Relationship among Gender, Humor, and Anxiety in College Students

by

Laura Iocin

W
IE Dissertation Committee
EV
Richard M. O'Brien, Ph. D., Sponsor
Mitchell L. Schare, Ph. D.
William C. Sanderson, Ph. D.
PR

Merry E. McVey-Noble, Ph. D., Reader

Sarah A. Novak, Ph. D., Orals Chairperson

Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy

Hofstra University

Hempstead, N.Y. 11549

April 17, 2009

 UMI Number: 3367277

INFORMATION TO USERS

The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy

W
submitted. Broken or indistinct print, colored or poor quality illustrations
and photographs, print bleed-through, substandard margins, and improper
IE
alignment can adversely affect reproduction.
In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript
and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if unauthorized
EV
copyright material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion.
PR

UMI
UMI Microform 3367277
Copyright 2009 by ProQuest LLC
All rights reserved. This microform edition is protected against
unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code.

ProQuest LLC
789 East Eisenhower Parkway
P.O. Box 1346
Ann Arbor, Ml 48106-1346
 Abstract

The current study intended to inspect the relationship between gender, anxiety, and

humor (self-deprecating and aggressive) in college students. Thirty female and 30 male

undergraduates were classified as anxious or not anxious based on scores on a measure of trait

anxiety, forming four groups: anxious men, anxious women, non-anxious women, and non-

anxious men. The anxious participants were subsequently stressed by working on a timed high-

stress task, while the non-anxious participants were required to Work on a low-stress task. Then,

all participants were given 10 minutes to watch as much as they liked of two comedy video clips

W
employing self-deprecating or aggressive humor, each 10 minutes long. Their humor preference

was measured using the number of clicks performed for each video and their statements of which
IE
video they preferred. Anxiety levels were measured at baseline, after the stress task, and after

exposure to humor using an anxiety thermometer and blood pressure measurements. A 2 x 2

EV
between subjects design was employed. Independent variables were: gender (male and female)

and stress level (anxiety and no anxiety/control). Dependent variables included: number of clicks
PR

for each comedy video and the subjects'statements of which video they preferred.

It was hypothesized that, for non-anxious participants, non-anxious women would

demonstrate a significant preference for self-deprecating humor and non-anxious men would

demonstrate a significant preference for aggressive humor. Out of the four groups, anxious

women were expected to demonstrate the highest preference for self-deprecating humor, and

anxious men were expected to demonstrate the highest preference for aggressive humor. Anxiety

levels were expected to be significantly lower after exposure to humor than before.

Hypothesis 1 was not supported. Significant differences were found in the opposite

direction, with non-anxious men significantly preferring self-deprecating humor and non-anxious
women significantly favoring aggressive humor. Hypothesis 2 was not supported. Significant

differences were found in the opposite direction, with anxious women watching less self-

deprecating humor and more aggressive humor when compared to non-anxious men. Hypothesis

3 was partially supported, as the group of anxious men reported a significant preference for

aggressive humor when compared to non-anxious men. Hypothesis 4 was supported by the

anxiety thermometer results but not by physiological measures. On the anxiety thermometer, the

anxiety of all 4 groups increased significantly from time 1 to time 2, and then it significantly

decreased from time 2 to time 3, with the anxious groups reporting more anxiety than the non-

W
anxious groups at all times. The results contribute in guiding our understanding of the

relationship between gender, anxiety, and aggressive and self-deprecating humor.

IE
EV
PR
 Acknowledgments

This project was truly a collaborative effort and I would like to express my appreciation

for the many people who helped in the process and made this investigation possible. I would like

to thank my sponsor, Dr. Richard O'Brien, for his valuable insight, support, and guidance

throughout every step of this project. Thank you for providing me with the framework within

which to refine and develop my ideas, for sharing your expertise, and for offering practical

suggestions. I would also like to thank the other two members of my core committee, Drs.

Mitchell Schare and William Sanderson, for their careful reading of this document, for providing

W
important feedback, and for their helpful advice on how to conceptualize my research questions.

I am grateful for their willingness to let me learn from my mistakes and lead me to further
IE
understanding. I would also like to extend my gratitude to Drs. Merry McVey-Noble and Sarah

Novak, for their willingness to come on board this project at the last minute, for their many
EV

valuable contributions, and for sharing their insight and theoretical views. Special thanks go to

Dr. Daniel Deutsch, who helped in the conceptualizing stages of this project. I appreciate the
PR

respect and honesty you have all shown me and your readiness to answer emails, be available for

meetings, and provide indispensable support.

I gratefully acknowledge my teachers and colleagues at the Student Counseling Center.

