So, first of all, correlation != causation. Everyone got that? Good. Let’s begin.
From the creator of booksthatmakeyoudumb comes another site (chart really), musicthatmakesyoudumb. This guy pulled data from Facebook (back when it still had networks) of the top books listed by students in different networks, and crossed that with freely available data of average SAT score at each college he looked at. The result, a very non-scientific chart of listening and reading habits correlated to “IQ” (ie SAT scores). A few “facts” gleaned from a glance.
Lil Wayne is Bad For Your IQ. Hip Hop too, but it’s not as bad as jazz (gasp), or, even, GOSPEL.
In other news, jazz is correlated with low IQ. Say what? Jazz seems to me one of the most intellectually demanding genres of music possible, requiring constant creativity and a determination to push the boundaries of what constitutes “valid” music. It must be because listening to jazz doesn’t imply you actually create it.
Classic rock is better than rock, which (surprisingly) is better than classical. In fact, the placement of classical music alone makes me doubt the accuracy of this chart, especially when propensity to listen to classical music is often correlated with deeper thinking and concentration capabilities. But a possible explanation for it is that people enjoy putting classical music down as their favorite music more for the appearance, rather than as a true reflection of their musical tastes. Cause if you care enough to put down actual composers, I bet the correlation with higher SAT scores will be much more significant.
It’s somewhat fitting that Ben Folds is coming to MIT. He’s listed as correlated with high SAT scores (relatively speaking), only beaten out by Guster, Counting Crows, Sufjan Stevens, and Beethoven.
What college was so indie that they enjoyed Sufjan Stevens en masse to the point that he’s on the top music list for the school? Exclusive small liberal arts colleges, I’m looking at you. Only y’all would perpetrate such a thing, which would explain how he’d be listed so high.
It’s a waste of time to comment on anything besides the tails of this distribution. The data for artists huddled in the center must be so rife with error that predicting their actual averages would be a bitch and a half (read: impossible).
Technically, it’s not the act of listening that makes a difference. Just be careful not to enjoy any of your music too much and you’ll be perfectly in the clear.
The moral of this story? There are lies, damn lies, and statistics.