Volume 32, Issue 3 -

This manuscript explores whether the associations between partner humor production and relationship satisfaction and humor’s importance in romantic relationships are moderated by sex. Study 1 reports a meta-analysis ( k  = 10; N  = 2,167) of the association between partner humor production (i.e., perceived; partner effects) and relationship satisfaction, and whether associations were moderated by participant sex. Contrary to predictions, partner humor production was more strongly associated to men’s relationship satisfaction than women’s satisfaction. Study 2 surveyed pairs of romantic partners ( N  = 246) regarding their production of humor, their appreciation of partner humor, and the importance of humor in their relationship. Results indicated no moderations by sex in the association between partner humor production and humor’s importance in the relationship.

This study investigates humor by mediators and disputants in 95 civil case mediations. Consistent with the majority of the humor literature, as well as with the descriptive and prescriptive literature on mediation, we found that some humor was used by mediators and disputants in a “nice” and affiliative way, to control tension and to facilitate amicable relationships. Some of that humor also came in the form of reciprocal back-and-forth banter or in a positive and affiliative form that was unrelated to the mediation itself. However, many incidents of humor were harsh, as well as aggressive, and that humor often served specific functions within the mediation context. Mediators, and, to a lesser extent, disputants, used humor as a means of applying pressure to another party. Disputants, but seldom mediators, used humor defensively, to counter the pressure applied to them. We discuss how our results stand in contrast to the conventional wisdom about humor; we extend humor and conflict theory by integrating theory and perspectives on power; and we explain how our findings might extend to various social situations that involve power differentials between parties.

Compliments and compliment responses (CRs) are face threatening acts which may jeopardize the interlocutor’s positive and negative face. Compliment responses are especially challenging because of the need to balance accepting the compliment with saving face for not sounding arrogant. The use of humor in responding to a compliment can serve as a mitigating factor to respond to a compliment gracefully but with amusement to balance out the loss of face. The present study seeks to analyze humorous CRs in Spanish and English in order to establish cross-cultural comparisons. The results suggest some distinct cultural tendencies. American English speakers prefer self-denigrating humor whereas Peninsular Spanish use teasing and ironic upgrades. Spanish speakers also rely on a wider variety of linguistic resources to add humor to their CRs. Both language groups use humor as a tool to save face. Teasing among Peninsular Spanish is used to strengthen familiarity and closeness ties between interlocutors, a trait often associated with the positive politeness nature of Spanish culture. Self-denigrating humor in English CRs is described as ambiguous from a politeness perspective because it can preserve negative face by directing the humor to the speaker or it may be interpreted as an imposition to reiterate the compliment.

The present study examined the relationship between humor styles and depression using two methods of examination: (1) the mean humor style differences between individuals who reported that they had been diagnosed with depression versus those who did not report being depressed; and (2) the phenotypic, genetic, and environmental correlations between humor styles and a short scale assessing depressed affect created from preexisting measures in archival data. Participants were 1154 adult Australians, consisting of 339 monozygotic twin pairs and 238 dizygotic twin pairs. With respect to mean differences, depressed individuals were found to use self-defeating humor more and self-enhancing humor less than non-depressed adults. When the depressed affect scale score was analyzed, negative correlations were found with both affiliative and self-enhancing humor. A positive correlation was found between depressed affect and both aggressive and self-defeating humor. These phenotypic correlations were also found to have some significant genetic and environmental correlations.

The current study addressed a topic that has both theoretical and applied importance, by examining the potential existential anxiety-buffering function of humor. Participants (N = 556; 55% female; M age = 37 years) completed a measure of trait coping humor before being randomly assigned to a mortality salience condition and a humor induction condition and then completing a measure of death-thought accessibility. ANOVA revealed main effects of trait coping humor, mortality salience and humor induction on death-thought accessibility in the expected directions. Coping humor interacted with mortality salience (F(1,439) = 14.47, p < 0.01) showing that low coping humor participants were more affected by the mortality salience manipulation. Coping humor also interacted with humor induction (F(1,439) = 8.94, p < 0.01) showing that low coping humor participants were more affected by the humor induction. Findings suggests that whilst trait coping humor appears to buffer the effects of mortality salience, those low in trait coping humor may benefit the most from interventions aimed at reducing existential anxiety via humor. The apparent beneficial effect of humor induction for individuals low in coping humor holds a promise of advancing our understanding of existential threat and, ultimately, providing a basis for interventions to improve mental health.

The study tested effectiveness and feasibility of a humor training for members of a community mental health center suffering from schizophrenia, personality disorders, depression, or anxiety. The training group (n=28) was compared to a treatment-as-usual control group (n=26). Outcomes were divided into primary (coping humor and cheerfulness) and secondary ones (well-being, depression, anxiety, and symptomatology), and were assessed prior to and after treatment and at a six-week follow-up. Additionally, gelotophobia was explored as a confounding variable of the training outcome. Linear mixed models showed improvements in coping humor and cheerfulness compared to the control group. However, effects did not remain stable at follow-up, and secondary outcomes were unaffected by the training. Interestingly, people with higher levels in gelotophobia tended to score worse on many outcomes before training. These differences disappeared after completion but recurred in the follow-up. Feedback indicated feasibility of the training within the institution. Summarizing the results, this is one of the first studies that tried to implement humor training in a routine care setting for people with mental disorders. Results are promising, however further research is needed to investigate humor trainings in clinical samples more profoundly.

Doctor jokes are one of the most popular kind of jokes because they deal with the very sensitive subject of human state of health which draws upon the very basic life-death dichotomy, listed by Raskin in his influential study (Raskin, Victor. 1985. Semantic mechanisms of humor . Dordrecht: Reidel.) among the dichotomies most common in jokes. At the same time, doctor jokes are culture-specific as they reflect the relations between doctors and patients which are typical of a culture in terms of its power distance relations, especially in institutional encounters. Such differences are emphasized by the linguistic categories, such as official and familiar forms of address or culture-specific lexical items. But the reason certain jokes do not “travel” across language boundary is often not only the language itself, but also the cultural assumptions and relations – this concerns, for instance, the references to drinking or doctors’ ineffectiveness/incompetence in Polish jokes. This study focuses on doctor jokes as a category of jokes popular both in Poland and English-speaking countries, but the broad category of doctor jokes is here restricted to those which express the doctor’s advice: this aims at specifying and comparing the jocular advice scripts, central to the doctor-patient relation in both cultures, setting them against the serious advice script.

Despite its cultural reach and influence, comedy may not be well-understood in communication and public engagement efforts for social justice challenges. Research about comedy’s influence in social issues exists across disciplines and lacks common language. This article creates a practical framework toward the understanding of mediated comedy in social change communication by presenting a typology of distinct formats of comedy – scripted entertainment, satire news, humorous ads, and stand-up comedy – and synthesizing multidisciplinary scholarship that deals with the role of comedy in audience understanding of civic and social issues. The resulting framework for comedy’s influence in social justice includes: attracting attention, persuasion, offering a way into complex issues, dissolving social barriers, and encouraging message sharing. Implications for leveraging comedy in social change public engagement efforts, as well as directions for future innovation and research, are discussed.