for exampel can lead to an increased chance of someone committing crime themselve. So why not listening, as opposed to seeing?


I understand where you're coming from, but the two examples do not equate at all. There's a huge difference between being emotionally involved in abuse, and seeing it constantly until such a time occurs that you are able to get out of the situation - and hearing a 3-minute rap. One of those things you cannot get away from, the other you can choose to turn off MTV or the local radio station.

[Lemon&Lime]

I understand where you're coming from, but the two examples do not equate at all. There's a huge difference between being emotionally involved in abuse, and seeing it constantly until such a time occurs that you are able to get out of the situation - and hearing a 3-minute rap. One of those things you cannot get away from, the other you can choose to turn off MTV or the local radio station.

That's true, but what if you chose to listen to it, over and over, for several years and thats the only kind of music you listen to, as well as hang out with people who have a similar taste in music as you. That's what I mean, I'm not talking about people who are both forced to witness abuse and forced to listen. I'm trying to compare people forced to witness physical abuse with people who chose to listen to a lot of gangsta rap.

To be honst, my own opinion is somewhat mutual on the topic. I think there is a link, definately, but it's a topic I'm interested in more as a academical/psychological angle. More interested in the "why it might" rather than the "yes or no".

[Purity4]

I agree with TrIriana and Nekowolf on this. Violence is a choice. Your musical taste does not make you violent. There are people who listen to rap who never become violent because it's not in their nature to be violent. Blaming music or other media, or peer pressure, is just another way to put blame elsewhere. I'm tired of people making excuses for those who do wrong. They made the choice. Those that choose to be violent and commit crimes ought to be held 100% responsible for those actions rather then trying to blame it on someone or something else.

[el_flel]

I'll probably post something more insightful in the morning but for now: IMO a person's musical taste is influenced by their lifestyle, not the other way around. So if someone is listening to music which glorifies criminal behaviour then chances are they probably thought that way anyway.

[imaeatyaface]

Usually it's some sort of vengeance, rage or a deeper issue that compels violence, the "Rap music made me do it!" excuse seems like just that:an excuse. The responsibility of the crime lies entirely in the person who committed the crime, not 50 Cent or Kanye or whoever is the rap flavor right now. In my opinion, if rap influences you to go out and try to do what's described in song lyrics, well, you're not unlike the people who get influenced by video games and TV. I'm speaking for myself here. I listen to rap-go ahead and laugh-but I don't, however, go out and do drive by's, shake my ass or whatever. They did the same with rock'n' roll, people still do, and rap is not going to change anytime soon.

[Nekowolf]

@fakepeeps7

The thing about classical music, is that it's good in a different way than how, as you put it, "angry" music would be detrimental.

The way such music could be detrimental would be through some form of emotional stimulation. From what little I know about music and the brain, classical music is not good through emotional responses, but rather through neurological stimulation, or something like that. I think. Again, I only have a very basic knowledge on it.

[fakepeeps7]

The way such music could be detrimental would be through some form of emotional stimulation. From what little I know about music and the brain, classical music is not good through emotional responses, but rather through neurological stimulation, or something like that. I think. Again, I only have a very basic knowledge on it.

It may not have anything to do with emotions at all. There has been quite a bit of research done on music and plants. In general, they do better with classical music. It's probably something to do with either melody or vibrations... which are drastically different when you're comparing classical music to rap or hard rock.

I'm not saying we're plants, but I don't see why we wouldn't be affected by vibrations as much as (or more than) plants. We are giant masses of vibrating atoms, after all.

[Nekowolf]

Well then...wouldn't that be more of a matter of growth and cell stimulation more than anything else?

Though, I guess that could, like...I dunno, make you smarter or something, it wouldn't necessarily turn you into a criminal. Social environment would have a much much greater hand into that.

But if they're unstable enough to have music influence them into committing some form of criminal activity, then really, it could've been anything that would have the capability to set them off. It just happened to be some kind of music.

This is actually similar to the whole issue over video games. Some claim playing violent video games makes you have violent tendencies. The problem is though, look at how many people play violent video games and are not violent, do not have criminal records or anything like that. Basically, those who somehow are set off by this stuff, they already have some deep-seeded problem that is the real cause, and really, it could be just about anything that can set that off. It could be movies, or games, or music, or some blogger, or even some real-world event. Even if there is some kind of detrimental effect, there really isn't anything you can do about it.

