The purpose of this study was to examine the
possibility of whether listening to music while exercising enhances the
quality of the workout, self-reported perceived exertion, heart rate, distance
ran, and mood ( tension, depression, anger, vigor, fatigue, confusion,
and friendliness ). A comparison was investigated between participants
who received no music, those who exercised to a fast tempo, and those who
exercised to a slow beat. No statistical significance was found between
any of the independent and dependent groups. Significance was noted, however,
on the responses to question number five of the Perceived Exertion Scale
( Appendix C ). The question asked, "Did you notice the music playing while
you were exercising? If so, was it distracting, helpful, or neither, please
explain?" Each participant who was assigned to receive music (fast or slow)
reported that the music was helpful and not distracting. It was further
noted that most of the participants stated they normally exercised to music
(between three and six days a week).
There were striking differences in the fact
that no statistical significance was determined between heart rate, perceived
exertion, distance, tension, depression, anger, vigor, fatigue, confusion,
and friendliness, yet a noticeable difference was revealed in the responses
to the question number five on the Perceived Exertion Scale regarding the
likeability of the music. Each participant who received either fast or
slow music reported liking the background music. These findings were consistent
with a majority of the literature. Mertesdorf (1994) stated that participants
preferred listening to upbeat music because it facilitated exercise pace
and the music acted as alleviating self-reported dullness and tediousness
of exercise. Also, Macnay (1995) reported that people preferred music while
exercising and it increased overall enjoyment of the exercise. Pfister,
Berrol, and Caplan (1998) also concluded that participants enjoyed listening
to music while walking due to its distracting elements.
It was hypothesized that the participants who
received fast tempo music would have a higher heart rate, higher self-reported
perceived exertion, and run farther versus those who exercised to slow
paced music and no music at all. Yet, it was found that heart rate was
almost identical between those assigned fast music and those assigned no
music. This finding is inconsistent with the literature. Brownley, Murray,
& Hackney (1995) reported a significant difference between the heart
rate of participants who listened to fast tempo music in comparison with
those who listened to no music. They reported that participants who listened
to the fast tempo music had a significantly higher heart rate versus those
who did not listen to music. An interesting difference reported in this
study was that the heart rate of participants who were assigned to listen
to slow tempo music had a substantially lower heart rate than the other
two conditions. However, these inconsistent findings with the literature
are primarily due to the extremely small sample size (five participants
in fast music condition, five in slow music condition, and four in the
no music condition). There were not enough participants in each condition
to support the predicted hypotheses.
It is worth discussing the noticeable difference
between the heart rate of those who listened to slow music in comparison
to the participants who listened to fast music or no music. Those assigned
to listen to slow music had a much lower mean heart rate versus the other
two conditions. This is consistent with the literature demonstrated by
Copeland and Franks (1991) study, which reported that exercising to slower
music will reduce physiological arousal (eg: heart rate).
The group assigned to listen to no music during
exercise was predicted to serve as the baseline between those assigned
to listen to fast music and those assigned to listen to slow music. However,
those who had no music during exercise did not serve as the baseline, as
predicted. The data for mean heart rate and mean distance ran between the
no music condition and the fast music condition were almost identical,
which was not hypothesized. However, those assigned to listen to the slow
music did have a lower mean perceived exertion, a lower mean heart rate,
and ran a lesser distance, which was predicted correctly.
It was also predicted that those who listened
to music would have an increase in positive mood. Strikingly, those who
received no music had a higher rate of friendliness and a higher rate of
vigor, however, it was not reported to be a significant difference (due
to the small sample size). Yet, it was also noted that those who did not
receive music reported higher ratings of tension. This finding disagrees
with the literature reported by Murrock (2002). Murrock (2002) found that
listening to music during exercise enhanced mood, while decreasing when
no music was playing during exercise.
In discussing mood, there was an unpredicted
correlation. There was a negative correlation revealed between perceived
exertion and the POMS subscale, tension. It was reported that as perceived
exertion increases, tension decreases, or, as tension increases perceived
exertion decreases. This is consistent with the literature that exercise
should increase mood, therefore, decreasing negative mood states, such
as tension. Reported by Macnay (1995), he found that listening to preferred
music decreased self-reported perceived exertion, but increased positive
mood.
