Volume 33, Issue 2 - Special Issue: Sex and gender differences in humor, Guest Editor: Gil Greengross

Both common observations and research evidence strongly suggest that there are major differences between adult males and females as to both the number of humorous attempts they display in social situations and the types of humor they initiate and appreciate. What the causes are for these differences, however, have been less clear, with attributions being related to both biological and environmental reasons. In fact, researchers who have studied the development of humor in infants, preschoolers, and elementary age children have generally observed that the early humor of both boys and girls is similar, thus raising the possibility that the differences that gradually emerge with age may be attributed more to environmental rather than to biological reasons. This chapter will discuss the humor research evidence amassed by those who have studied young children’s humor development and the potential environmental influences on humor development that may account for some of the sex differences seen in adult humor.

To account for sex differences in the production, receptivity, and preference for humor in potential mates during courtship, past research has often adopted an evolutionary approach. The present manuscript will attempt to integrate evolutionary explanations with proximal social and cultural influences using the traditional sexual script and ambivalent sexism theory. The results of both Study 1 ( N =227) and Study 2 ( N =424) suggest that trait masculinity is positively associated with humor production in courtship, while trait femininity is associated with humor receptivity. Study 1 indicated that the traditional flirting style was associated with less humor production by women, and Study 2 indicated that hostile sexism was related to a lower preference for a humor-producing potential partner by men. A sex difference in humor production in potential partners in Study 2 was no longer detectable once trait gender and hostile sexism was accounted for. Taken together, gender roles, over and above biological sex, influence one’s own humor use in courtship and preference for humor in potential partners.

We examine the degree to which women and men use humor to confront sexist jokes. We also test the social benefits and perceived effectiveness of confronting with humor. One-hundred-sixty-four (46% female) participants read about a male coworker who made a sexist joke and reported how they would respond in an open-ended format. Women were more likely than men to say they would respond with humor. Specifically, 16% of women, compared to 4.5% of men, spontaneously provided a humorous confrontation. Participants then read a second scenario that asked them to imagine a male friend making a sexist joke. We manipulated the confronter’s gender and the type of confrontation (humorous versus serious) in the scenario. Confronters who used a humorous (versus serious) response were rated as more likeable but less effective. People often hesitate to confront sexism for fear of social repercussions. Given that humorous confrontation reduces social backlash, it might be worth slightly lower perceived effectiveness to increase overall rates of confronting sexism.

Across two studies, we examined how the reaction of a woman who was targeted by potentially disparaging sexist jokes by a male joke-teller affected men’s and women’s perceptions of the jokes, the woman who was told the jokes, and the male joke-teller. Participants viewed videos in which a man told sexist jokes to a woman who responded with amusement, offense, ambiguity, or nonverbal disapproval. We found that the woman’s reaction to the sexist humor affected the perceptions of both the male joke-teller and the woman. Our results suggest that expressing nonverbal disapproval may be an effective way to produce negative perceptions of a man telling sexist jokes (Study 1) and may increase positive perceptions of a woman who confronts them (Study 2). Further, expressing verbal offense may be an increasingly acceptable way of confronting sexist jokes, perhaps due to recent cultural shifts in perceptions of confronting sexism more generally (Study 2). Our findings offer reason to be optimistic about changing norms with regard to confronting sexist humor.

The present study investigated whether antifat sexist humor (compared to antifat sexist statements or control statements), conveyed via Tweets, would impact perceptions of an overweight female target depicted in a workplace harassment scenario. We examined whether gender, antifat attitudes, and sexism would impact joke perceptions and moderate perceptions of the joke-relevant target. Participants ( n  = 451) were drawn from MTurk and completed the study online. They were randomly exposed to one of three tweet conditions and then read and responded to the harassment vignette, among filler vignettes, before completing sexism and antifat measures. Antifat attitudes unexpectedly shifted as a function of study prime and were thus not considered as a moderator. Results showed that men high in hostile sexism reported a greater likelihood of retweeting/favoriting antifat sexist jokes than men low on hostile sexism or women high in hostile sexism. Individuals high in hostile sexism in the joke condition found the behavior of the target less appropriate, and the behavior of the ostensible perpetrator more appropriate, than those in the control condition and those low on hostile sexism. Similar findings were obtained for benevolent sexism. Findings underscore the power of social media as a vehicle for disparagement humor and its consequences.