[fakepeeps7]

Well then...wouldn't that be more of a matter of growth and cell stimulation more than anything else?

Though, I guess that could, like...I dunno, make you smarter or something, it wouldn't necessarily turn you into a criminal. Social environment would have a much much greater hand into that.

Granted, it's probably not going to turn you into a criminal. But, as others have said, if you're prone to violence, you might tend to listen to music with violent messages. Even if the effect is just "growth and cell stimulation", it can't really be helping. It's like a fire. Listening to that music didn't actually start it... but it could be like adding fuel.

Aren't there some studies that measure brain activity while listening to different types of music? I'm sure they've been done, but I wouldn't know where to find them.

[Nekowolf]

Oh, well of course. But blaming the music they listen to really doesn't accomplish anything, and at worse, is a distraction from the real issue.

And that's the problem. People confuse correlation with causation.

[amandatea]

@fakepeeps7

The thing about classical music, is that it's good in a different way than how, as you put it, "angry" music would be detrimental.

The way such music could be detrimental would be through some form of emotional stimulation. From what little I know about music and the brain, classical music is not good through emotional responses, but rather through neurological stimulation, or something like that. I think. Again, I only have a very basic knowledge on it.

Speaking as a trained musician and an extreme geek...

Music is beneficial to your mind, soul, body, etc because of a few things
1) Emotionally - yes, that's part of it for sure. Music can do a lot to uplift you..and maybe this is just because i'm a born musician- ie i am obsessed and always have been - but i have never ever had music have any kind of negative affect on my emotions. No matter which genre - maybe some artists/groups are annoying to me but pure music is always a positive thing for me.

2) Neurologically - It does a lot for the way your brain works. Maybe more-so if you learn it in detail in a theory or music lesson type of setting but i think it still does something for your brain even simply as an observer. That is why it is so important that music and the arts in general to be put back into the school system.

3) Scientifically - The reason certain notes sound nicer together than others is because of the frequency of the sounds. There is actually a mathematical/scientific aspect of musical notes


"Where Math meets Music"
http://www.musicmasterworks.com/WhereMathMeetsMusic.html

That site can explain it way better than i could. And here is one for reference.


Frequencies for equal-tempered scale
http://www.phy.mtu.edu/~suits/notefreqs.html




Hopefully that helps you understand how music is good for us. :)

[tizerist]

For sure it increases crime. It promotes guns, pimping etc.
If you're at an impressionable age, or just an impressionable person, it will damage the person.

[jooxis]

I agree that it could provide influence. All people who claim music has zero affect on these things clearly underestimate the power music can have. And this goes beyond just "violence", music can influence people in lots of ways. Of course in order to commit violent acts you have to have certain issues within yourself, but music (and other forms of media such as books, movies, art, etc.) can definitely influence and cause certain triggers to go off.

[Nekowolf]

@amandatea

Oh, uh, lack of clarity on my part, my bad. What I meant was, though, is it is unlikely that music would put you into such an emotional state that it is essentially a breakdown or what not. Music has influence, yes, but for a normal person, it wouldn't go that far.

On a personal note, and something I find a bit amusing, when I'm depressed, I listen to heavy metal and it makes me feel better. I think it might also help me concentrate depending what I'm doing, too.

But nonetheless, thanks for the links; music is always an interesting topic.

[SuicidiaParasidia]

i say certain types of music cause an increase in crime the same way standing around tall people makes you tall.

or that owning a gun turns you into a bloodthirsty animal.
or that being raised by homosexuals turns you into a homosexual.


point being: influence is not the same as mind control.
the impulse has to first be there in order for it to be triggered, and since the same thing doesnt trigger everybody then the trigger cannot be named.

[nea200pl]

Interesting topic Figgi.

No, I don't think music increases anything. I think people saying something like *this type of music (or violent games - very popular distraction recently) made me do it* just look for something to put the blame on and easy distraction from their own crimes.
I listen to gangsta rap regularly (and play violent games for that matter) and that does not make me angry in anyway, push me to commit crimes, own a weapon and so on.

...A random interesting fact - crime in general has decreased by around 10% in Britain within the last 5 years. So is the increased media coverage of crime a factor?

