Article published in:
Interaction Studies
Vol. 18:1 (2017) ► pp. 116–141

You can laugh at everything, but not with everyone

What jokes can tell us about group affiliations

| | Central European University
| | Laboratoire de Psychologie et NeuroCognition | | Université Pierre Mendès France
| | Laboratoire Psychologie de la Perception | | Université Paris Descartes
| | Institut des Sciences Cognitives Marc Jeannerod | | Université de Lyon 1
| | Université de Lyon 1
This paper explores the impact of group affiliation with respect to the on-line processing and appreciation of jokes, using facial electromyography (EMG) activity and offline evaluations as dependent measures. Two experiments were conducted in which group affiliation varied between the participant and each of two independent (recorded confederate) speakers whose described political profiles were distinguished through one word: “Right” versus “Left.” Experiment 1 showed that jokes were more highly evaluated and that associated EMG activity was more intense when it was later determined that the speaker was a member of the listener’s ingroup rather than outgroup. In an effort to determine whether these parochial effects can be isolated to ingroup favoritism as opposed to outgroup derogation, Experiment 2 paired a joke-teller described as politically active (either from the right or the left) with one who was described as politically neutral. These more subtle comparisons suggest that the parochial effects observed in our joke understanding paradigm are mediated, at least in part, by the presence of an outgroup member.
Keywords: humor, language processing, parochialism, social laughter
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
    • 1.1Parochialism and language
    • 1.2The case of jokes: Laughter as a dependent variable
  • 2.Experiment 1
    • 2.1Method
      • 2.1.1Participants
      • 2.1.2Stimuli
      • 2.1.3Apparatus
      • 2.1.4Procedure
      • 2.1.5Data analysis
    • 2.2Results
      • 2.2.1EMG results
      • 2.2.2Post-joke evaluation results
    • 2.3Discussion
  • 3.Experiment 2
    • 3.1Method
      • 3.1.1Participants
      • 3.1.2Stimuli
      • 3.1.3Procedure
    • 3.2Results and discussion
  • 4.General discussion
  • Acknowledgments
  • Note
  • References


This article is currently available as a sample article.

