The role of aggression and conflict about aggression on humor appreciation

This study investigated the role of aggression and conflict about aggression ("pugnacity" and "conflict about pugnacity" as measured by Cattell's Motivation Analysis Test, or MAT) on the appreciation of a wide variety of humor.

Sixty-four subjects (undergraduates) were preselected on the basis of their performance on the MAT into four equal groups:

1. high aggression and high conflict about aggression (HH),

2. high aggression and low conflict about aggression (HL),

3. low aggression and high conflict about aggression (LH), and

4. low aggression and low conflict about aggression (LL).

Each of these groups was subdivided into an equal number of females and males, resulting in eight cells composed of eight subjects each. Thus, the design was a 2 x 2 x 2 factorial with the factors being aggression, conflict about aggression, and gender.

After Sswere selected, their response to a variety of humor was measured using the following methods and procedures:

1. humor diary (they brought a one-day diary recording humorous events and explaining the circumstances),

2. favorite joke (they wrote down their favority joke),

3. favorite comedian (they wrote down the name of their favorite comedian),

4. Eysenck's cartoons (they rated 32 humorous cartoons previously factor analyzed into four equal groups named nonsense, social satire, aggression, and sex humor),

5. comedy tapes (they met in a small room in groups of four, all of the same gender and degree of aggression and of conflict about aggression, where they were videotaped while listening to an aggressive comedy routine by Carlin and a gentle comedy routine by Cosby; afterwards, their laughing and smiling frequency was recorded by as assistant,

6. written jokes (they rated 50 written jokes previously selected by this writer in a pre-test so as to discriminate between the various experimental groups; these jokes were then factor analyzed, using maximum likelihood and procrustean rotation methods, into four clearly defined sets, named put-down, scurrilous, gallows, and nonsense humor). These measures produced much data. The first two measures proved impossible to analyze, as subjects' diaries were often poorly reported and their favorite jokes difficult to categorize. The analyses from the other instruments resulted in 22 significant findings, ranging from simple effects to second, third, and fourth order interactions. A few of the findings were trivial (such as the finding that subjects laughed and smiled more during Carlin's selection than during Cosby's), or repeated well-established findings (such as the tendency for women to like nonsense jokes better than do men). The great majority (19 out of 22) significant effects, however, were informative.

The main trends may be summarized as follows:

1. Both aggression and conflict about aggression greatly influenced the appreciation of humor.

2. The influence of aggression upon the appreciation of different kinds of humor usually differed from the influence of conflict about aggression, so that different types of humor responded differentially to these factors.

3. The most general influence of both aggression and conflict about aggression was to increase the appreciation of all types of humor, so that aggressive, conflicted persons enjoyed humor most and non-aggressive, non-conflicted persons enjoyed it least.

4. Aggressive persons tended to prefer emotionally vivid humor, full of sexuality and aggression, and to laugh rather than smile.

5. Conflicted persons tended to prefer Pryor to Martin, to rate gallows humor highest among the written jokes, and to smile rather than laugh in response to the comedy tapes, especially in response to Carlin.

6. The more aggressive females, as compared to the less aggressive, had a greater liking for nonsense cartoons; the opposite was true for males.

7. Compared to males, females tended to prefer gallows humor. These findings have some clear theoretical implications. Some of the most obvious are that any purely cognitive theory of humor, such as the incongruity theory proposed by McGhee, are not workable, and that Freud's theories about humor, as first published in 1905 (in Wit and Its Relationship to the Unconscious), are vindicated. Other implications are less clear but provocative. For example, the data suggest that a limited amount of conflict about aggression may be healthy, for it enhances the appreciation of humor, especially of certain kinds of "transcendent humor that (according to experimental literature) are correlated with greater ego strength.