Maybe gun crimes, because knife crimes and crimes against disabled or mentally challenged people (where are humans heading to I have no idea) have very much increased.

[Lemon&Lime]

After reading everyone's replies, I was thinking on this debate last night before going to bed and I was reminded of something I saw on the news a while ago. I think that sometimes it comes down to "circumstantial evidence" (sp?)

Let me give an example. There was a woman called Kersher or something (sp?) in France who was convicted along with her boyfriend of raping and murdering her flatmate. It became a really high-profile case, fairly recently. One of the pieces of evidence used against her was that she had started to write a story on her laptop/computer about a woman who was brutally raped and then murdered. The TV news channel didn't provide information on whether the story focused on the rape or the recovery or as a crime story, but the story existed.

Now, seeing as she was linked to a rape and murder the story she wrote was used in evidence, because it could suggest a violent imagination.

Yet I don't see the writers of the Saw series being brought in to questioning/psychological assessment purely on the basis of their violent films.

Therefore, I think that actually the link may well be a chicken/egg situation, but it can't always be proven which came first - the violence or the music.

Edit: I strongly recommend that people on this thread read the psychological study I linked to on my first post, it provides evidence that watching rap music videos does lead to an increase in violent/sexist attitudes towards women, but only if the music is listened to, without watching the video.

[fakepeeps7]

On a personal note, and something I find a bit amusing, when I'm depressed, I listen to heavy metal and it makes me feel better. I think it might also help me concentrate depending what I'm doing, too.

Nothing that requires memory, I hope. A new study that came out recently confirms what I've suspected for a long time: listening to music is not good for your memory (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1300482/Listening-favourite-music-sound-way-study-.html). It used to drive me crazy when my friends would put on music when we were trying to study. I'd basically have to shut my books and wait for the rest of them to finish (and, consequently, get nothing done).

Our brains are not the multi-tasking machines we like to think they are.

[Nekowolf]

No no. Just concentration. I mostly use it when I'm playing some games.

[Lemon&Lime]

I can't remember the study, but I read somewhere in my psychology textbook that the brain can only concentrate fully on one person speaking at a time, and this includes music. It also means that you cannot read something and listen to someone at the same time. That's because only one side of your brain deals with language.

Therefore, music with words in will not aid concentration.

Whereas classical/orchestral music, without words, will not reduce concentration, and in some people can in fact aid it.

[fakepeeps7]

Whereas classical/orchestral music, without words, will not reduce concentration, and in some people can in fact aid it.

I think that study I posted found the opposite:

The students were also tested while listening to a voice simply repeating the number three over and over again and while listening to a voice saying random numbers - something known as a changing-state sound.

Although the random numbers proved a distraction, the repetition of the number three didn't.

This suggests that it is not peace and quiet that is important when studying - but lack of change in any background noise.

So, unless you're deaf or can completely block out background noise, it appears you're going to have a problem even with instrumental music. (And what's the point of putting on music if you're just going to block it out, anyway? You're stressing your brain for no reason!)

[Lemon&Lime]

I think that study I posted found the opposite:



So, unless you're deaf or can completely block out background noise, it appears you're going to have a problem even with instrumental music. (And what's the point of putting on music if you're just going to block it out, anyway? You're stressing your brain for no reason!)

I don't think you read the study. The music they listened to contained words.

[el_flel]

^ I think you're talking about the bottleneck metaphor/filter theories: that people can only fully attend to one form of input at a time. However, studies have shown that people do also retain information from the second source, just not as much as the first source.

I hate studying in silence, so I'll have music on as background noise but I don't pay much attention to it. Like Nekowolf, I also like loud, shouty, rock music when I'm pissed off.

[amandatea]

@amandatea

What I meant was, though, is it is unlikely that music would put you into such an emotional state that it is essentially a breakdown or what not. Music has influence, yes, but for a normal person, it wouldn't go that far.



Yeah, I agree. Music in its pure form - without lyrics - in my experience, is a positive influence on the mind and soul. Sometimes the lyrics are weird or maybe depressing for some people, i guess. But I really do not buy "music influenced me to do [bad thing]". My previous post was mostly talking about subconscious. Like someone else said, if a person listens to a certain "bad" kind of music - which i don't think exists, really, as music is a form of expression like art or poetry - they had that personality that led them to be interested in that, or it's, whether all or in part, a desire to fit in with their particular group of peers. I hope this makes sense :S

[Nekowolf]

Therefore, music with words in will not aid concentration.