Thank you all for your understanding and assistance. I would like to extend special thanks to v

Drs. John Guthman, Merry McVey-Noble, and Despina Konstas, for their encouragement,

interest, and for the many hours they have spent supervising and teaching me to be a better

therapist and researcher. I am grateful that I have had the opportunity to learn from you.

I would also like to thank my family and my friends for believing in me and for

encouraging me to pursue my dreams. Special thanks go to my parents, who always sacrificed

j • . . . .

, ' . . . ' • • ' • ' - . . ( •

Ill
their needs for my own, my sister and her husband, and my parents in law. Even though we are

thousands of miles apart, I can always feel your love and I always have you in my heart. Your

pride in my accomplishments, no matter how small, is an important source of happiness in my

life. Last, but never least, I thank my husband Cristian for his love, patience, and support over

the past six years of graduate school. Thank you for encouraging me when my faith in this

project wavered, for tolerating me when Iwas intolerable, and for helping me put things into

perspective. Thank you for your many sacrifices and for being strong when I couldn't be. You

truly are my better half. This is for you.

W
IE
EV
PR

IV
 Table of Contents
Abstract. — ....... i
Acknowledgements. . ......%.. iii
List of Tables vii
List of Figures........ ix

CHAPTER I: INTRODUCTION.... ...1

Humor. 1
Humor Definition.. '.. ...2
Reinforcing and Curative Properties of Humor. 9
v
Sense of Humor. ........!.. .................. 19
Types of Humor ...22
Laughter. ........ .........„............:.. .27
Laughter Definition and Characteristics. 29
Facilitated Laughter. .......:......... ...30
Laughter, Physiology, and the Immune System............... ..;. T 32

W
Laughter, Mood, and Stress........^;.. ... 38
Anxiety..!.. „!7.1.:V^V/.,V. Tr..7!..7.V„....^.............V.........:....:;:,::4l
Anxiety Characteristics, Causes, and Types 41
Effects of Anxiety on Physiology... IE 7........45
Treatment for Anxiety. ..48
Humor and Laughter as Treatment for Anxiety ....:..... ....49
Gender Differences. ........ ( .. 55
EV
Gender Differences in Anxiety .'....- ..55
Gender Differences in Humor :.i...................... 63
Summary ; .............71
Statement of the Problem. ...74
Hypotheses. ...... 75
PR

CHAPTERII: METHOD....... i. ..............:. ...76

Subjects .....>. .....76
Design .....78
Apparatus ....78
Video Material... ............80
Anagrams.............. ..81
Self-Report Measures '.:. 83
Cutoff Scores ...:..... 84
Procedure. 85

CHAPTER III: RESULTS........... 88

Pretest Group Comparisons : 88
Hypotheses Testing. ...92
Analysis Conducted to Test Hypotheses 1, 2, and 3 - Introduction 92
Hypothesis 1 , ......99
Hypothesis 2.... ,..' :..100
Hypothesis 3 :...:....100

v
 Analysis Conducted to Test Hypothesis 4-Introduction... , 101
Hypothesis 4..;... -....106
Additional Analysis. .;. 118
Time 1 vs. Time 2.............................. 118
Time 1 vs. Time 3 ....;......... ;.. .120
Anxiety Differences between Groups....... 121
Correlations........ 124
Supplemental Examination of Self-Reports. ..129

CHAPTERIV: DISCUSSION......... 135

Hypothesis 1 13 6
Hypothesis 2.. A........ '..- .........139
Hypothesis 3..........!... ....................140
Hypothesis 4 ................. .144
Limitations and Future Research 148
Conclusion 150

W
REFERENCES/-...; v.v.... v.:....: :.7...;..;;..:........ ...w.. :c::..:..:.:.......::............;.. vl 52

Appendix A: Demographic Characteristics by Group IE .183

Appendix B: Anagram Task 1 ..., 184
Appendix C: Anagram Task 2..... , :., .........185
Appendix D: Solutions for Anagram Task 1 : -....- 186
EV
Appendix E: Solutions for Anagram Task 2 I :.............. 187,
Appendix F: Instructions for Anagram Task 1 and Anagram Task 2....., , 188
Appendix G: The State-Trait Anxiety Inventory. 189
Appendix H: Anxiety Thermometer. 193
Appendix I: Humor Styles Questionnaires 194
PR

Appendix J: Informed Consent Form.". ......198

Appendix K: Demographic Characteristics...!..... ........199
Appendix L: Video Preference Report. .200
Appendix M: Post-Hoc Paired T-Test Comparisons by Group for Systolic Blood Pressure.....201
Appendix N: Post-Hoc Paired T-Test Comparisons by Grdup for Diastolic Blood Pressure....202
Appendix O: Post-Hoc Paired T-Test Comparisons by Group for Pulse .203

VI
 List of Tables "

Table 1: Demographic Characteristics of Sample. :.'.. :........... 77

Table 2: Means and Standard Deviations for Age by Group. .79

Table 3: Chi-Square Test Results for Demographic Characteristics (Anxious Men vs.

