Cover not available
Article published In:
Journal of Asian Pacific Communication
Vol. 34:1 (2024) ► pp.56–82

Foreign-born instructor humor perception and effects on self-perceived affective and cognitive learning

Comparison of Thai and United States classrooms

ORCID logo | Southern Methodist University
 | Baruch College, The City University of New York
 | University of Southern Mississippi
In this cross-sectional study, a total of 394 U.S. American and Thai college students took an online survey investigating how they perceived humor used by their foreign-born instructors and how those perceptions then predicted their self-perceived cognitive and affective learning. Moderated mediation analyses revealed both student groups understood affiliative humor and considered it appropriate and humorous which then enhanced their learning. Aggressive humor positively predicted Thai students’ learning through the mediating role of humorousness and negatively predicted U.S. students’ learning through the mediating role of appropriateness. Self-defeating humor enhanced U.S. students’ learning through the moderating role of appropriateness. This study clarified the influence of different humor styles on learning and extended the instructional humor processing theory by demonstrating the moderating effect of culture. With the internationalization of higher education and increasing number of foreign-born instructors, this pioneering study provided preliminary suggestions for effectively using humor in cross-cultural classrooms.
Keywords: instructor humor, cross-cultural classroom, humor perception, affective learning, cognitive learning, instructional humor processing theory
Article outline
  • Theoretical framework
    • Humor styles in the educational setting
    • Instructional humor processing theory
    • Instructional humor in cross-cultural context
    • Student learning outcomes
  • Method
    • Participants
    • Measures
      • Instructor humor style
      • Instructor humor perception
      • Student self-perceived learning
    • Scale reliability and validity
  • Results
    • Supplemental analysis
  • Discussion
    • A cultural comparison: Foreign-born instructor humor perception
    • Learning outcome comparison: Effects of foreign-born instructor humor on self-perceived learning outcomes
    • Theoretical and methodological implications
    • Limitations and directions for future research
  • Conclusion
  • Disclosure statement
  • Acknowledgements
  • References
Published online: 18 February 2022
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/japc.00075.cha
References (51)
References
Alberto, R. P. & Liteke, M. H. (2015). Improving English language instruction through collegiality among foreign and Thai English teachers. St. Theresa Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences, 1 (1). Retrieved from [URL]
Altbach, P. & Knight, J. (2007). The internationalization of higher education: Motivations and realities. Journal of Studies in International Education, 11 (3–4), 290–305. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Banas, J. A., Dunbar, N., Rodriguez, D. & Liu, S. J. (2011). A review of humor in educational settings: Four decades of research. Communication Education, 60 (1), 115–144. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Beebe, S. A. & Mottet, T. P. (2009). Students and teachers. In W. F. Eadie (ed.), 21st Century communication: A reference handbook, (pp. 349–357). Sage. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Berlyne, D. E. (1960). Conflict, arousal, and curiosity. McGraw-Hill. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bieg, S. & Dresel, M. (2018). Relevance of perceived teacher humor types for instruction and student learning. Social Psychology of Education, 21 1, 805–825. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bloom, B. S., Englehart, M. D., Furst, E. J., Hill, W. H. & Krathwohl, D. R. (1965). Taxonomy of educational objectives: The classification of educational goals, Handbook I: Cognitive domain. David McKay.Google Scholar
Bolkan, S. & Goodboy, A. K. (2015). Exploratory theoretical tests of the instructor humor–student learning link. Communication Education, 64 (1), 45–64. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Booth-Butterfield, S. & Booth-Butterfield, M. (1991). Individual differences in the communication of humorous messages. Southern Communication Journal, 56 (3), 205–218. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bryant, J., Comisky, P. & Zillmann, D. (1979). Teachers’ humor in the college classroom. Communication Education, 28 (2), 110–118. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Byrne, B. M. (2004). Testing for multigroup invariance using AMOS Graphics: A road less traveled. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 11 (2), 272–300. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Croucher, S. M. (2013). The difference in verbal aggressiveness between the United States and Thailand. Communication Research Reports, 30 (3), 264–269. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Festinger, L. (1957). A theory of cognitive dissonance. Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Frymier, A. B., Wanzer, M. B. & Wojtaszczyk, A. M. (2008). Assessing students’ perceptions of inappropriate and appropriate teacher humor. Communication Education, 57 (2), 266–288. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gorham, J. & Christophel, D. M. (1990). The relationship of teachers’ use of humor in the classroom to immediacy and student learning. Communication Education, 39 (1), 46–62. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Graham, E. E. (1995). The involvement of sense of humor in the development of social relationships. Communication Reports, 8 (2), 158–170. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hall, E. T. (2000). Context and meaning. In Samovar, L. A., Porter, R. E. (eds) Intercultural communication: A reader, 9 1. Wadsworth.Google Scholar
Hayes, A. F. (2017). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach. Guilford Publications.Google Scholar
Hofstede, G. (1984). Culture’s consequences: International differences in work-related values. Sage Publications.Google Scholar
Hofstede, G. & Hofstede, G. J. (2005). Cultures and organizations, 2nd ed. McGraw Hill.Google Scholar
Hofstede Insights. (2019). What about Thailand? Retrieved from [URL]