However, the way I use it has nothing to do with listen to the lyrics or with someone. The best example is, actually, if my friend is over and we're playing Mario Kart. Usually, we just play to beat the computer, but sometimes if I want to be competitive, I'll listen to my iPod; when it comes Mario Kart, especially Rammstein.

Maybe it has something to do with the fact that they sing almost entirely in German, and I don't understand German at all.

But I still think I do better if I'm listening to Rammstein while playing Mario Kart, cause it gets me pumped up, which helps with the competitive spirit at the time. At the very least, I -feel- like I'm doing better.

[fakepeeps7]

I don't think you read the study. The music they listened to contained words.

Don't tell me what I read or didn't read when you obviously didn't even read the part that I bolded for your convenience.

If you don't like that study, then here's another (http://clearinghouse.missouriwestern.edu/manuscripts/230.php). Though, you probably won't like that one, either, because it came to a similar conclusion:

The calculated results for this experiment were inconsistent with the original hypothesis that music, especially classical music, would enhance memory. The interaction between the type of music played and the memories recalled was insignificant. However, the white noise group was found to have the least amount of memory errors while the classical, Haydn, music group made the most.

[Mia138]

I think as a Society we have become compelled to blame bad or in appropriate behaviour on 'something'. If its not video games or music then its broken homes or the books we read as a child!!
I personally do not believe that listening to too much 'gansta rap' will turn anyone into a gansta any more than watching too many violent films will make you violent. I believe we all have a propensity to 'bad behaviour' which is estabished very early on in life and is part inherant, part nurture and part a result of experiences.
The current generation have always blamed the new generations tastes and preferences for problems. As, someone said earlier, when Rock and Roll was the buzz it was called the devils music and blamed for everything that went wrong with its young enthusiasts.
We have this insatiable urge to 'find something to blame it on' because its too disturbing to concede that some people are just plain violent whether they listen to gangsta rap or Beethoven.
Look at what has happened in recent years to 'supposedly' help reduce societies problems with violence. To me its laughable that they ban cartoons like Tom & Jerry because they 'encourage violence'. Its such an INSULT to our intelligence, even as children, to infer that we are incapable of distinguishing between cartoon characters and real life. How many hundreds of thousands of us over the past few decades watched Tom chasing Jerry around with a huge sledgehammer and flattening him? Did we become a world of mouse killers? Did that really evoke ANY feelings of violence in you? Most likely it just made you laugh - as was intended. Years ago one of the most popular boys games to be played was 'Cowboys and Indians' - running around pretending to shoot each other with guns or bow and arrow - inspired by the many films on the same subject shown at the cinema or on TV. Surely if these people are to be believed we should have expected a generation of very violent boys to grow up afterwards? I don't*recall that happening.. In the same vein, I am furious that these do called do-gooders have insisted that classic childrens literature like Enid Blyton's Noddy has had to be 'altered' to make it more 'acceptable'. As a child of that era I loved reading Noddy and read them to my own children. We never ever considered 'Big Ears' as a name given with any spite or malice, it was just his name. The gollywog was 'just a gollywog' I dont think I ever gave a thought to any racial interpretation at all!
Ive ranted right off topic - sorry- but this subject annoys me gratefully. Its time we stopped looking for something to blame for peoples bad behaviour and realised that (unless they are mentally ill) its THEIR OWN FAULT they do bad things because THEY CHOOSE TO! Not because of gangsta rap or big ears or anything else!

[Lemon&Lime]

Don't tell me what I read or didn't read when you obviously didn't even read the part that I bolded for your convenience.

If you don't like that study, then here's another (http://clearinghouse.missouriwestern.edu/manuscripts/230.php). Though, you probably won't like that one, either, because it came to a similar conclusion:

Nothing is ever proven in psychology. So here is an opposing study.

http://studyskills.suite101.com/article.cfm/classical_music_for_concentration

Evidence for my point earlier that the brain can only concentrate on one "source" of written/spoken word at a time, so music without words may be beneficial.
Not all music is made equal when it comes to trying to concentrate. Anything with lyrics can prove to be more harmful than helpful. The same part of the brain that is trying to focus on the task at hand – i.e. reading a novel or trying to solve a math problem – is the same part of the brain that is listening to the words in the song. Listening to something without lyrics – such as classical or instrumental – prevents the brain from trying to do both. If words are absolutely unavoidable, listen to something with calming and peaceful lyrics, that won't promote tiredness.