Anxious Women vs. Non-Anxious Men vs. Non-Anxious Women) ..............79

Table 4: Means and Standard Deviations for Trait Anxiety by Group .90

Table 5: Pair-Wise t-Test Comparisons for Trait Anxiety. >

. .90

Table 6: Means and Standard Deviations for Aggressive Humor and Self-Deprecating
Humor HSQ Scores by Group 91

W
Table 7: Pair-Wise t-Test Comparisons for Aggressive and Self-Deprecating Humor HSQ

Scores::.;v.v:v. :.r.r...v..v.....;.. v. n:.;:.;......:....:. .v.........:.........:...:........:.:..... .92

IE
Table 8: Means and Standard Deviations for Key Presses by Group 94

Table 9: MANOVA Results for the Key Presses Variables...... 95

EV
Table 10: Pair-Wise t-Test Comparisons for Aggressive Humor Key Presses and Self-
Deprecating Humor Key Presses. ...95

Table 11: Video Preference Self-Report Variable for Self-Deprecating Humor and
Aggressive Humor by Group.. .............: 96
PR

• r . . . •

Table 12: Chi-Square Test Results for Video Preference Self-Report Variable
(Self-Deprecating Humor and Aggressive Humor). 97

Table 13: Correlations between Number of Clicks and Reported Preference for Humor
Video Clips for Each Group ........... 98

Table 14: Group Means and Standard Deviations for Anxiety Thermometer at Times
l,2,and3 .......:.102

Table 15: Group Means and Standard Deviations for Systolic Blood Pressure at Times
1,2, and 3 ....;. 102

Table 16: Group Means and Standard Deviations for Diastolic Blood Pressure at Times
1,2, and 3... .....103

Table 17: Group Means and Standard Deviations for Pulse at Times 1, 2, and 3 .....103

vii '
Table 18: Repeated MANOVA Main Effects and Interactions for Anxiety Thermometer,

Systolic Blood Pressure, Diastolic Blood Pressure, and Pulse.. 104

Table 19: Post-Hoc Paired T-Test Comparisons by Group for Anxiety Thermometer .105

Table 20: Pair-Wise T-Test Comparisons for State Anxiety Inventory and Anxiety
Thermometer at Time 1.'.'..: , ......Ill
Table 21: Pair-Wise T-Test Comparisons for Systolic and Diastolic Blood Pressure

at Time 1 112

Table 22: Pair-Wise T-Test Comparisons for Pulse at Time 1 .113

Table 23: Pair-Wise T-Test Comparisons for Anxiety Thermometer and Pulse at Time 2 114
Table 24: Pair-Wise T-Test Comparisons for Systolic and Diastolic Blood Pressure

W
at Time 2. ..115

Table 25: Pair-Wise T-Test Comparisons for Anxiety Thermometer and Pulse at Time 3...... 116
IE
Table 26: Pair-Wise T-Test Comparisons for Systolic and Diastolic Blood Pressure
at Time 3 •...:. 117
EV
Table 27: Whole Sample Correlations between Scores on State Anxiety Inventory,
Anxiety Thermometer, Systolic Blood Pressure, Diastolic Blood Pressure, and
Pulse at Times 1, 2, and 3 •'..... 125

Table 28: Correlations between Scores on State Anxiety Inventory, Anxiety Thermometer,
PR

Systolic Blood Pressure, Diastolic Blood Pressure, and Pulse at Times 1, 2, and 3
for Anxious Men. 127

Table 29: Correlations between Scores on State Anxiety Inventory, Anxiety Thermometer,
Systolic Blood Pressure, Diastolic Blood Pressure, and Pulse at Times 1,2, and 3
for Anxious. Women. .'. 128

Table 30: Correlations between Scores on State Anxiety Inventory, Anxiety Thermometer,
Systolic Blood Pressure, Diastolic Blood Pressure, and Pulse at Times 1,2, and 3
for Non-Anxious Men. 130

Table 31: Correlations between Scores on State Anxiety Inventory, Anxiety Thermometer,
Systolic Blood Pressure, Diastolic Blood Pressure, and Pulse at Times 1, 2,. and 3
for Non-Anxious Women ..„'..' 131

