Download millennials and live music culture PDF

Titlemillennials and live music culture
Author
LanguageEnglish
File Size4.7 MB
Total Pages149
Document Text Contents
Page 1

MILLENNIALS AND LIVE MUSIC CULTURE





An Undergraduate Research Scholars Thesis

by

CAITLIN ALEXANDRIA CURBELLO





Submitted to Honors and Undergraduate Research
Texas A&M University

in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the designation as an




UNDERGRADUATE RESEARCH SCHOLAR




Approved by
Research Advisor: Dr. Billy R. McKim




May 2015





Major: Agricultural Communications and Journalism

Page 2

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

ABSTRACT .................................................................................................................................. 1

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS .......................................................................................................... 2

NOMENCLATURE ..................................................................................................................... 3

CHAPTER

I INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................ 4

The Millennial Generation .................................................................................... 4
Live Music Culture ............................................................................................... 5
Example of the Live Music Industry in Texas ...................................................... 8


II QUANTITATIVE DATA COLLECTION METHODS ...................................... 9

Context and Description of Larger Study ........................................................... 13
Validity ............................................................................................................... 15
Reliability ............................................................................................................ 16
Data Analysis and Interpretation ........................................................................ 16
Framework .......................................................................................................... 17


III RESULTS .......................................................................................................... 23

Research Question 1 ........................................................................................... 25
Research Question 2 ........................................................................................... 40
Research Question 3 ........................................................................................... 52


IV CONCLUSION(S) .............................................................................................. 63

Summary of the Study ........................................................................................ 63
Summary of Findings .......................................................................................... 65


REFERENCES ........................................................................................................................... 77

APPENDIX A ............................................................................................................................. 79

APPENDIX B ............................................................................................................................. 86

Page 74

= 4.3). Overall, the lowest scored (least important) venue feature across all generations was food

specials (V1_Q010_C) (total M = 2.8).



A MANOVA was used to compare the mean scores of independent variables (RO2.4.2), venue

features (V1_Q010_A through V1_Q010_G) across conditions and test interactions among

dependent variables, generational groups (D001_RC_D). After identifying a significant

MANOVA, subsequent ANOVAs were carried out on each of the dependent variables venue

features energy (V1_Q010_A through V1_Q010_G). A Bonferonni correction was applied to

each of the subsequent ANOVAs to protect against inflated Type I error (Field, 2009). ANOVA

results indicated significant interactions between subjects in the variable atmosphere

(V1_Q010_A) (p = .028, η2 = .045, 1 – = .666) and variable food specials (V1_Q010_C) (p =

.001, η2 = .083, 1 – = .923) for the effects of venue features on generation (D001_RC_D). Only

results for food specials (V1_Q010_C) exceeded the threshold for the power of analysis (≥.80)

therefore, significant results were not due to chance or error. Results for energy (V1_Q010_B),

sound quality (V1_Q010_D), volume (V1_Q010_E), seating (V1_Q010_F), lighting

(V1_Q010_G) did not meet the minimum requirements for power of analysis (≥.80).



The descriptive analysis for (RO2.5.1) the amount willing to pay for admission (V1_Q015)

across generations (D001_RC_D) revealed that Millennial respondents most often chose the

amount of $100-$149 for the highest amount they would be willing to pay for admission to a live

music venue or event. This range was followed by the second most often chosen admission price,

$150-$199 by Millennial respondents. Baby Boomer respondents chose the price range of $1-

$49, while Generation X respondents most often chose the $50-$99 price range for the amount

71

Page 75

willing to pay for admission to a live music venue or event. This indicates that Millennials are far

more likely to spend higher amounts on tickets for live music venues and events compared to

other generations. Meaning, Millennials are the demographic that should be targeted and

accommodated by live music venues and events.



A Kruskal-Wallis H test was used for comparison (RO2.5.2) of the dependent variables amount

willing to pay for admission (V1_Q015) and independent variable generations (D001_RC_D).

Median scores for amount willing to pay for admission (V1_Q015) were statistically

2(3) = 13.003, p = .002. This post hoc analysis revealed

statistically significant differences in amount willing to pay for admission (V1_Q015) scores

between Baby Boomers (Mdn = 3.00) and Millennials (Mdn = 3.00) (p = .019) and Baby

Boomers and Generation X (Mdn = 3.00) (p = .002) generational groups, but not between

Generation X and Millennials (Mdn = 1.000) generational groups. Visual results for 2.5.2 can be

found in Appendix --.



Research Question 3 and its objectives were meant to describe and compare the environmental

determinants that influence Millennials engagement with contemporary live music venues and

events. Mencarelli and Pulh (2006) claim that the venue is an essential catalyst for the interaction

of the audiences with all of the amenities of said venue, and affects the audience’s interaction

with the venue itself and its personnel. Based on quantitative results, a better understanding of

which environmental determinants influenced Millennials engagement was formed.



72

Page 148

Results for Kruskal-H Wallis Test continued









145

Page 149

Results for Kruskal-H Wallis Test continued



146

Similer Documents