Evidence that music can aid concentration.
When it comes to whether or not to listen to music during a study session, Christman said that while it is better to study with no distractions, music can help solve the issue of the split between the right and left hemispheres of the brain. While the left hemisphere is better at dealing with concentration, the right hemisphere deals with complementary attention, such as reacting to a phone ringing. Playing music while studying allows the right hemisphere to "enjoy itself" and not get bored while doing something that would normally be very tedious.

High-speed music may well increase adrenaline, hence why it could help you concentrate on video games, which often involve a lot of muscle-memory and the brain learning patterns - therefore may not involve as much concentration as revising for an exam, for example. Not only that, but racing games are unlikely to involve having to listen to speech - so therefore the brain's attention isn't being split, and as mentioned before with the right side of the brain as an example - the left (language) side of the brain may be kept occupied by for example lyrics in heavy metal music, stopping it from "falling asleep" itself.

[fakepeeps7]

So go listen to your music then. I was just pointing out that recent studies have found that music (or any other auditory distraction) can hamper memory.

I'm not buying Christman's assertions, anyway. He paints with way too broad a stroke. There's a fine line between being "aroused" and being so hyped up you can't sit still. "Arousal" can result in endorphins, sure. But it can also result in a release of stress hormones, which could have the opposite effect. His recommended use of stimulants would have some people needing to run around the block; studying would be extremely difficult for them.

[Lemon&Lime]

So go listen to your music then.

No need to be catty.

I'm not buying Christman's assertions, anyway. He paints with way too broad a stroke. There's a fine line between being "aroused" and being so hyped up you can't sit still. "Arousal" can result in endorphins, sure. But it can also result in a release of stress hormones, which could have the opposite effect. His recommended use of stimulants would have some people needing to run around the block; studying would be extremely difficult for them.

I'm sure that if people are stressed out while listening to music they have the capacity to turn it off. I don't think it's going to take anybody by surprise. There's no need for a flight or fight response (stress hormones + adrenaline) while concentrating when the brain is aroused. The whole point of the flight or fight response is that it has its own, seperate part of the brain, concentration needed is minimal. Sure, revising can make you stress and the "fight" response might happen, but that isn't because of the music.

[fakepeeps7]

I'm sure that if people are stressed out while listening to music they have the capacity to turn it off. I don't think it's going to take anybody by surprise. There's no need for a flight or fight response (stress hormones + adrenaline) while concentrating when the brain is aroused. The whole point of the flight or fight response is that it has its own, seperate part of the brain, concentration needed is minimal.

Any input (good or bad) can cause stress. Adrenaline doesn't only flow because of the startle reflex. (And adrenaline is a stress hormone... so I'm not sure what you meant by "stress hormones + adrenaline". Cortisol may be released, but that's after the adrenaline has made your heart race and your palms sweat -- after the "fight or flight", in other words.)

Sure, revising can make you stress and the "fight" response might happen, but that isn't because of the music.

Well, that's your opinion. I've experienced marked stress from certain types of music (and not from the activities I was trying to concentrate on while the music was playing), so I'm going to have to disagree.

[jodemilo]

Well speaking as a musician I find I listen to music on either a shallow, medium or deep level depending on my other activities.

If I want to listen to music to the exclusion of everything else (probably because I want to study it), it will be jazz or classical, and it demands my total attention because that's essential the purest form of music imo.

If I'm doing artwork then I'll listen to non-instrumental music, i.e. basically pop music and all it's genres (apart from REALLY hardcore heavy metal, rap or country music, just cos I don't like those styles).
It helps me concentrate and makes me work more efficiently for longer.

I can't listen to pop music while I'm studying: the presence of words from another source distracts me from what I'm reading.

Not sure about whether some types of extreme music can result in crime. All I know is I find certain extreme heavy metal mindnumbingly boring, soulless and ultimately gives me a headache. :)

[imaeatyaface]

After reading everyone's replies, I was thinking on this debate last night before going to bed and I was reminded of something I saw on the news a while ago. I think that sometimes it comes down to "circumstantial evidence" (sp?)