Table 32: Means and Standard Deviations for Importance of Humor Content by Group.. .133

vin
 List of Figures

Figure 1: Anxiety Thermometer Mean Scores for Anxious Men, Anxious Women,
Non-Anxious Men, and Non-Anxious Women at Times 1,2, and 3 > 107

Figure 2: Systolic Blood Pressure Mean Scores for Anxious Men, Anxious Women,
Non-Anxious Men, and Non-Anxious Women at Times 1, 2, and 3..... 108

Figure 3: Diastolic Blood Pressure Meain Scores for Anxious Men, Anxious Women,
Non-Anxious Men, and Non-Anxious Women at Times 1,2, and 3. ........;.109

Figure 4: Pulse Mean Scores for Anxious Men, Anxious Women, Non-Anxious Men,
and Non-Anxious Women at Times 1, 2, and 3....., ...110

W
IE
EV
PR

ix
 1

CHAPTER I (

INTRODUCTION

Humor
f • '

The first known form of the word humor was the Latin term humorem, which meant fluid

or liquid. The concept was used for centuries by Greek and Roman physicians to depict bodily

fluids, which in time became thought to possess certain psychological qualities. Therefore, the

term humor gradually developed connotations relating to trait and state mood characteristics

(Martin, 2007). The English language borrowed the word humor from the French humeur. It was

W
only in the sixteenth century that this term began to depict a person whose behavior conflicts

with social norms, someone who is odd, peculiar, or eccentric. Since this person was normally an

individual who others laughed about, in time the terms humorist and man of humor developed to
IE
describe people who were the object of laughter or enjoyed imitating such individuals for the
EV

amusement of others. Therefore, "humor came to be seen as a talent involving the ability to make

others laugh" (Martin, 2007, p. 21). Still, it was not until the nineteenth century that the concept
PR

of humorist assumed the meaning of an individual who creates a product called humor in order to

^ make others laugh (Wickberg, 1998).

Before the eighteenth century, laughter was regarded almost entirely in negative terms.

There was no difference made between laughing with and laughing at, because all laughter was

viewed to appear from making fun of someone (Martin, 2007). In time, it was recognized that

laughter can be either aggressive or benevolent, and the contemporary difference between

laughing with and laughing at was encapsulated by the terms humor and wit, respectively.

Naturally, humor came to be regarded as more socially acceptable than wit. This distinction

' / • • • • ' . • • / - • ' . - .

( . ' • • • • . . _ . • • •

. . • ( ' • - . - • •
 2

gradually disappeared during the twentieth century, and humor became an umbrella term for
i • . . . .

everything laughable (Martin, 2007),

Humor Definition. The Oxford English Dictionary defines humor as "that quality of

action, speech, or writing which excites amusement; oddity, jocularity, facetiousness, comicality,

fun; the faculty of perceiving what is ludicrous or amusing, or of expressing it in speech, writing,

or other composition; jocose imagination or treatment of a subject" (Simpson & Weiner, 1989, p.

486). Martin (2007) proposed that humor can be understood as a "cognitive-linguistic form of

play that elicits the emotion of mirth, which, in turn, is typically expressed through laughter" (p.

W
156). He also explained the humor process as comprising four basic components: a social

context, a cognitive-perceptual process, an emotional response, and the vocal-behavioral

IE
expression of laughter. >
EV
Humor is a social phenomenon, since people were found to use it more in social contexts

than when alone (Martin & Kuiper, 1999; Provine & Fischer, 1989). Humor can be part of

practically any social situation, as it appears in conversations between friends and strangers,
PR

groups of employees at work, or when public speakers address audiences. "The social context of

humor is one of play" (Martin, 2007, p. 5). Therefore, when people create humor and laughter,

their verbal and motor behavior is not oriented toward achieving more important goals than

simply having fun." Apter (1991) distinguished between two different states of mind: a playful,

humor-using state of mind which he named the paratelic mode, and a goal oriented, more serious

state of mind called the telic mode. Apter described people as employing both states of mind

many times throughout a day and using them at different times and in different contexts to better
f
serve their needs.
1 ;
• • . . I - , . •
 ' • ' • • ' ? •

Cognitive, theorists such as Martin (2007) take the view that the production and reception

of humor involves cognitions. To produce humor, the individual needs to mentally process

stimuli that originated in the environment or in memory, to rearrange the information creating a

new product, and to express it to others using verbal of nonverbal actions which are perceived by

outsiders as funny. To appreciate humor, the individual again needs to mentally process the

meaning of information that originated in the environment or in memory, and to then judge it as

playful, humorous, and nonserious (Martin, 2007). For people to be put in a playful state of mind

and in order for humor to be produced, the information involved needs to be appraised as

somehow incongruous and surprising, and some aspect of it needs to make us judge the stimulus

W
as nonserious or unimportant (Martin, 2007). Gervais and Wilson (2005) defined the essence of

humor as nbnserious social incongruity.

