Startseite Thinking fast and slow in the experience of humor
Artikel
Lizenziert
Nicht lizenziert Erfordert eine Authentifizierung

Thinking fast and slow in the experience of humor

  • Larry Ventis

    Larry Ventis is a Professor of Psychology at the College of William and Mary in Virginia. He earned his Ph.D. in clinical psychology at the University of Tennessee in Knoxville. His research has largely focused on the psychology of humor and the psychology of religion. His previous humor research included an examination of the use of humor to counter fear. Recent research on religion has focused on implicit religious attitudes and the development of the Christian Humanist Implicit Association Test (CH IAT).

    EMAIL logo
Veröffentlicht/Copyright: 5. August 2015
HUMOR
Aus der Zeitschrift HUMOR Band 28 Heft 3

Abstract

The present work theorizes that the experience of humor relies on distinct roles for each of the two thought modes identified by Kahneman (2011): Intuitive and Reflective Thought. A listener’s Intuitive Thought early in a joke is hypothesized to increase the probability of experiencing incongruity. Reflective Thought is hypothesized to be the mechanism for resolving the incongruity in a joke. If the latter hypothesis is valid, measures of Reflective Thought should be more closely associated with Humor Cognition (Feingold 1983) than would intelligence. SAT Total score was used to represent tested IQ (Frey and Detterman 2004), and the Cognitive Reflection Test (Frederick 2005) and SAT Critical Reading score were used to represent Reflective Thought. Participants consisted of 148 university students, 79 females, 67 males, and 2 undesignated. Partial correlation analysis revealed that controlling for SAT Critical Reading, SAT Total had no relationship to Humor Cognition (r=–0.04, n.s.). However, controlling for SAT Total, SAT Critical Reading and Humor Cognition remain significantly correlated (r=0.33, p<0.001).

About the author

Larry Ventis

Larry Ventis is a Professor of Psychology at the College of William and Mary in Virginia. He earned his Ph.D. in clinical psychology at the University of Tennessee in Knoxville. His research has largely focused on the psychology of humor and the psychology of religion. His previous humor research included an examination of the use of humor to counter fear. Recent research on religion has focused on implicit religious attitudes and the development of the Christian Humanist Implicit Association Test (CH IAT).

References

Baron-Cohen, S., A. MLeslie & U.Frith.1985. Does the autistic child have a “theory of mind”? Cognition21. 3746.10.1016/0010-0277(85)90022-8Suche in Google Scholar

Cacioppo, J. & R.Petty.1982. The need for cognition. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 42(1). 116131.10.1037/0022-3514.42.1.116Suche in Google Scholar

Darwin, C.1872 [1972]. The expression of the emotions in man and in animals. New York: AMS Press.10.1037/10001-000Suche in Google Scholar

Feingold, A.1983. Measuring humor ability: Revision and construct validation of the humor perceptiveness test. Perceptual and Motor Skills56. 159166.10.2466/pms.1983.56.1.159Suche in Google Scholar

Feingold, A. & R.Mazzella.1991. Psychometric intelligence and verbal humor ability. Personality and Individual Differences12(5). 427435.10.1016/0191-8869(91)90060-OSuche in Google Scholar

Frederick, S.2005. Cognitive reflection and decision making. Journal of Economic Perspectives19(4). 2542.10.1257/089533005775196732Suche in Google Scholar

Frederickson, B. L.1998. What good are positive emotions?Review of General Psychology2(3). 300319.10.1037/1089-2680.2.3.300Suche in Google Scholar

Frey, M. C. & D. K.Detterman.2004. “Scholastic assessment or g? The relationship between the Scholastic Assessment Test and general cognitive ability”. Psychological Science15(6). 373378.10.1111/j.0956-7976.2004.00687.xSuche in Google Scholar

Gervais, M. & D. S.Wilson.2005. The evolution and functions of laughter and humor: A synthetic approach. Quarterly Review of Biology80(4). 395430.10.1086/498281Suche in Google Scholar

Greengross, G., Martin, R., & Miller, G.2012. Personality traits, intelligence, humor styles, and humor production ability of professional stand-up comedians compared to college students. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts6(1). 7482.Suche in Google Scholar

Halpern, D. F.1997. Sex differences in intelligence: Implications for education. American Psychologist52. 10911102.10.1037/0003-066X.52.10.1091Suche in Google Scholar

Hurley, M., D.Dennett & R.Adams.2011. Inside jokes: Using humor to reverse-engineer the mind. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.10.7551/mitpress/9027.001.0001Suche in Google Scholar

Kahneman, D.2011. Thinking, fast and slow. New York, NY: Farrar, Straus, & Giroux.Suche in Google Scholar

Koestler, A.1964. The act of creation. London: Hutchinson.Suche in Google Scholar

Kruglanski, A. W., D. M.Webster & A.Klem.1993. Motivated resistance and openness to persuasion in the presence or absence of prior information. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology65. 861876.10.1037/0022-3514.65.5.861Suche in Google Scholar

Provine, R. R.2000. Laughter: A scientific investigation. New York: Penguin.Suche in Google Scholar

Shammi, P. & D. T.Stuss.1999. Humor appreciation: A role of the right frontal lobe. Brain, 122(4). 657666.Suche in Google Scholar

Stanovich, K. E.2011. Rationality and the reflective mind. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195341140.001.0001Suche in Google Scholar

Suls, J. M.1972. A two-stage model for the appreciation of jokes and cartoons: An information-processing analysis. In J. H.Goldstein & P. E.McGhee (eds.), The psychology of humor: Theoretical perspectives and empirical issues, 81100. New York: Academic Press.10.1016/B978-0-12-288950-9.50010-9Suche in Google Scholar

Suls, J. M.1983. Cognitive processes in humor appreciation. In P. E.McGhee & J. H.Goldstein (eds.), Handbook of humor research: Vol. 1: Basic issues,3957. New York: Springer-Verlag.10.1007/978-1-4612-5572-7_3Suche in Google Scholar

Wang, C & Mark J.Gierl.2007. Investigating the cognitive attributes underlying student performance on the SAT Critical reading subtest: An application of the attribute hierarchy method. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Council on Measurement in Education, Chicago, Illinois, 9 April.Suche in Google Scholar

Wyer, R. S. & J. E.Collins.1992. A theory of humor elicitation. Psychological Review99(4). 663688.10.1037/0033-295X.99.4.663Suche in Google Scholar

Ziv, A.1976. Facilitating effects of humor on creativity. Journal of Educational Psychology68(3). 318322.10.1037/0022-0663.68.3.318Suche in Google Scholar

Published Online: 2015-8-5
Published in Print: 2015-8-1

©2015 by De Gruyter Mouton

Heruntergeladen am 30.9.2025 von https://www.degruyterbrill.com/document/doi/10.1515/humor-2015-0070/html
Button zum nach oben scrollen