Let me give an example. There was a woman called Kersher or something (sp?) in France who was convicted along with her boyfriend of raping and murdering her flatmate. It became a really high-profile case, fairly recently. One of the pieces of evidence used against her was that she had started to write a story on her laptop/computer about a woman who was brutally raped and then murdered. The TV news channel didn't provide information on whether the story focused on the rape or the recovery or as a crime story, but the story existed.

Now, seeing as she was linked to a rape and murder the story she wrote was used in evidence, because it could suggest a violent imagination.

Yet I don't see the writers of the Saw series being brought in to questioning/psychological assessment purely on the basis of their violent films.

Therefore, I think that actually the link may well be a chicken/egg situation, but it can't always be proven which came first - the violence or the music.

Edit: I strongly recommend that people on this thread read the psychological study I linked to on my first post, it provides evidence that watching rap music videos does lead to an increase in violent/sexist attitudes towards women, but only if the music is listened to, without watching the video.

The violence comes first, in my opinion. You do not just listen to a rap song and then go and automatically do drive by's and gun down someone-their must have to be a preexisting issue there.

[Lemon&Lime]

Any input (good or bad) can cause stress. Adrenaline doesn't only flow because of the startle reflex. (And adrenaline is a stress hormone... so I'm not sure what you meant by "stress hormones + adrenaline". Cortisol may be released, but that's after the adrenaline has made your heart race and your palms sweat -- after the "fight or flight", in other words.)

Adrenaline is not a stress hormone. Unless you find sex stressful. Or being happy. Or running. Or winning. Adrenaline is present in every extreme emotion expressed.

Well, that's your opinion. I've experienced marked stress from certain types of music (and not from the activities I was trying to concentrate on while the music was playing), so I'm going to have to disagree.

But you've missed my point entirely. If the music stresses you out you'll turn it off. You were talking about music releasing stress hormones while you were using it to concentrate. Unless you're suggesting that this can happen subconsciously your point is irrelevant - because if that music wasn't working for you, you'd turn it off.

[simbalena]

Maybe it has something to do with the fact that they sing almost entirely in German, and I don't understand German at all.


The language doesn't make any difference as the brain automatically listens to any vocal sounds as if they are words, so any music with word-like sounds is going to be more distracting that instrumental music.

You may not notice any negative affect on a task you are performing though, especially if it uses a different region of your brain.

[jooxis]

That's weird. I always listen to music with lyrics (and sing along and listen to the lyrics) while I'm playing games for example. When I play cards online, where lots of thinking is involved. It doesn't seem to interfere, in fact it helps but I'm doing both exactly at the same time (thinking about how to win the game and which card to play and singing and thinking about the lyrics).

And I think other people normally do this too... although I'm not sure whether it conflicts with these studies.

It's true that I can't read while listening to music with lyrics, I\it probably has to do with specific parts of the brain as someone mentioned.

[Oaktree]

Adrenaline is not a stress hormone. Unless you find sex stressful. Or being happy. Or running. Or winning. Adrenaline is present in every extreme emotion expressed.

In this case, you are confusing the scientific definition of stress with the colloquial definition. Scientifically speaking, stress is any sort of rigor that your body goes through, whether positive or negative. This page (http://www.mentalhelp.net/poc/view_doc.php?type=doc&id=15644) explains it a little more clearly.

[Elyasis]

It's true that I can't read while listening to music with lyrics, I\it probably has to do with specific parts of the brain as someone mentioned.

I have to be some kind of mutant then because I prefer listening to music while I read. Doesn't distract me at all. I'll also listen while writing and have nary an issue. I've always been more comfortable multi tasking on several things at once than making a concerted effort on one at a time though, that might effect the results of these tests. Personally I live by my own experience and don't pay very much attention to generalities.

[Lemon&Lime]

In this case, you are confusing the scientific definition of stress with the colloquial definition. Scientifically speaking, stress is any sort of rigor that your body goes through, whether positive or negative. This page (http://www.mentalhelp.net/poc/view_doc.php?type=doc&id=15644) explains it a little more clearly.

No I'm not. I am saying that any extreme emotion leads to adrenaline being released. The examples in that link were things like marriage, having a child, losing your job. I'm talking about emotions such as anger, excitement. Adrenaline causes your palms to go sweaty, breathing to increase. Involved in stresses which we percieve as stressful or the scientific one. I really don't get your point because it's not like I'm disagreeing.

