Header

UZH-Logo

Maintenance Infos

Gender differences in humor-related traits, humor appreciation, production, comprehension, (neural) responses, use, and correlates: A systematic review


Hofmann, Jennifer; Platt, Tracey; Lau, Chloe; Torres-Marín, Jorge (2020). Gender differences in humor-related traits, humor appreciation, production, comprehension, (neural) responses, use, and correlates: A systematic review. Current Psychology:Epub ahead of print.

Abstract

All available peer-reviewed literature on humor and gender differences (1977–2018) was screened and evaluated according to a priori defined QUALSYST criteria. The 77 papers surpassing a conservative quality criterion generated seven emergent themes around humor and gender differences. In short, men score higher in the aggressive humor style (M > F), while no other gender differences were consistently reported in humor-related traits (M = F). In the prediction of negative outcomes (stress, loneliness, depression), differential effects for humor in both genders are reported, but not consistently (M ≠ F). Gender differences exist for the appreciation of sexual humor (M > F), even in mixed target stimuli, and hostile humor (both genders appreciate opposite gender target stimuli more). Gender differences are absent in nonsense and neutral humor (M = F). For humor production, three samples showed no gender differences (M = F), while three samples suggested men are funnier (M > F) and one that women are funnier (M < F). No studies reporting differences in humor comprehension were identified (M = F). For humor use and communication, gender differences were found across methods (M ≠ F), yet, they depend on the context (e.g., workplace) and may thus resemble gender roles rather than “natural differences”. Moreover, few studies provide hard data on actual humor use and communication in different domains. When exposed to humor stimuli, different neural responses of men and women in prefrontal cortex activations (or selected parts) were found (M ≠ F). Also, self-report data suggest that both genders value a sense of humor in their partner (M = F), yet women typically value the humor production abilities more than humor receptivity, while for men, the woman’s receptivity of their own humor is more important than a woman’s humor production abilities, in line with gender stereotypes (M ≠ F). To conclude, much progress has been achieved in the past 15 years to overcome methodological flaws in early works on humor and gender differences. Importantly, attention should be paid to disentangling actual gender differences from gender role expectations and gender stereotypes. Methodologically, designs need to be checked for potential bias (i.e. self-reports may accentuate roles and stereotypes) and more hard data is needed to substantiate claims from self-report studies.

Abstract

All available peer-reviewed literature on humor and gender differences (1977–2018) was screened and evaluated according to a priori defined QUALSYST criteria. The 77 papers surpassing a conservative quality criterion generated seven emergent themes around humor and gender differences. In short, men score higher in the aggressive humor style (M > F), while no other gender differences were consistently reported in humor-related traits (M = F). In the prediction of negative outcomes (stress, loneliness, depression), differential effects for humor in both genders are reported, but not consistently (M ≠ F). Gender differences exist for the appreciation of sexual humor (M > F), even in mixed target stimuli, and hostile humor (both genders appreciate opposite gender target stimuli more). Gender differences are absent in nonsense and neutral humor (M = F). For humor production, three samples showed no gender differences (M = F), while three samples suggested men are funnier (M > F) and one that women are funnier (M < F). No studies reporting differences in humor comprehension were identified (M = F). For humor use and communication, gender differences were found across methods (M ≠ F), yet, they depend on the context (e.g., workplace) and may thus resemble gender roles rather than “natural differences”. Moreover, few studies provide hard data on actual humor use and communication in different domains. When exposed to humor stimuli, different neural responses of men and women in prefrontal cortex activations (or selected parts) were found (M ≠ F). Also, self-report data suggest that both genders value a sense of humor in their partner (M = F), yet women typically value the humor production abilities more than humor receptivity, while for men, the woman’s receptivity of their own humor is more important than a woman’s humor production abilities, in line with gender stereotypes (M ≠ F). To conclude, much progress has been achieved in the past 15 years to overcome methodological flaws in early works on humor and gender differences. Importantly, attention should be paid to disentangling actual gender differences from gender role expectations and gender stereotypes. Methodologically, designs need to be checked for potential bias (i.e. self-reports may accentuate roles and stereotypes) and more hard data is needed to substantiate claims from self-report studies.

Statistics

Citations

Dimensions.ai Metrics
3 citations in Web of Science®
1 citation in Scopus®
Google Scholar™

Altmetrics

Downloads

1 download since deposited on 19 Aug 2020
1 download since 12 months
Detailed statistics

Additional indexing

Item Type:Journal Article, refereed, original work
Communities & Collections:06 Faculty of Arts > Institute of Psychology
Dewey Decimal Classification:150 Psychology
Scopus Subject Areas:Social Sciences & Humanities > General Psychology
Uncontrolled Keywords:General Psychology
Language:English
Date:4 June 2020
Deposited On:19 Aug 2020 15:41
Last Modified:20 Aug 2020 20:00
Publisher:Springer
ISSN:1046-1310
Additional Information:This is a post-peer-review, pre-copyedit version of an article published in "Current Psychology". The final authenticated version is available online at: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-020-00724-1
OA Status:Closed
Publisher DOI:https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-020-00724-1

Download

Closed Access: Download allowed only for UZH members