Gender differences in humor appreciation

Male andfemale undergraduates judged a randomized sequence ofhumorousjokes and Cartoons representing three humor types: sexual, hostile, and nonsense. Within sexual and hostile humor, the disparagement ofmales and females was balanced. Male subjects rated sexual humor funnier than did females; there was a parallel tendency for hostile humor. No gender difference was foundfor the enjoyment of nonsense humor. Male subjects enjoyed hostile humor more when females were victimized than when males were victimized. Contrary to earlier research findings, female subjects showed a reversed tendency: they enjoyed hostile humor more when males were victimized than when females were victimized. The present findings were considered consistent with predictions from the disposition theory of humor (Zillmann 1983). Unexpectedly, gender-specific enjoyment was found for jokes and Cartoons: while there was no appreciable difference for jokes, males enjoyed cartoons more than did females. Gender differences in humor appreciation have long been discussed by scholars such äs Freud (1982 [1905]), and in recent decades some empirical evidence regarding such speculations has been gathered. Gender differences seem to be related to types of humor: sexual and hostile, which are both tendentious, according to Freud. Within these humor types the gender of the person who is victimized in the joke may affect enjoyment. Nonsense humor is considered nontendentious, äs it does not feature victimization of any kind. Sexual humor, defined by a number of researchers äs humor in which reference is made to sexual organs or activities (see Stocking and Zillmann 1988), has been found to be appreciated more by men than by women (see Humor 1-3 (1988), 231-243. 0933-1719/88/0001-0231 $2.00 © Mouton de Gruyter, Berlin 232 N. Mundorf et al. for example Brodzinsky and Rubien 1976; Groch 1974; Terry and Ertel 1974). One explanation for this difference could be Freud's (1982 [1905]) view that sexual humor is the province of men who, preferably in the Company of other males, indulge in poking fun at females and their sexuality. For sexual humor that victimizes either females or males, the disposition theory of humor (Zillmann 1983) assumes a more positive attitude toward the own gender than toward the opposite one, and consequently it predicts an interaction between the respondent's and the humor-victim's gender. Male and female respondents could be expected to find humorous a sexual joke that victimizes the other gender but would be less likely to iaugh at a joke that makes fun of their own kind. However, factors other than gender may be relevant in creating a positive or negative disposition. According to disposition theory, the enjoyment of male ineptness by other males can be explained by the assumption that other males are considered Potential rivals and that their debasement serves the self-enhancement of the teller or of the audience of the joke. This may explain why some men are capable of deriving pleasure from the victimization of their own gender in sexual humor (Stocking and Zillmann 1988). Apparently, other males are seen äs competitors, and the display of their sexual ineptitudes or misfortunes may therefore create a considerable amount of enjoyment. An important reason for the reduced enjoyment of sexual humor by females might be that many women still internalize cultural sanctions against openly expressing enjoyment of sexual humor. In support of this view, Brodzinsky and Rubien (1976) found males to be more successful than females in creating funny captions for sexual humor, and Burns and Tyler (1976) observed that sexually conservative women deemed sexual humor less funny than nonsexual humor. Since male-oriented sexual humor frequently features material that is derogatory to women, it is conceivable that humor that is sexual, but not sexist, will encounter less resentment by females. Chapman and Gadfield (1976) found support for this assumption. In their investigation, females enjoyed sexist humor less than did males but matched the males in enjoyment of nonsexist sexual humor. However, a closer look at Chapman and Gadfield's study indicates problems with the operationalization of sexist versus nonsexist humor. Five out of twelve sexual cartoons were judged not to be sexist by the majority of coders. Of these, only three failed to produce a gender difference in humor appreciation. One of the three seems to fit the definition of sexual humor äs mentioned above only Gender differences 233 marginally. Instead it thrives on the disparagement of a homosexual couple ("But Mr. Noah, sir, you did say two by two! " said one young man, hand-in-hand with another, äs they are turned away from the ark). Another nonsexist joke was rated considerably funnier by males (M= 4.7) than by females (M=3.7), although the comparison did not reach statistical significance. Hostile humor thrives on victimization: someone is made the "butt" of the joke (Stocking and Zillmann 1988). In general, women seem to find hostile humor less funny than men do (Groch 1974; Landis and ROSS 1933; O'Connell 1960; Zillmann and Stocking 1976). A number of studies (such äs Brodzinsky and Rightmyer 1980) document greater use and more frequent generation of hostile humor by males. Women apparently are not encouraged to express delight over matters of dominance and cruelty, even when presented in comic form. Disposition theory (Zillmann 1983) would predict that females enjoy hostile humor more when a male is victimized, and males would laugh more readily at a female victim. The latter prediction is supported by research, but the former is not (Cantor 1976; Losco and Epstein 1975). Surprisingly, females were found not to side with their own kind when it came to enjoyment of hostile humor. They derived greater pleasure from humorous situations where women are dominated or ridiculed by men. McGhee and his coworkers (McGhee and Lloyd 1981; McGhee and Duffey 1983a, 1983b) noted this difference in young children. Zillmann and Cantor (1976) and Cantor (1976) explain these findings in terms of disposition theory and suggest that females in a male-dominated society are more positively disposed toward males than toward their own gender and hence are partial to hostile humor with female victims. For nontendentious, nonsense humor, Freudian theory predicts a difference in enjoyment by the two genders. Freud (1982 [1905]) speculated that men suffer the bürden of rationality — the urge towards logical coherence — more than women do, causing them to delight in an unchallenging, light-hearted bit of nonsense. Absurd humor could give the male a restful diversion from the rigors of rational thinking and would therefore be especially amusing to males. Research evidence indicates the opposite: women enjoy nontendentious nonsense humor more than men do (Groch 1974; Landis and ROSS 1933; O'Connell 1960). This difference again may be due to females feeling pressured to conform to stereotypes. Women may feel more comfortable laughing at absurdity than at belittling or off-color jokes and cartoons. 234 N. Mundorf et al. Developmental research (see McGhee 1971; Pien and Rothbart 1980; Shultz and Robbillard 1980) indicates that this preference emerges around preadolescence and seems to support the assumption that it has cultural rather than genetic roots. Only a few studies have explored gender-specific enjoyment of Cartoons äs compared to jokes. Malpass and Fitzpatrick (1959) and Groch (1974) reported that the form of Präsentation does not differentially affect male and female enjoyment of humor. However, males might be expected to enjoy cartoons (especially sexual and hostile ones) more than females do, because visual representations tend to convey and make especially explicit aspects of victimization to which women may object or which they may find offensive. Although there are research findings pertaining to gender-specific enjoyment of different types of humor and the victimization of the two genders in these types of humor, these factors have not been integrated into one experimental design. As only such an integrated design allows the direct comparisons of interest, the present study involved different types of humor (nonsense, sexual, and hostile), äs well äs the victimization of males and females within the two tendentious humor types (sexual and hostile). Male and female respondents rated the funniness of the randomly assembled exemplars (that is, each humor and victimization condition). In order to determine possible effects of the mode of humor presentation, an equal number of jokes and cartoons was selected to represent each type of humor and gender of victim.