Haha Squad

Research to be written up

Business

  • people perceive status, competence and confidence when humour is used (Bitterly, Brookes & Schweitzer, 2017)
  • perception of leaders (Decker, 1987; Bell, 2012);
  • trustworthiness of leaders (Hoption, Barling & Turner, 2013)
  • improving team performance (Lehmann-Willenbrock & Allen, 2014)
  • approaches for improving effectiveness at work by using humour (Kerr, 2015; Bagdonas & Aaker, 2020).

Humour theories and research

Humour in psychology/therapy/medicine/counselling

  • healing using humour (Adams & Mylander, 1998; Johnson, 2008)
  • reframing dramatic or tragic stories from our lives as comedies (McAdams, 1982)
  • stress-reducing effects of humour (Berk, Tan & Berk, 2008).

Humour in teaching

  • categorisations of appropriate and inappropriate humour in teaching (Manzer, Frymier, Wojtaszczyk & Smith, 2007)
  • why some types of humour result in increased learning (Wanzer, Frymier & Irwin, 2009)
  • the impact of humour on retention and recall (Garner, 2010)
  • how humour can increase creativity and encourage alternative thinking (Isen, Daubman & Nowicki, 1987; Grugulis, 2002; Kudrowitz, 2006; Ventis, 2019).

Uncategorised

  • Nothing Serious? Candidates’ Use of Humour in Management Training (2002) – https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0018726702055004459
  • “Wit is a genuine indicator of wits.” https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/the-comedy-of-error-by-jonathan-silvertown-review-why-evolution-made-us-laugh-3xwmctsmx?shareToken=b986ba92159be972b86813233795e178
  • Ponton, The power of humour to unite and divide: a case study of design coordination meetings in construction (Hazel Ponton, Allan Osborne, Neill Thompson & David Greenwood ) Pages 32-54
  • Laugh Lab by Richard Wiseman
  • Jude Elliman, ‘What happens in moments of humour with my clients?’ in Eric de Haan’s Behind Closed Doors
  • https://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2017/04/over-nearly-80-years-harvard-study-has-been-showing-how-to-live-a-healthy-and-happy-life/
  • “Decker and Rotondo (2001) also studied leader humour but, instead, took a dyadic approach and surveyed employees regarding their bosses’ behaviours and their perceptions of these behaviours. These findings demonstrated that positive humour was related to higher ratings of leader task- and relationship-behaviours and overall effectiveness, whereas negative humour was negatively related to these behaviours (but not overall effectiveness). Thus, these results indicate that subordinates perceive leaders who use humour well as more relationship-oriented but still did not directly address relationship quality.” (taken from Cooper)
  • Hampes (1999): “There is also a strong positive relationship between humor and trust. People who are rated high in humor tend to trust other people more than people rated low in humor. Hampes (1999) concluded that people who are high in humor can cope with the stress associated with trusting others, which makes them more trusting.” (Taken from Romero)
  • “Dixon (1980) claims that humor is a cognitive stress reducer.” (Taken from Romero)
  • “Dixon et al. (1989) found that individuals who are high in humor pay more attention when learning humorous material and also recall it better.” (Taken from Romero)
  • “Wanzer et al. (1996) also indicates the viability of this affective mechanism, finding that individuals who were perceived as more humorous (i.e. having a high ‘humour orientation’) were judged to be more socially attractive by their acquaintances. As a reinforcing event, humour facilitated a relational link between the two parties. Similarly, individuals with a clowning, rather than sarcastic, sense of humour were judged to be more popular group members (Goodchilds, 1959). Although sarcastic individuals were judged to be relatively less popular, this effect was attenuated when rater sex was considered, since men were more likely to find people with a sarcastic wit funny. In other words, sarcasm was more likely to be a reinforcing, rather than punishing, event for men in this study as compared to women. For those who saw it as a reinforcing event, they also judged the sarcastic source to be more popular with others.” (taken from Cooper)
  • Comprehension-elaboration theory (From Cooper: “This most recent theory of humour specifies the conditions under which individuals will find a particular humour event amusing (Wyer, 2004; Wyer & Collins, 1992). Comprehension-elaboration theory states that the degree to which someone will enjoy a humour attempt is first determined by how difficult the humour is to comprehend and, second, by the cognitive elaboration the target performs after comprehending the humour. A particular humorous event may initially begin to elicit amusement, but the individual will then enact ‘post-comprehension cognitive activities’ (Wyer, 2004: 209). At this time, the person may think more about the humour, itself, or may think outside of the humour. People will be motivated to think outside of the humour if they have concerns about issues such as: 1) the motives of the person who conveyed the story, 2) whether the humour is socially (in)appropriate in a situation (e.g. the workplace), and/or 3) whether the humour is offensive to them- selves or other groups. During the elaboration process, amusement may increase if the humour is particularly relevant and appropriate to the situation. Alternatively, the immediate enjoyment of the humour may decrease if, upon elaborating, the individual finds the humour to be hurtful or concludes the person expressing the humour had an undesirable motive.”
  • Duncan, Smeltzer & Leap says “The reader who wishes to gain an insight to the general subject of humour should refer to vol 26 (1976) of the Journal of Communication.
  • Freud, Jokes and their relation to the unconscious: humour is highly bound up with sex and aggression. A joke is funny because it allows the hostile and libidinous wishes of the unconscious to leap uncensored into awareness.
  • Priest (1985) – The future of sexist humour in the workplace, in DLF Neilsen & AP Neilson’s Western Humour and Irony Membership Serial Yearbook, WHIM Conference, Tempe, Arizona State Uni – quoted in Duncan, Smeltzer & Leap: Moderate Intergroup Conflict Humour (MICH) suggests that hostile joking occurs most when there is a moderate level of conflict between the too groups (not too little and not too much – like a baby bear type of hostility! DL)