Creativity, Caring, and Context: Women's and Men's Accounts of Humor Preferences and Practices
- 1 June 1991
- journal article
- Published by SAGE Publications in Psychology of Women Quarterly
- Vol. 15 (2), 217-231
- https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-6402.1991.tb00793.x
Abstract
Empirical research on humor has perpetuated, rather than challenged, stereotypes of the humorless female. Among other biases, it has neglected participants' own definitions of “sense of humor” and their own accounts of their preferences and practices. In this study, 203 participants (72 males, 131 females) answered a 68-item Humor Questionnaire and also wrote a narrative about a person with an outstanding sense of humor. Factor analysis of the questionnaire revealed ten dimensions of humor, with four of the ten producing gender differences. Content analysis of the narratives produced a detailed account of the participants' definition of sense of humor. Both males and females viewed creativity, contextual relevance, and caring as components of an outstanding sense of humor. Gender similarities and differences are discussed in relation to the conversational context of spontaneous humor.Keywords
This publication has 15 references indexed in Scilit:
- Humor appreciation as a function of sexual, aggressive, and sexist contentSex Roles, 1989
- Psychology Reconstructs The Female: 1968–1988Psychology of Women Quarterly, 1989
- Gender and Personality Differences in the Appreciation of Cartoon HumorThe Journal of Psychology, 1986
- Stereotyped Traits and Sex Roles in Humorous DrawingsCommunication Research, 1977
- Is Sexual Humor Sexist?Journal of Communication, 1976
- The Feminine RoutineJournal of Communication, 1976
- Exploration of Individual Differences in Preferences for HumorPsychological Reports, 1974
- On Being Witty: Causes, Correlates, and ConsequencesPublished by Elsevier ,1972
- Humor in Negro and White Subcultures: A Study of Jokes Among University StudentsAmerican Sociological Review, 1959
- SUMMARIES OF RESEARCHES REPORTED IN DEGREE THESES1British Journal of Educational Psychology, 1946