IE
Humor is characterized by the experience of a pleasant emotion, a unique feeling of well-
EV

being which is described as cheerfulness, merriment, hilarity, or amusement, and which Martin y

(2007) calls mirth. Mirth, therefore, is the specific emotion elicited in humans by humor. Averill
PR

(1969) was one of the first researchers who investigated the emotion of mirth and the autonomic

responses associated with it. Ruch (1993) described mirth as occurring in varying degrees of

intensity ranging from mild amusement to hilarity. This emotion is accompanied by a range of

biochemical changes in the brain, endocrine system, and autonomic nervous system (Panksepp,

1993), which have further effects on numerous parts of the body, and which form the basis of

speculations about the possible benefits of humor and laughter.

The last component involved in humor is laughter, which is considered to be humor's

expressive component. Mirth at low intensity levels is expressed by faint smiles. If the emotional

intensity increases, a broader grin and then audible chuckling are produced. Mirth at high

• • "' '•' • • . r '

• - . . . - \
intensities is expressed by loud guffaws, which may also be supplemented by a reddening of the

face, as well as bodily movements such as rocking the body, throwing back the head, and so on

(Martin, 20G7). For that reason, laughter conveys to others that one is experiencing the emotion

of mirth.

"Life is a comedy to those who think arid a tragedy to those who feel" (Horatio Walpole,

1717-1797). This old proverb comprises a widespread belief in the importance of humor:

without humor, life would be unbearable (Eysenck, 1972). Consequently, humor has always been

an area of interest for literary, philosophical, and scientific writers. From a psychological point

of view, humor and laughter are universal features of human existence, as they are experienced

W
by virtually all people around the world, regardless of their culture (Apte, 1985; Lefcourt, 2001).
i, •
IE ' .

Humor is part of people's lives each day. Humor is communicated in different ways and is
. •

intended to serve different purposes. While some of the humor we experience everyday is
EV

transmitted through mass media such as radio, television, newspapers, humorous movies and

books, and so on, most humor is produced and exchanged spontaneously in the course of normal
PR

social interactions between individuals (Martin & Kuiper, 1999).

Martin (2007) reviewed five general theoretical approaches that have been the most

influential psychological perspectives on humor: psychoanalytic, superiority/disparagement,

arousal, incongruity, and reversal theory. Because both psychoanalytic and superiority theories

proposed that the function of laughter is to release a surplus of physiological energy, they are

also called energy-release theories of laughter.

Freud theorized that the purpose of laughter is to release excess nervous energy (Freud,

1960 [1905]; Freud, 1928). He identified three types of laughter related phenomena: wit or jokes,

humor, and the comic. Individuals enjoy jokes because they employ cognitive techniques to
 5

distract the superego, which allows unconscious, primitive aggressive and sexual impulses from

the id to be temporarily expressed and enjoyed. Humor refers to the tension release function of

mirth and laughter and it is used in coping with stress. Humor arises in stressful situations when

individuals are likely to experience negative emotions such as anxiety, anger, or depression. By

paying attention to the humorous or incongruous elements in the situation individuals can alter

their perspective on the event, which in turn enables them to avoid experiencing negative affect.

For this reason, Freud considered humor the highest of the defense mechanisms that protect

people against emotional distress. The third category, the comic, refers to nonverbal sources of

mirth, and like jokes, it often contains aggressive elements. A large number of studies were

W
conducted to test this theory of humor, but their results produced limited and inconsistent
IE
supportive evidence. While some psychologists still research this area, since the 1980s the

psychoanalytic theory of humor has been largely abandoned by empirical researchers"(Martin,

EV
2007).

The superiority theory is the oldest approach to humor, dating back to the philosophers
PR

Plato and Aristotle. In this view humor is believed to result from a sense of superiority derived

from the belittling of another person or of one's past mistakes or foolishness. Therefore, the

superiority theory sees humor as a form of aggression (Martin, 2007). Gruner, the most active
• * . v _ - ' • ' . • " • • . ' .

contemporary promoter of this theory, based his observations on an evolutionary theory in which

competitiveness and aggression are critical factors that enable humans to survive successfully

(Gruner, 1978). He argued that humor is "playful aggression," similar to the kind of play young

children and animals engage in, and does not involve physical violence against others. He also

stated that "successful humor, like enjoying success in sports and games (including the games of

life), must include winning ("getting what we want"), and sudden perceptiqn of that winning"
~ •• .A ' .
 - . - • • • 6

(Gruner, 1997, p. 9, emphasis in original). Therefore, all jokes, no matter how innocent,

comprise three key components: a contest, a winner, and a loser. In summarizing the research

findings produced by studies testing the superiority theory of humor, Martin (2007) concluded

that, while there appears to be little doubt that aggressive components play a role in many jokes
• - • v..
and forms of humor, there is little support for the view that all humor involves a form of

aggression and that hostile people generally enjoy humor more than nonhostile individuals do.

