What's so funny? Modelling incongruity in humour production

Cognition and Emotion 31 (3) (2017)

Authors
J. Vaid
Texas A&M University
Abstract
Finding something humorous is intrinsically rewarding and may facilitate emotion regulation, but what creates humour has been underexplored. The present experimental study examined humour generated under controlled conditions with varying social, affective, and cognitive factors. Participants listed five ways in which a set of concept pairs (e.g. MONEY and CHOCOLATE) were similar or different in either a funny way (intentional humour elicitation) or a “catchy” way (incidental humour elicitation). Results showed that more funny responses were produced under the incidental condition, and particularly more for affectively charged than neutral concepts, for semantically unrelated than related concepts, and for responses highlighting differences rather than similarities between concepts. Further analyses revealed that funny responses showed a relative divergence in output dominance of the properties typically associated with each concept in the pair (that is, funny responses frequently highlighted a property high in output dominance for one concept but simultaneously low in output dominance for the other concept); by contrast, responses judged not funny did not show this pattern. These findings reinforce the centrality of incongruity resolution as a key cognitive ingredient for some pleasurable emotional elements arising from humour and demonstrate how it may operate within the context of humour generation.
Keywords humor  comic  cognitive  conceptual combination
Categories (categorize this paper)
Reprint years 2017
DOI 10.1080/02699931.2015.1129314
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

Our Archive
External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

The Act of Creation.Arthur Koestler - 1965 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 16 (63):255-257.
A Theory of Humor Elicitation.Robert S. Wyer & James E. Collins - 1992 - Psychological Review 99 (4):663-688.

View all 8 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

The Function and Content of Amusement.Ward E. Jones - 2006 - South African Journal of Philosophy 25 (2):126-137.
On Humour.Simon Critchley - 2002 - Routledge.
On Humour.Simon Critchley - 2011 - Routledge.
Comic Immoralism and Relatively Funny Jokes.Scott Woodcock - 2015 - Journal of Applied Philosophy 32 (2):203-216.
Humour and Incongruity.John Lippitt - 1994 - Cogito 8 (2):147-153.
Humour and Incongruity.Michael Clark - 1970 - Philosophy 45 (171):20 - 32.
Four Deadly Sins?(Arist. Wasps 74–84).Dwora Gilula - 1983 - Classical Quarterly 33 (02):358-.
The King of Pain.Ward E. Jones - 2009 - The Philosophers' Magazine 47 (47):79-84.
Why 30 Rock Is Not Funny.Josh Gillon - 2011 - Philosophy and Literature 35 (2):320-337.
Truly Funny: Humor, Irony, and Satire as Moral Criticism.E. M. Dadlez - 2011 - Journal of Aesthetic Education 45 (1):1-17.
Entre satire et humour, Shaftesbury et le thé'tre élisabéthain.Françoise Badelon - 1999 - Revue de Métaphysique et de Morale 2:161-172.
The Incongruity of Incongruity Theories of Humor.Tomáš Kulka - 2007 - Organon F: Medzinárodný Časopis Pre Analytickú Filozofiu 14 (3):320-333.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2016-02-04

Total views
225 ( #31,626 of 2,279,928 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
44 ( #20,344 of 2,279,928 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes

Sign in to use this feature