[paksetti]

It doesn't matter what makes a violent person want to do violent things, they were probably going to do it anyway. I'm not generally a fan of rap, but I'm smart enough to know that it's just a genre of music, and not evil mind control.

[amandatea]

I have to be some kind of mutant then because I prefer listening to music while I read. Doesn't distract me at all. I'll also listen while writing and have nary an issue. I've always been more comfortable multi tasking on several things at once than making a concerted effort on one at a time though, that might effect the results of these tests.



I completely agree. I actually sometimes practice piano with other music playing in the background because it forces me to concentrate on what i'm doing and i get more results. But yeah, I am constantly listening to music and i am usually multitasking.

Personally I live by my own experience and don't pay very much attention to generalities.

Yes! I agree with that too!

[fakepeeps7]

Adrenaline is not a stress hormone. Unless you find sex stressful. Or being happy. Or running. Or winning. Adrenaline is present in every extreme emotion expressed.

Sorry, but you're wrong. Adrenaline is a stress hormone. I don't know what wacky reference you've got that says it isn't.

As Oaktree said, "stress" doesn't just mean being angry or upset. All extreme emotions can cause stress on the body.

But you've missed my point entirely. If the music stresses you out you'll turn it off.

You can't turn it off if you're not the one playing it.

You were talking about music releasing stress hormones while you were using it to concentrate.

No, I wasn't. I wasn't "using it to concentrate". I was talking about having music foisted upon me against my will (as in an office setting) and then being expected to be able to concentrate while music I hate is pounding in my ears.

Unless you're suggesting that this can happen subconsciously your point is irrelevant - because if that music wasn't working for you, you'd turn it off.

Why wouldn't it happen subconsciously? Are you telling me that you release stress hormones on command?

[Lemon&Lime]

Sorry, but you're wrong. Adrenaline is a stress hormone. I don't know what wacky reference you've got that says it isn't.

Read my post again and then talk to me. Seeing as this debate isn't scientific, and we're all common folk to your superior being I am using the colloquial meaning of the word stress. If you don't, then as far as I'm concerned you're not proving me wrong you're being a dictionary-basher. Adrenaline is released during extreme emotions. It's use as a hormone (a "stress" hormones to pedantic people) is only one of its uses. It's also used in cardiac arrests and severe allergic reactions because of its vasoconstrictive effects. Can also be used to treat sepsis.


You can't turn it off if you're not the one playing it.

I don't know how it got to this stage, but can we just clarify what situation we're talking about here? How many times in life are you going to be tied in a chair and forced to listen to music? Unless you've been in a Quentin Tarantino film.


No, I wasn't. I wasn't "using it to concentrate". I was talking about having music foisted upon me against my will (as in an office setting) and then being expected to be able to concentrate while music I hate is pounding in my ears.

Majority of people in this thread so far have been talking about the use of music to aid concentration. If you're having your own debate that's fine by me but please inform people before you post.


Why wouldn't it happen subconsciously? Are you telling me that you release stress hormones on command?

No, I'm saying I can't remember a time when I was stressed (colloquial, for you benefit) without knowing it (subconscious).

[gabrielorie]

I'm positive that music causes violence...A song by be (can't remember the name) but it talks about being in fail and killing the police officers :| .There is also another one called ''Birthday Sex''...

[Nekowolf]

And "Heirate Mich" is about necrophilia, but you don't see me going around fucking dead things. If I watch Gacy, I'm not going to rape teen boys then kill them. If I play Postal, I'm not going to go on a random killing spree. If I read Harry Potter, I'm not going to turn into a witch.

[amandatea]

I completely agree. I actually sometimes practice piano with other music playing in the background because it forces me to concentrate on what i'm doing and i get more results. But yeah, I am constantly listening to music and i am usually multitasking.



Yes! I agree with that too!



Okay, I don't mean to be off topic, or petty, or catty, but how on earth can someone disagree with that? It's something *I* have found works for me. I wasn't telling other people to do it. Disagreeing with that makes absolutely no sense. If people want me to delete this post after, i will. Haha. I was just curious how someone can justify disagreeing with something like that. :rofl:

[TRIriana]

I understand where you're coming from, but the two examples do not equate at all. There's a huge difference between being emotionally involved in abuse, and seeing it constantly until such a time occurs that you are able to get out of the situation - and hearing a 3-minute rap. One of those things you cannot get away from, the other you can choose to turn off MTV or the local radio station.