In this study, it would have been more beneficial
and possibly yielded more results, had the sample size been substantially
larger. Due to the small sample size, it was difficult to obtain significance
because there were not enough participants per group. It would have been
preferred to have had at least fifteen to twenty participants in each group
to acquire an ideal sample size. There may have potentially been more of
a variation in the results had the small sample size been larger. Despite
the small sample size, there were other several improvements that could
have been implemented in this study. First, a real life setting in which
the participants could have exercised would have been a more ideal situation.
The elliptical machine was useful, however, it would have been more beneficial
in either a gym or if the participant could have exercised outdoors. Normally,
people exercise in a gym, the convenience of their own home, or outside.
The elliptical machine was located in the laboratory of the Psychology
department, which is not a typical exercise setting. However, due to the
knowledge of the author, there is no recent literature examining the effects
that the context of an environment may have upon exercise.
Secondly, the experimenter could have been
a possible distraction because she had to record heart rate and distance
run every minute using the information on the elliptical machine, as well
as the polar heart rate monitor. Having the experimenter stand near the
participant exercising to read the physiological data could have potentially
been a distraction or caused anxiety. Several of the participants continuously
asked whether they were doing well while exercising and it seemed apparent
that the experimenter could have been causing anxiety.
Many of the participants also reported not
fully exerting themselves throughout the exercise either. The main reasons
reported were due to having class right after the experiment, not feeling
the need to exercise as if they were at a gym or running outdoors, or feeling
that they could have pushed themselves harder but did not feel the need
to. One participant said she did not want to waste all of her energy. Another
common response was that the participants did not feel the need to exert
at their maximum level. However, thirteen out of fourteen participants
reported exercising on a regular basis, anywhere between three to six days
a week. This corresponds to the American Health Association, which states
regular exercise can increase health, and reduce the risk of heart disease.
The experiment took place primarily in the
morning, which could have been another factor in the experiment. Eleven
of the participants exercised between nine-thirty and eleven forty-five
in the morning, while three exercised between the hours of five forty-five
and seven-thirty at night. There were no significant differences noted
between the different times, however seventy-five percent of the participants
received the exercise in the morning versus the afternoon or evening. In
a study conducted by O'Connor (1992), he found that when testing the effect
of time of day on exercise, both mood and exercise were not dependent on
the time day. However, Atkinson & Reilly (1995) found a difference
among age groups depending on time of day. Atkinson & Reilly (1995)
found that for young adults, (mean age 19-25 ), work rate was higher in
the afternoon than in the morning.
A possible distraction for five of the participants
assigned to listen to the fast music was that there was an error on the
CD. Song number four, Bring Me to Life, on the fast music CD skipped repeatedly
in the middle of the song for all five participants who received that music
condition. However, only one participant verbalized that she noticed the
skipping of the song.
The last component that may have provided significant
results would have been administering the POMS before and after exercise
to collect an accurate representation of each participant's mood. This
may have resulted in seeing a bigger increase between the different conditions
in mood (depression, anger, tension, vigor, fatigue, confusion, and friendliness)
before and after exercise occurred.
Despite the improvements suggested, there was
significance found from the bi-nominal probability, which was consistent
with a majority of the literature. The significance that was reported by
the participants was that they enjoyed the music, as well as reporting
that the music made the time go by faster. This was consistent with the
study conducted by Mertesdorf (1994), Pfister, Berrol, and Caplan (1998),
Macnay (1995). It was also consistent with Hayakaw, Takada, Miki, and Tanaka
(2000) who reported that music served as a distraction from the discomforts
of exercising, and yet again with Potteiger, Schroeder, and Goff (2000)
who had similar findings that music provided a helpful way to distract
the participants from the uneasiness of exercise.
Conclusion
The present study was comparable to the findings
in the literature review supporting that music acted as contributor in
passing time during exercise. However, the findings were not similar to
specific studies that reported significance between different music groups,
such as Brownley, Murray, & Hackney ( 1995 ) who reported that heart
rate in those participants who exercised to fast tempo music was significantly
higher versus those who exercised to no music. Results revealed an unpredicted
outcome of a negative correlation between perceived exertion and tension.
The study also demonstrated that music mainly served as a distraction from
the unpleasantness of exercise, and could also be used for pure enjoyment
purposes during exercise. An interesting aspect to investigate in further
research would be to have an equal allotment between genders, in order
to explore if there are any specific differences between perceived exertion,
mood, distance run, and/or heart rate.