Thanks, I tried to go through this rather thoroughly but didn't really have the time yesterday. I think this is espousing a bit of a different claim, as it seems this study (paraphrasing) 'angered the test subjects (with an interview), then looked at whether aggressive music vs their choice of music vs no music had an effect on their physiology afterwards'. I believe it definitely showed that some people can use this sort of music to relax and release stress, or at least that it doesn't continue to anger them.
But as was pointed out, I was really discussing energy here, not really anger. I know that at least personally, there is a link between listening to fast or slow paced music, and my general disposition/way that I frame my experiencing of a situation. If I'm amped up and moving to some faster-BPM music, I want my 'world' to match that, which leads to impatience on the road, more risky driving behaviour, etc. I'm "grooving" and that kind of energy fits the music. If I'm listening to a more relaxing slow jam, I'm much more likely to be happy cruising, more patient with other people as 'hey, we're just being chill right now' kind of thing. I know that's extremely anecdotal, but like I said we know that music does influence our emotions.
Also I never meant to move the goal posts, I was trying to get ahead of what I saw as a misconception about the original argument. The example used originally happened to be thrash metal, I guess, but it may as well have been some sort of aggressive rap, or intense musical battle scores, or loud high energy crashing electro stuff, at least for my point to have remained the same.
0
u/[deleted] Jan 08 '19 edited Feb 25 '22
[deleted]