The arousal theory of humor is a newer theory proposed by Berlyne (1972). Berlyne

argued that there are two arousal-related mechanisms in humor: the arousal boost and the arousal

W
jag mechanisms. The arousal boost mechanism regulates the production and the perception of

humor, during which arousal is elevated by the various properties of the stimuli involved in the
IE
process. The increase in arousal is perceived as pleasurable as long as it stays at an optimal level.

The arousal jag mechanism becomes active when the arousal level has gotten higher than the
EV

optimal level and begun to be aversive. According to Berlyne, the punch line of a joke is an

unexpected resolution of the arousing properties of the joke, and induces a fast reduction in the
PR

arousal level, bringing it down to a pleasant intensity again. The sudden decrease of arousal from

an aversive to a pleasurable level adds to the enjoyment of the joke. In Berlyne's view,

individuals Express their pleasure associated with the arousal boost and the arousal jag by

laughing. When talking about the research on arousal theories, Martin (2007) stated that research

studies investigating Berlyne's theory have shown that humor represents a complex,

physiological interaction between cognition and emotion. The research supported Berlyne's idea

that humor is accompanied by an increase in arousal level, but little evidence was collected in

support of an inverted-U emotional enjoyment of humor. Instead, research findings showed that

i
 7

the relationship between physiological arousal and humor is linear, with funnier stimuli being

associated with greater increases in heart rate and skin conductance (Langevin & Day, 1972).

The incongruity theories tend to overlook the social and emotional aspects involved in)

humor and focus on cognitions, because they consider the cognitive incongruity present in

humorous stimuli to be the crucial determinant of whether or not a stimulus is amusing.

Numerous psychologists have developed theories emphasizing the role of cognitions in the

production and perception of humor. Eysenck (1942, p. 307) argued that "laughter results from

the sudden, insightful integration of contradictory or incongruous ideas, attitudes, or sentiments

which are experienced "objectively." Mulkay (1988) explained that the essence of humor is the

W
simultaneous activation of two contradictory perceptions, because in the humorous mode of
IE
thinking, contrary to normal rational logic, a stimulus can be both X and hon-X at the same time.

Suls (1972,! 1983) recommended a two-stage model to understand humor, which

EV

resembles a problem solving task. According to Suls, the content of a joke causes the listener to

anticipate a particular outcome and when the punch line does not confirm their expectation, the
PR

listener is surprised and looks for a rule that would make the punch line agree with their

expectation. If the cognitive rule is found, the incongruity is removed, the joke is perceived as
• • • . • ' . v

amusing and laughter is produced. If the rule is not found, the ihcpngruity remains and the joke .

produces puzzlement and not laughter..Therefore, in Suls' model humor is created by the

resolution of a cognitive incongruity and not from the ongoing presence of an incongruity.,
!
Martin (2007) added that^ while a form of cognitive incongruity is generally accepted as a

necessary condition for humor, most theorists would agree that not all incongruities are

humorous by themselves and that "soothing extra" is also needed. Suls (1983) suggested that to

be funny the incongruity must occur suddenly, and Rothbart (1976) proposed that for humor to
\ . • . . ' ' - • • .
 ' 8

be produced the incongruity needs to take place in a playful and non-threatening context. The

research findings in this area offer support to the idea that incongruity is indeed a crucial

L component of humor. Still, incongruity theories seem to mainly focus on humor comprehension

and not on humor appreciation, as they describe components necessary to understand and "get"

the joke, and do not explain the emotional aspects that make the experience of humor pleasant -~

(Suls, 1983).

The main advocate for a reversal theory of humor is Apter (1982; Apter & Smith, 1977).

