August 21, 2007 by Colin
Some people may say that the popularity of Freakonomics has had a negative effect on the weight and seriousness of subjects being researched and discussed in economics faculties across North America.
I’m just glad the Economist magazine isn’t the only source of humour for economists anymore.
Professor Robert Oxoby, of the University of Calgary, has published the results of what was, most likely, an argument in the faculty lounge:
On the Efficiency of AC/DC: Bon Scott versus Brian Johnson
We explore the effects of listening to the music of AC/DC in a simple bargaining environment.
“…The question as to who was a better singer, Bon Scott or Brian Johnson, may never truly be resolved. However, our analysis suggests that in terms of affecting efficient decision making among listeners, Brian Johnson was a better singer. Our analysis has direct implications for policy and organizational design: when policymakers or employers are engaging in negotiations (or setting up environments in which other parties will negotiate) and are interested in playing the music of AC/DC, they should choose from the band’s Brian Johnson era discography.
Please, before you snort and perhaps mock, realize that this was a finely tuned scientific experiment:
“…In our Bon Scott treatment, participants listened to “It’s a Long Way to the Top” (featuring Bon Scott on vocals) from the album High Voltage. In our Brian Johnson treatment, participants listened to “Shoot to Thrill” (featuring Brian Johnson on vocals) from the album Back in Black. These songs were chosen in order to avoid pre-conceived preferences for the band’s biggest singles (e.g. “Highway to Hell,” “You Shook Me All Night Long”).”
Here’s the SSRN page.
[tags] economics, AC/DC, Bon Scott, Brian Johnson, University of Calgary [/tags]