Kalliny, M., Cruthirds, K. W. & Minor, M. S. (2006). Differences between American, Egyptian and Lebanese humor styles: Implications for international management. International Journal of Cross Cultural Management, 6 (1), 121–134. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kazarian, S. S. & Martin, R. A. (2004). Humour styles, personality, and well-being among Lebanese university students. European Journal of Personality, 18 (3), 209–219. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Klopf, D. W. & Park, M. S. (1992). Korean communication practices: Comparative research. Korean Journal, 32 1, 93–99.Google Scholar
Komin, S. (1990). Culture and work-related values in Thai organizations. International Journal of Psychology, 25 (3–6), 681–704. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Komolsevin, R., Knutson, T. & Datthuyawat, P. (2010). Effective intercultural communication research contributions from Thailand. Journal of Asian Pacific Communication, 20 (1), 90–100. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Leask, B. & Bridge, C. (2013). Comparing internationalization of the curriculum in action across disciplines: Theoretical and practical perspectives. Journal of Comparative and International Education, 43 (1), 79–101. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Martin, R. A. (2007). The psychology of humor: An integrative approach. Elsevier Academic Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Martin, R. A., Puhlik-Doris, P., Larsen, G., Gray, J. & Weir, K. (2003). Individual differences in uses of humor and their relation to psychological well-being: Development of the humor styles questionnaire. Journal of Research in Personality, 37 (1), 48–75. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
McCann, R., Honeycutt, J. & Keaton, S. (2010). Toward greater specificity in cultural value analyses: The interplay of intrapersonal communication affect and cultural values in Japan, Thailand, and the United States. Journal of Intercultural Communication Research, 39 (3), 157–172. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Merkin, R. (2009). Cross-cultural communication patterns: Korean and American communication. Journal of Intercultural Communication, 20 1, 19–25. [URL]
Morreall, J. (1983). Taking laughter seriously. State University of New York.Google Scholar
Omiteru, E., Martinez, J., Tsemunhu, R. & Asola, E. F. (2018). Higher education experiences of international faculty in the U.S. Deep South. Journal of Multicultural Affairs, 3 (2), 1–18. [URL]
Petty, R. E. & Cacioppo, J. T. (1981). Attitudes and persuasion: Classic and contemporary approaches. W. C. Brown.Google Scholar
Plax, T. G., Kearney, P., McCrosky, J. C. & Richmond, V. P. (1986). Power in the classroom VI: Verbal control strategies, nonverbal immediacy and affective learning. Communication Education, 35 (1), 43–55. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Punyanunt, N. M. (2000). The effects of humor on perceptions of compliance-gaining in the college classroom. Communication Research Reports, 17 (1), 30–38. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Richmond, V. P., McCrosky, J. C., Kearney, P. & Plax, T. G. (1987). Power in the classroom VII: Linking behavior alteration techniques to cognitive learning. Communication Education, 36 (1), 1–12. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schwieger, F., Gros, E. & Barberan, L. (2010). Lessons from the culturally diverse classroom: Intellectual challenges and opportunities of teaching in the American university. College Teaching, 58 (4), 148–155. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sidelinger, R. J. (2014). Using relevant humor to moderate inappropriate conversations: Maintaining student communication satisfaction in the classroom. Communication Research Reports, 31 (3), 292–301. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sungkaman, U. (2016). Linguistic strategies used in satirical discourse to create the Thai sense of humor. Humanities Journal, 23 (1), 154–178. [URL]
Stuart, W. D. & Rosenfeld, L. B. (1994). Student perceptions of teacher humor and classroom climate. Communication Research Reports, 11 (1), 87–97. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Theobald, R. (2013). International faculty. In: Alberts, H. C., Hazen, H. D. (eds) International students and scholars in the United States, (pp. 111–130). Palgrave Macmillan. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tsukawaki, R. & Imura, T. (2020). Preliminary verification of instructional humor processing theory: Mediators between instructor humor and student learning. Psychological Reports, 123 (6), 2538–2550. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Vaid, J. (2006). Joking across languages: Perspectives on humor, emotion and bilingualism. In A. Pavlenko (Ed.), Bilingual minds: Emotional experience, expression and representation, (pp. 152–182). Multilingual Matters Ltd. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wangsomchok, C. (2016). Linguistic strategies to express humor in Thai context. International Journal of Social Science and Humanity, 6 (6), 462–465. [URL]. DOI logo
Wanzer, M. B., Frymier, A. B. & Irwin, J. (2010). An explanation of the relationship between instructor humor and student learning: Instructional humor processing theory. Communication Education, 59 (1), 1–18. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wanzer, M. B., Frymier, A. B., Wojtaszczyk, A. M. & Smith, T. (2006). Appropriate and inappropriate uses of humor by instructors. Communication Education, 55 (2), 178–196. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wrench, J. S. & Richmond, V. P. (2004). Understanding the psychometric properties of the humor assessment instrument through an analysis of the relationships between teacher humor assessment and instructional communication variables in the college classroom. Communication Research Reports, 21 (1), 92–103. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Zhang, Q. (2005). Immediacy, humor, power distance, and classroom communication apprehension in Chinese college classrooms. Communication Quarterly, 53 (1), 109–124. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Zillmann, D. & Cantor, J. R. (1996). A disposition theory of humor and mirth. In A. J. Chapman & H. C. Foot (Eds.), Humor and laughter: Theory, research and applications (pp. 93–115). Transaction Publishers.Google Scholar
Ziv, A. (1988). Teaching and learning with humor: Experiment and replication. Journal of Experimental Education, 57 (1), 5–15. [URL]. DOI logo
Cited by (1)

Cited by one other publication

Lu, Jackson G.
2023. Cultural differences in humor: A systematic review and critique. Current Opinion in Psychology 53 ► pp. 101690 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 9 january 2025. 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.