That's true, but what if you chose to listen to it, over and over, for several years and thats the only kind of music you listen to, as well as hang out with people who have a similar taste in music as you. That's what I mean, I'm not talking about people who are both forced to witness abuse and forced to listen. I'm trying to compare people forced to witness physical abuse with people who chose to listen to a lot of gangsta rap.


The difference is still choice. You can choose to like a genre of music and listen to it frequently, but you do not choose to be emotionally or physically abused.

I'm positive that music causes violence...A song by be (can't remember the name) but it talks about being in fail and killing the police officers .There is also another one called ''Birthday Sex''...

Cite your sources? Was there a sudden rise in the deaths of police officers, in a specific area where the song was played frequently? I;ve read the lyrics to the song Birthday Sex and...I don't see what's wrong with it. It appears to be about consensual sex on a girl's birthday, wherein they're experimenting with positions. Oh no, how terrible. Consensual sex. The world is doomed.

[Nekowolf]

"You can choose to like a genre of music" - this is the only part I have to disagree with. You don't choose what genres you like; you just do or don't.

I never chose to love metal, and I never chose to hate country; I just do.

[Lemon&Lime]

The difference is still choice. You can choose to like a genre of music and listen to it frequently, but you do not choose to be emotionally or physically abused.


That's correct, but the difference of choice does not effect the point I was trying to make. I was suggesting that someone forced to witness abuse may be just as likely to reproduce that abuse as someone who chose to listen to lots of gangsta rap and "hang out" with people who enjoy listening to similar music/take part in the lifestyle involved. I do not see how your point contradicts mine. You do not choose to be emotionally/physically abused yes, but you can choose whether or not to repeat the cycle. Therefore actually, when thinking about it, both scenarios involve a choice, just one is further down the line.

[TRIriana]

That's correct, but the difference of choice does not effect the point I was trying to make. I was suggesting that someone forced to witness abuse may be just as likely to reproduce that abuse as someone who chose to listen to lots of gangsta rap and "hang out" with people who enjoy listening to similar music/take part in the lifestyle involved. I do not see how your point contradicts mine. You do not choose to be emotionally/physically abused yes, but you can choose whether or not to repeat the cycle. Therefore actually, when thinking about it, both scenarios involve a choice, just one is further down the line.


The difference between being forced and choosing to do something is literally the difference between - for example - going skydiving and having a blast or being thrown out of a plane against your will. The first...likely fun. The second...horrifically traumatic. The only difference is choice as both times you're falling from a plane.

As for choice repeating the cycle, being emotionally and mentally damaged can, to an extent, take away your ability to chose. Or even the understanding that there's a difference between right and wrong; so yes, my point does contradict yours.

I'm trying to get this across simply because of the initial comment you made, wherein you tried to equate listening to music with abuse. Frankly I thought that was rather disgusting, and insulting to survivors of abuse.

[imaeatyaface]

That's correct, but the difference of choice does not effect the point I was trying to make. I was suggesting that someone forced to witness abuse may be just as likely to reproduce that abuse as someone who chose to listen to lots of gangsta rap and "hang out" with people who enjoy listening to similar music/take part in the lifestyle involved. I do not see how your point contradicts mine. You do not choose to be emotionally/physically abused yes, but you can choose whether or not to repeat the cycle. Therefore actually, when thinking about it, both scenarios involve a choice, just one is further down the line.

Just because you listen to a genre of music, in this case gangsta rap doesn't mean you are involved in the lifestyle.

[Lemon&Lime]

You are still missing my point entirely. I was saying that someone who sees domestic abuse for example may be just as likely to replicate it as someone who watches lots of gangsta rap music videos. Evidence that watching the music videos leads to misogynistic attitudes and thinking that hitting women is okay has been found (look back on my thread). Choice does not come into my argument. As far as I'm concerned your response is beating around the bush instead of responding to my actual point. Like when someone corrects your grammar instead of answering your question.

I am sorry if I have created offense, but that is a result of your own missunderstanding of my point.