IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/osf/osfxxx/nmruj.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

People Prefer Simpler Content When There Are More Choices: A Time Series Analysis of Lyrical Complexity in Six Decades of American Popular Music

Author

Listed:
  • Varnum, Michael E. W. PhD

    (Arizona State University)

  • Krems, Jaimie
  • Morris, Colin
  • Grossmann, Igor

    (University of Waterloo)

Abstract

Song lyrics are rich in meaning. In recent years, the lyrical content of popular songs has been used as an index of shifting norms, affect, and values at the cultural level. One remarkable, recently-uncovered trend is that successful pop songs have increasingly simple lyrics. Why? We test the idea that increasing lyrical simplicity is linked to a widening array of novel song choices. To test this Cultural Compression Hypothesis (CCH), we examined six decades of popular music (N = 14,661 songs). The number of novel song choices predicted greater lyrical simplicity of successful songs. This relationship was robust, holding when controlling for critical ecological and demographic factors and also when using a variety of approaches to account for the potentially confounding influence of temporal autocorrelation. The present data provide the first time series evidence that real-world cultural transmission may depend on the amount of novel choices in the information landscape.

Suggested Citation

  • Varnum, Michael E. W. PhD & Krems, Jaimie & Morris, Colin & Grossmann, Igor, 2019. "People Prefer Simpler Content When There Are More Choices: A Time Series Analysis of Lyrical Complexity in Six Decades of American Popular Music," OSF Preprints nmruj, Center for Open Science.
    • Handle: RePEc:osf:osfxxx:nmruj
    DOI: 10.31219/osf.io/nmruj
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://osf.io/download/5defe6ea9bd131000c12fb09/
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.31219/osf.io/nmruj?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Hobday, Mike, 1998. "Product complexity, innovation and industrial organisation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 26(6), pages 689-710, February.
    2. Rycroft, Robert W., 2006. "Time and technological innovation: Implications for public policy," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 28(3), pages 281-301.
    3. Iyengar, Sheena S. & Kamenica, Emir, 2010. "Choice proliferation, simplicity seeking, and asset allocation," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 94(7-8), pages 530-539, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. T. Gries & R. Grundmann & I. Palnau & M. Redlin, 2017. "Innovations, growth and participation in advanced economies - a review of major concepts and findings," International Economics and Economic Policy, Springer, vol. 14(2), pages 293-351, April.
    2. Ralph Stevens & Jennifer Alonso Garcia & Hazel Bateman & Arthur van Soest & Johan Bonekamp, 2022. "Saving preferences after retirement," ULB Institutional Repository 2013/342267, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    3. João Caraça & João Lobo Ferreira & Sandro Mendonça, 2007. "A chain-interactive innovation model for the learning economy: Prelude for a proposal," Working Papers Department of Economics 2007/12, ISEG - Lisbon School of Economics and Management, Department of Economics, Universidade de Lisboa.
    4. Prencipe, Andrea & Tell, Fredrik, 2001. "Inter-project learning: processes and outcomes of knowledge codification in project-based firms," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(9), pages 1373-1394, December.
    5. Choi, James J. & Haisley, Emily & Kurkoski, Jennifer & Massey, Cade, 2017. "Small cues change savings choices," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 142(C), pages 378-395.
    6. Gürdal, Mehmet Y. & Kuzubaş, Tolga U. & Saltoğlu, Burak, 2017. "Measures of individual risk attitudes and portfolio choice: Evidence from pension participants," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 186-203.
    7. Gholz, Eugene & James, Andrew D. & Speller, Thomas H., 2018. "The second face of systems integration: An empirical analysis of supply chains to complex product systems," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(8), pages 1478-1494.
    8. Hobday, Mike & Rush, Howard & Tidd, Joe, 2000. "Innovation in complex products and system," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(7-8), pages 793-804, August.
    9. Fabrice Le Lec & Marianne Lumeau & Benoît Tarroux, 2016. "Choice or information overload ?," Economics Working Paper Archive (University of Rennes 1 & University of Caen) 2016-07, Center for Research in Economics and Management (CREM), University of Rennes 1, University of Caen and CNRS.
    10. Ioana Chioveanu & Jidong Zhou, 2013. "Price Competition with Consumer Confusion," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 59(11), pages 2450-2469, November.
    11. Robert L. Clark & Emma Hanson & Melinda S. Morrill & Aditi Pathak, 2015. "Supplemental Plan Offerings and Retirement Saving Choices: An Analysis of North Carolina School Districts," NBER Chapters, in: The Impact of Reforms of State Retirement Plans, pages 333-355, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    12. Felipe, Jesus & Kumar, Utsav & Abdon, Arnelyn & Bacate, Marife, 2012. "Product complexity and economic development," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 23(1), pages 36-68.
    13. Estelle Midler & Charles Figuières & Marc Willinger, 2015. "Choice overload, coordination and inequality: three hurdles to the effectiveness of the compensation mechanism?," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 45(3), pages 513-535, October.
    14. Padmashree Gehl Sampath & Bertha Vallejo, 2018. "Trade, Global Value Chains and Upgrading: What, When and How?," The European Journal of Development Research, Palgrave Macmillan;European Association of Development Research and Training Institutes (EADI), vol. 30(3), pages 481-504, July.
    15. Bruce Rasmussen, 2010. "Innovation and Commercialisation in the Biopharmaceutical Industry," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 13680.
    16. Michael Grubb, 2015. "Failing to Choose the Best Price: Theory, Evidence, and Policy," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 47(3), pages 303-340, November.
    17. Mark Dean & Dilip Ravindran & Jorg Stoye, 2022. "A Better Test of Choice Overload," Papers 2212.03931, arXiv.org.
    18. Bauer, Johannes M. & Prado, Tiago S., 2020. "Lessons from Innovation Economics for Digital Platform Policy," ITS Conference, Online Event 2020 224846, International Telecommunications Society (ITS).
    19. Jason Abaluck & Jonathan Gruber, 2016. "Choice Inconsistencies among the Elderly: Evidence from Plan Choice in the Medicare Part D Program: Reply," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 106(12), pages 3962-3987, December.
    20. McLeish, Caitriona & Nightingale, Paul, 2007. "Biosecurity, bioterrorism and the governance of science: The increasing convergence of science and security policy," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(10), pages 1635-1654, December.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:osf:osfxxx:nmruj. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: OSF (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://osf.io/preprints/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.