Apter distinguished between a paratelic, playful state of mind and a telic, goal oriented state of

mind. He explained that in the telic state individuals are concerned with attaining important

W
goals, while the means to achieve these goals are secondary, and in the paratelic state of mind the
IE
individual is less preoccupied with attaining specific goals, and is more likely to enjoy the

ongoing activities they engage in for their own sake. Therefore, the telic state is seen as future
EV
oriented, while the paratelic state is seen as present oriented. As a paratelic activity, humor

involves the enjoyment of arousal. Apter also stated that both emotionally arousing elements
PR

such as sexual and aggressive themes, as well as topics that would normally create feelings of

disgust, horror, and revulsion such as parodies of horror movies and "sick" jokes, all may be

perceived as humorous when one is in the paratelic state of mind. In addition, Apter agreed that

cognitive incongruity, which he called "synergy," is an important part of humor, because holding

at the same time in one's mind two contradictory ideas about the same object contributes to the

creation of humor. Since this theory seems to comprise various parts encountered in the theories

of humor presented above that have been supported by research findings, Martin (2007)

concluded that Apter's theory is the most comprehensive, it includes many of the strengths of

other theories, and can account for many of the research findings in the area of humor.
 9

Reinforcing and Curative Properties of Humor. Humor and laughter have always been

considered to possess health benefits. Some of the oldest speculations of the benefits of humor

and laughter have been focused_on the following areas: digestion, various organs in the body,

mood, energy level, and blood circulation (Goldstein, 1982; Moody, 1978). These possible

benefits of humor and laughter may have been derived from the psychological functions humor

serves. Martin (2007) classified these functions into three broad categories: cognitive and social

benefits of the positive emotion of mirth, uses of humor for social communication and influence,

and tension and relief coping.

••;'. ._ / . - • • • ; • • • j~y

W
Human eimotions serve important adaptive functions. In the past researchers seemed to

focus more on the consequences of negative emotions, and did not pay much attention to positive
IE
emotions such as mirth. Still, researchers have long theorized that positive emotions have

cognitive and social benefits. Fredrickson (1998, 2001) proposed a "broaden-and-build" model
EV

of the psychological functions of positive emotions. He proposed that positive emotions function

to broaden the scope of the individual's focus of attention and to build physical, intellectual, and
PR

social resources. Consequently, the individual is able to engage in more creative problem

solving, has an increased range of behavioral response options, and possesses a variety of skills

and resources he can use to resolve life's challenges. Current research has shown that, indeed,

participants experiencing positive emotions, including mirth, demonstrate greater cognitive

flexibility, are more creative when solving their problems, display more effective reasoning,

planning, and judgment, are more socially responsible, and engage in more prosocial behaviors

such as helpfulness and generosity (Isen, 2003; Lyubomirsky, King, & Diener, 2005).

Shiota et al (2004) proposed a second model directed at explaining the role of positive

emotions, and suggested that positive emotions may play ah important role in the regulation of
 10
;
"• ' .1

interpersonal relationships by helping identify possible relationship partners, by being involved

in developing, negotiating, and maintaining important relationships, and by compromising and

working with others to attain goals that could not be accomplished alone. Consequently, humor

is likely to be beneficial by creating the emotion of mirth which is typically shared by two or

more people at the same time. Mirth coupled with laughter may be a way of identifying

individuals with similar values, reinforcing others, increasing attachment and group solidarity,

and attracting and selecting partners (Martin, 2007), Fredrickson and Levenson (1998) showed

that positive emotions, including mirth, help to reduce physical arousal produced by negative

emotions.

W
A second function humor serves is that of enabling social communication and social,
IE
influence. Humor, Martin (2007) explains, is neither good nor bad, but only a means of

communicating that can be utilized for either friendly or aggressive purposes. Consequently,
EV

humor can be used with the goal of improving relationships, strengthening group conformity, or i

resolving conflicts, and it can also be used to enhance one's status at the expense of others by
PR

manipulating, humiliating, or isolating others.

Researchers proposed that humor is often used to indirectly manage uncomfortable social

situations when a more direct or serious conversational style may lead to a'possibly embarrassing

or confrontational interaction. Humor, therefore, is employed to influence individuals in different

ways or to transmit implicit messages in an indirect way (Mulkey, 1988). Kane, Suls, and

Tedeski (1977) suggested that humor can also be used to smooth over conflicts and tensions

between individuals. Consequently, when discussing important differences in opinion friends

may use humor to communicate to each other that they still appreciate and accept the other

person, while recognizing that they have different points of view. Humor may also be a way of
 11

. "saving face" for the person using humor and others (Keltner et al, 2001). Here, humor is

employed to "test the water" and see the receivers' reaction, or to reduce the impact of the

message. One way this can be done is by conveying the message and, if it is not well received; to

retract it by saying "it was only a joke." '

As mentioned above, humor can also be used in a coercive, manipulative, or aggressive

way, Alexander (1986) explained that, from an evolutionary point of view, humor and laughter

have enhanced group identity and cohesion not only by reinforcing group norms and values, but

also by rejecting outsiders to the group. When compared to more positive uses of communicative

humor, which usually involve two people or,groups, speaker(s) and a receiver(s), aggressive

W
humor involves three individuals or groups: the speaker(s) who produces the funny message* the
IE
listener(s) who is laughing at it, and the target(s) who is the one the speaker ridicules. Besides

enhancing self status and group cohesion at the expense of others j aggressive humor can also be
EV

used as a way of intimidating people into conforming to desired behaviors (Martin, 2007).