Benign violation theory suggests humor mocking normative values is funny if the humor is non-threatening. Research suggests sexism toward women (versus men) is particularly threatening due to inequalities in social power. In Study 1, we examined whether men and women differ in how amused and offended they were by sexist humor. We predicted men would perceive sexist humor as more funny and less offensive than women would. In Study 2, we examined whether perceptions of threat were related to perceptions of sexist jokes. We predicted women would perceive more threat than men from sexist humor, which would lead to lower amusement and greater perceived offensiveness. Across both studies, jokes targeting women were perceived to be less funny, more offensive, and more sexist than jokes targeting men. Additionally, greater perceptions of threat were related to greater perceptions of jokes as offensive and sexist. However, women were not more threatened than men by sexist jokes. While these findings were not entirely consistent with our hypotheses, our findings suggest disparagement humor targeting lower-status groups is perceived more negatively than disparagement humor targeting higher-status groups and these perceptions may be inextricably rooted in threat posed to lower-status groups.

Reappraisal is an effective emotion regulation strategy that draws on cognitive processes–like changing one’s thoughts to change one’s feelings–that are similar to those implicated in humor. Yet, very little is known about the links between the dispositional tendency to use reappraisal and individuals’ humor styles (e. g. aggressive, affiliative, self-deprecating, self-enhancing). Importantly, there are gender differences both in emotion regulatory processes and in the use of humor styles. We examined gender differences in reported use of humor styles, the associations between reappraisal and humor styles, and whether gender moderated those associations. Participants ( N =250) were recruited through Amazon Mechanical Turk and self-reported their dispositional use of reappraisal and four humor styles. Men reported greater use of aggressive humor compared to women. Dispositional use of reappraisal was positively associated with self-enhancing humor. In addition, reappraisal use was positively related to greater use of affiliative humor, and this association was stronger for men than women. For men, greater use of reappraisal was associated with greater use of self-defeating humor, but reappraisal was negatively associated with self-defeating humor for women. Findings extend insight from prior work and suggest that both reappraisal and specific ways of using humor draw on aspects of self-regulatory competence rooted in cognitive change abilities, and the patterns of association differ in interesting ways for men and women.

This study explored how multifaceted facets of humor relate to sex differences and compassion for oneself, others, and the environment (N total  = 697; 57.5% female). We utilized the Dispositional Positive Emotions ‘amusement’ subscale ( DPES-H ), the Humor Styles Questionnaire Self-Enhancing Dimension ( HSQ-SE ), and the COPE Inventory to assess ‘coping humor’ ( COPE-CH ) and found that males report significantly higher scores of these humor constructs when compared to females. Considering previous research indicating that humor may be used to enhance oneself and relationships with others, we compared all three humor measures in males and females with reports of self-compassion, other-oriented compassion, and altruistic environmental concern. Interestingly, we found that all three humor scales are significantly related to the multi-faceted measure of self-compassion, the DPES ‘compassion’ subscale ( DPES-C ), and the environmental concern scale, but specific significant correlations vary according to sex. Altogether, this study explores sex differences in humor experiences and illustrates that women’s experiences with coping humor, DPES humor, and self-enhancing humor are significantly correlated with reports of compassion for oneself and others while men’s experiences with coping humor, DPES humor, and self-enhancing humor are significantly correlated with altruistic environmental concern. Potential basis for these correlations and implications for future research in light of these sex differences and similarities will be discussed.