The prediction of preference for sexual cartoons

Preferences for sexual cartoons were studied äs a function of cartoon category, three characteristics of preference raters, and eight rated properties oft he cartoons. Nonmetric factor analysis of preference ratings yielded five categories of sexual cartoons: Heterosexual Pairs, Varied Activities, Mild Themes, Moralizing, and Strange Themes. The Heterosexual Pairs and Varied Activities categories were rated highest in preference, the Mild Themes and Moralizing categories lowest. Although there was a strong correlation between rated creativity (fit, novelty, and originality combined) of the cartoons and preference across categories, it did not fully account for category differences in preference, nor did any other variable investigated. Males rated the cartoons higher in preference than didfemales. The gender difference was more pronounced for raters low in sense of humor and for cartoons high in rated tastelessness (vulgarity and explicitness combined). Sexually liberal females tended to dislike cartoons rated highly demeaning to women but to like cartoons rated low in demeaning to women. Sexually liberal members of both sexes tended to dislike cartoons rated highly demeaning to men. Humor theorists have long speculated about the dynamics of reactions to sexual humor. The modern era has also seen much empirical work devoted to the subject. Reasons are not hard to find. Mindess, et al. (1985: 51) expressed it well, albeit in florid prose: "The comedy of the sexual act, that panting moment of ecstacy so often followed by heartbreak; the irony of infatuation; and the melodrama of unrequited love — these are untapped natural resources from which laughter can be mined. " The purpose of this study was to extend past work on sexual humor Humor 8-4 (1995), 385-405. 0933-1719/95/0008-0385 © Walter de Gruyter 386 T. K Herzog and A. J. Hager by examining preferences for sexual cartoons äs a function of three kinds of predictor variables. The first is the type or category of sexual cartoon. Our working assumption was that meaningful categories within the domain of sexual cartoons could be found and that they would make a difference in accounting for preference reactions. The approach was to discover cartoon categories empirically by means of nonmetric factor analysis of preference ratings. We have used this approach successfully in two previous studies of humor preferences (Herzog and Bush in press; Herzog and Larwin 1988) and in numerous studies of environmental preferences (for example, Herzog and Bosley 1992). We are not alone in advocating factor-analytic approaches for categorizing humor Stimuli in general (McGhee, Ruch, and Hehl 1990) and sexual humor Stimuli in particular (Ruch and Hehl 1986, 1988). The second kind of predictor variable consists of characteristics of the humor perceiver, traditionally known äs individual-difference variables. Three such variables were included in this study. The most obvious candidate was gender of the preference raters. The greater liking of males for sexual humor is one of the most firmly established findings in the literature. See Mundorf, et al. (1988) for a recent review. The only controversy concerns whether the gender difference can be fully explained in terms of other individual-difference variables or properties of the humor Stimuli. Some have claimed or implied empirical success in this endeavor (for example, Chapman and Gadfield 1976; Love and Deckers 1989; Ruch and Hehl 1988), but others have tried and failed (Mundorf et al. 1988). The researchers cited have invoked several variables to explain the gender difference: sexual attitudes of the humor perceiver; sexual or sexist content of the humor Stimuli; victim gender in the humor Stimuli. Sexual liberalism, one kind of sexual attitude, was the second individual-difference variable included in this study. Ruch and Hehl (1988) found that a generally positive attitude toward sex predicted greater enjoyment of sexual humor and that a permissive attitude toward sex was positively related to enjoyment of nonsensical sexual humor. Thus, we expected positive relationships between sexual liberalism and preference for at least some categories of sexual cartoons. The third perceiver characteristic investigated was sense of humor. The measure was based on seif reports of how broadly a person perceives humor or engages in humor in a variety of life situations. We reasoned that people with a broad sense of humor were more likely to enjoy humor Preference for sexual cartoons 387 involving a sensitive area like sexuality. A six-item Likert-scale index of this form of sense of humor was a significant positive predictor of humor preference in a study of sick humor (Herzog and Bush in press). Similar measures have proved useful in studies of the moderating elfect of humor on stress (for example, Lefcourt and Martin 1986; Porterfield 1987). We included the Herzog-Bush scale in this study and expected generally positive relationships with sexual humor preference. The third kind of predictor variable consists of properties of the humor Stimulus. We had separate groups of participants, different from those who rated for preference, rate each cartoon for one of eight cartoon properties. The properties are of three types. One type involves how easy it is to understand the cartoon. Clearly, comprehension is relevant to humor preference, äs evidenced by the extensive literature on incongruity and its resolution (see Forabosco 1992, for a review). The sole predictor variable of this type was fit, a judgment of how well the cartoon caption seems to fit the Situation shown in the drawing. Fit was a positive predictor of preference in both of our previous humor studies (Herzog and Bush in press; Herzog and Larwin 1988). We expected similar results in this study. The second type of cartoon property involves the cartoon's capacity to arouse and maintain interest. Three variables of this type were assessed: novelty (newness, freshness), surprise (unexpectedness), and originality (defined tautologically äs itself). Surprise proved to be a positive predictor of preference for sick jokes (Herzog and Bush in press), and originality played a similar role in a study of cartoon preference (Herzog and Larwin 1988). Both surprise and originality were positive predictors of joke funniness in a study by Wicker, et al. (1981). Because these are the kinds of variables that grab and hold attention, we expected generally positive relationships with preference. Including all three variables in the same study also allowed us to assess whether or not they represent distinct constructs. The third type of cartoon property involves variables that do not fit neatly into the general categories of understanding or interest but which are nonetheless clearly relevant. Four such variables were assessed: vulgarity (tastelessness), explicitness (of sexual activity depicted), demeaning to women, and demeaning to men. Vulgarity seems obviously relevant to sexual humor. However, given our mixed results with this variable (Herzog and Bush in press; Herzog and Larwin 1988) and the fact that cogent arguments can be made for either positive or negative relationships 388 T. R. Herzog and A. J. Hager with preference for sexual humor, we had no prior predictions in this study. We feit the same way about explicitness, and we were unsure if it would be distinct from vulgarity. Nonetheless, explicitness has been implicated in liking for sexual humor by other researchers (Prerost 1984; Ruch and Hehl 1988), albeit in complex ways. A very similar variable, "sex," was linked to the gender difference in liking for sexual humor by Love and Deckers (1989). Inclusion of the demeaning variables allowed us to explore the role of sexism in liking for sexual humor with the advantage that we could make comparisons based on victim gender. Recall that several researchers have implicated sexism in explaining the gender difFerence in preference for sexual humor. In summary, the study extended past research on sexual humor in two ways. First, we investigated some predictor variables seldom or never used in such research: participant's sense of humor; fit and novelty of the humor Stimuli. Second, we examined a collection of predictor variables which have never been brought together in one study. This allowed us to examine predictor combinations seldom, if ever, assessed previously.