Within a social group, aggressive humor such as sarcasm and teasing is used to make fun of
PR

group members who engage in deviant behavior, with the intent of punishing these unwanted

behaviors and making the subject conform to the norms of the group.

Perhaps the one function of humor that most inspired psychologists to propose that

humor and laughter may have curative properties is the tension relief and coping function. Gross

and Munoz (1995) proposed that humor may be an important emotion regulation rriechanism,
• • • ' • ' . . . . . t

which can contribute to better mental health. When individuals experience depression, anxiety,

or anger they can use humor in an attempt to replace these unpleasant emotions with the more

pleasant emotion of mirthswhich usually accompanies humor and laughter. Consequently, the

above mentioned negative emotions and their harmful effects on mental and physical health are
replaced by the enjoyable experience of mirth" and its positive effects. Fredrickson and Levenson

(1998) suggested that mirth may have a physiological benefit of speeding recovery from the

cardiovascular effects of any negative stress related emotions that may have been evoked. In _

addition, when people experience mirth instead of depression, anxiety, or anger they are more

likely to demonstrate more cognitive flexibility and to engage in more creative problem solving
1
'' ' . • '• '.

strategies (Fredrickson, 2001).

• • ^ • - • ,

By using humor in emotionally distressing situations, individuals manage to shift

perspective and to reappraise their circumstances, which then ^become more manageable (Kuiper,

W
Martin, & Olihger, 1993; Martin, Kuiper, Olinger, & Dance, 1993). The incongruities and

multiple interpretations involved in humor enable individuals to diminish environmental threats

IE
by turning them into objects of nonserious play. Therefore, humor is a way of creating positive

emotions, preserving one's sense of mastery, hope, and self respect, refusing to be overwhelmed
EV

by people and situations that threaten our well-being, and surviving in apparently hopeless

situations (Ford & Spaulding, 1973; Frankl, 1984; Henman, 2001). Many times coping humor
PR

takes the form of joking and laughing with other people, either in the midst of an aversive

situation or shortly afterwards (Martin, 2007). Since many of the threats to the well being of

individuals come from other people, aggressive humor, where the producer and the receiver of

humor make fun of a target, is one of the most commonly used types of humor in those

situations. By employing aggressive humor targeted at their adversaries, by making fun of their

laziness, stupidity, ugliness, incompetence, and other failings, individuals are capable of

minimizing the feelings of distress other people may cause them and they are able to derive

pleasure at the expense of those who frustrate, annoy, and irritate them (Martin, 2007), To

summarize, the psychological functions of humor include the positive cognitive and social '
 13

effects of mirth, its uses as a means of social influence and communication, and its uses as a

mode of regulating emotions, coping with stress, decreasing anxiety, and relieving tension.

Mental health is usually defined as the absence of psychological disturbance or emotional

distress. When talking about humor in the context of psychological functioning, Martin (2007)

defines mental health in terms of three general capacities that appear to be critical for an

individual to function successfully: the ability to regulate negative emotions and enjoy positive

emotions, the ability to cope with stress and adapt to change, and the ability to establish and

maintain close, meaningful, and lasting relationships with others. By engaging in humor, people

intend to either maintain their positive mood or to replace feeling anxious, depressed, or angry

W
with the more pleasant emotion of mirth. Therefore, humor is beneficial to mental health because
IE
it helps the individual's capacity to regulate or manage emotions (Gross & Munoz, 1995).

Research has shown that smiling and laughing, even when they are done artificially and
EV
participants are asked to engage in forced, nonhumorous laughter, appear to temporarily induce

feelings of amusement and mirth (Foley, Matheis, & Schaefer, 2002; Neuhoff & Schaefer, 2002).
PR

Danzer, Dale, and Klions (1990) used humor in an attempt to reduce induced feelings of

depression. They used a standard mood induction technique to produce a depressive mood in

female undergraduate students, which proved to be successful since all the participants reported

an increase in depressed mood after the manipulation. Then, researchers assigned the participants

randomly to three different conditions: humorous audiotape (stand-up comedy), nonhumorous

audiotape (unfunny geography lecture), or a non tape condition. Their results showed that only

the participants in the humor condition conveyed a significant posttreatment reduction in

dysphoria back to baseline levels. These findings suggest that humor may successfully

counteract depressed mood.