Published online: 10 August 2017
https://doi.org/10.1075/is.18.1.06mor
References
Abrams, J. R., & Bippus, A
(2011) An intergroup investigation of disparaging humor. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 30(2), 193–201. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Attardo, S
(1993) Violation of conversational maxims and cooperation: The case of jokes. Journal of Pragmatics, 19(6), 537–558. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Baayen, R. H., Davidson, D., & Bates, D
(2008) Mixed-effects modeling with crossed random effects for subjects and items. Journal of Memory and Language, 591, 390–412. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Baron, J
(2012) Parochialism as a result of cognitive biases. In R. Goodman, D. Jinks, & A. K. Woods (Eds.), Understanding social action, promoting human rights. Oxford: Oxford University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Bates, D., Maechler, M., Bolker, B., & Walker, S
(2015) lme4: Linear mixed-effects models using Eigen and S4. R package version 1.1–9, https://​CRAN​.R​-project​.org​/package​=lme4.
Beaupré, M. G., & Hess, U
(2003) In my mind, we all smile a case of ingroup favoritism. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 391, 371–377. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Billig, M., & Tajfel, H
(1973) Social categorization and similarly in intergroup behavior. European Journal of Social Psychology, 31, 7–52. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Brennan, S. E., & Clark, H. H
(1996) Conceptual pacts and lexical choice in conversation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 221, 1482–1493. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Cohen, B. H., Davidson, R. J., Senulis, J. A., Saron, C. D., & Weisman, D. R
(1992) Muscle tension patterns during auditory attention. Biological Psychology, 331, 133–156. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Curry, O. S., & Dunbar, R.I. M
(2013) Sharing a joke: The effects of a similar sense of humor on affiliation and altruism. Evolution and Human Behavior, 34(2), 125–129. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Darwin, C
(1872) The expression of the emotions in man and animals. London: John Murray. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Dezecache, G., & Dunbar, R.I. M
(2012) Sharing the joke: the size of natural laughter groups. Evolution and Human Behavior, 33(6), 775–779. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Dunbar, R.I. M
(2012) Bridging the bonding gap: the transition from primates to humans. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 367(1597), 1837–1846. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Dunbar, R., Baron, R., Frangou, A., Peirce, E., Van Leeuwen, E.J. C., Stow, J., Partridge, G., MacDonald, I., Barra, V., & Van Vugt, M
(2012) Social laughter is correlated with an elevated pain threshold. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London/B, 2791, 1161–1167. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Flamson, T., & Barrett, H. C
(2008) The encryption theory of humor: A knowledge-based mechanism of honest signaling. Journal of Evolutionary Psychology, 61, 261–281. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Gervais, M., & Wilson, D. S
(2005) The evolution and functions of laughter and humor: a synthetic approach. The Quarterly Review of Biology, 80(4), 395–430. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Grice, H. P
(1989) Studies in the way of words. Harvard: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Hess, U., Beaupré, M. G., & Cheung, N
(2002) Who to whom and why – cultural differences and similarities in the function of smiles. In Millicent Abel (Ed.), An empirical reflection on the smile (pp. 187–216). New York: The Edwin Mellen Press.Google Scholar
Hodson, G., Rush, J., & Macinnis, C. C
(2010) A joke is just a joke (except when it isn't): cavalier humor beliefs facilitate the expression of group dominance motives. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 99(4), 660–682. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Hoicka, E., & Akhtar, N
(2012) Early humour production. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 30(4), 586–603. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Hurley, M. M., Dennett, D. C., & Adams Jr., R. B
(2011) Inside Jokes: Using Humor to Reverse-Engineer the Mind. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Lynch, R
(2010) It's funny because we think it's true: laughter is augmented by implicit preferences. Evolution and Human Behavior, 311, 141–148. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Maass, A
(1999) Linguistic intergroup bias: Stereotypes-perpetuation through language. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 311, 79–131. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Maass, A., Salvi, D., Acuri, L., & Semin, G. R
(1989) Language use in intergroup contexts: The linguistic intergroup bias. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 571, 981–993. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Niedenthal, P. M., Mermillod, M., Maringer, M., & Hess, U
(2010) The future of SIMS: Who embodies which smile and when? Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 33(6), 464–480. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Panskepp J
(2000) The riddle of laughter: neural and psychoevolutionary underpinnings of joy. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 91, 183–186. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Platow, M. J., Haslam, S. A., Both, A., Chew, I., Cuddon, M., Goharpey, N., Maurer, J., Rosini, S., Tsekouras, A., & Grace, D. M.
(2005) « It's not funny if they're laughing »: self-categorization, social influence, and responses to canned laughter. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 41(5), 542–550. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Pollio, H. R., & Bainum, C. K
(1983) Are funny groups good at solving problems? A methodological evaluation and some preliminary results. Small Group Behavior, 14(4), 379–404. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Provine, R. R
(1992) Contagious laughter: Laughter is a suffcient stimulus for laughs and smiles. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 301, 1–4. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Schwartz-Sea, P., & Simmons, R. T
(1991) Egoism, parochialism, and universalism. Rationality and Society, 31, 106–132. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Smoski, M. J., & Bachorowski, J.-A
(2003) Antiphonal laughter between friends and strangers. Cognition and Emotion, 171, 327–340. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Sperber, D., Clément, F., Heintz, C., Mascaro, M., Mercier, H., Origgi, G., & Wilson, D
(2010) Epistemic Vigilance. Mind and Language, 25(4), 359–393. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Sperber, D., & Wilson, D
(1986/1995) Relevance: Communication and cognition. 2nd edition. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Tajfel, H., Billig, M. G., Bundy, R. P., & Flament, C
(1971) Social categorization and intergroup European. Journal of Social Psychology, 1(2), 149–178.Google Scholar
Topolinski, S., Likowski, K. U., Weyers, P., & Strack, F
(2009) The face of fluency: Semantic coherence automatically elicits a specific pattern of facial muscle reactions. Cognition and Emotion, 23(2), 260–271. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Weisfeld, G. E
(1993) The adaptive value of humor and laughter. Ethology and Sociobiology, 14(2), 141–169. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Winkielman, P., & Cacioppo, J. T
(2001) Mind at ease puts a smile on the face: Psychophysiological evidence that processing facilitation increases positive affect. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 811, 989–1000. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Wolosin, R. J
(1975) Cognitive similarity and group laughter. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 32(3), 503–509. CrossrefGoogle Scholar

Full-text

You can laugh at everything, but not with everyone
Cited by

Cited by 4 other publications

Bischetti, Luca, Irene Ceccato, Serena Lecce, Elena Cavallini & Valentina Bambini
2019. Pragmatics and theory of mind in older adults’ humor comprehension. Current Psychology Crossref logo
Bischoff, Marie, Silke Schmidt & Holger Muehlan
2021. Development and validation of the child humor orientation scale short-form. HUMOR 34:1 ► pp. 69 ff. Crossref logo
Bryant, Gregory A., Christine S. Wang & Riccardo Fusaroli
2020. Recognizing affiliation in colaughter and cospeech. Royal Society Open Science 7:10 ► pp. 201092 ff. Crossref logo
Reed, Lawrence Ian & Evelyn Castro
2022. Are You Laughing at Them or with Them? Laughter as a Signal of In-Group Affiliation. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior 46:1 ► pp. 71 ff. Crossref logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 15 april 2022. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.