Find a topic that relates to the material covered in chapter 3. Research the topic using at least three internet sites of content (not fluffy sites). These can include a video if used as an example.
After viewing the web sites, please take a moment to synthesize what you read/saw and then integrate it (along with the material from the text) into a quality post of what you read. When you write assume your reader has limited knowledge on the topic. Give the reader detail and background material so they can follow along, read and learn from what you are writing (i.e., explain things). It is OK to have fun and to be creative with this blog post.
Please make sure you use the terms, terminology and concepts you have learned so far in the class. It should be apparent from reading your post that you are a college student well underway in a course in psychology.
Please use spaces between your paragraphs to make your post easier to read - thanks in advance
Let me know if you have any questions.
In chapter three, our textbook theorizes three different theories in relation to understanding humor: Arousal, Incongruity, and Reversal Theory. The three theories differ in many ways, but there is one concept that all three theories generally agree with: arousal is positively associated with the emotional elements that are required in order to perceive a situation or joke as funny. Some of these arouses included elements of surprise, sex, violence, taboo topics, disgust, etc. According to the Arousal Theory, these elements are various stimulus properties that Daniel Berlyne refers to as collective variables. Berlyne considered these variables to be essential to perceiving something as humorous because in addition to attracting our attention to the joke, they are associated with increases in arousal in the brain and automatic nervous system. Although Berlyne based his theories on the inverted-U relationship that supported a curvilinear process to happen between physiological arousal and subjective pleasure, studies based on the Arousal theory led to and a more supported notion that automatic arousal is a linear process; the more arousal, the more enjoyment, and the funnier something is perceived to be.
According to the Incongruity Theory, it is suggested that in order for something to be humorous, incongruity is a crucial factor. In order for something to be considered funny, it must possess elements that are incongruous, surprising, peculiar, unusual, or different from what we would normally expect. Although the Incongruity Theory makes sense, the theory as a whole focuses mainly on the cognition involved in humor and fails to account for the social and emotional aspects of humor. Nevertheless, it is true that in most joke situations, a certain degree of joke comprehension and appreciation is essential in order to produce a sort of cognitive problem-solving task when trying to understand a joke. In a video posted on the Onion News Network (ONN), a congressman is seen giving a formal speech on how the CIA accidentally overthrew Costa Rica. The video shows an element in incongruity because although the topic being discussed is absurd and irrational, it appears to take place at a professional conference sometime in the 1950’s. There is also an element of surprise and unexpectedness being offered in this video because no one would expect a congressman to be discussing this issue and similarly, no one would expect a government operation, like the CIA to make such an interesting mistake. However, in order to understand the comical bit, the listener would need to have a certain amount of intellect in order to understand the absurdity of what is being discussed and in order to process the comedy involved in the responses from the congressman to the news reporters.
The Reversal Theory also agrees with the importance of arousal is association to what one finds to be funny. According to the Reversal Theory, one must be in a playful frame of mind in order to find something to be funny. This playful frame of mind is referred to as a paratelic state opposed to a more goal-driven and focused frame of mind known as the telic state. The Reversal Theory believes that individuals switch back and forth between these two mind sets throughout the day depending on what situation he or she is presented with. If a person hears a joke when he or she is not in the paratelic state, different arousal-increasing elements including surprise, sex, violence, taboo topics, and disgust, may help to put that person in the right mind frame that may contribute to the humorous experience. Online I found a website titled, “Cracked.” On this website I found a list of the seven most horrifying museums on Earth. These museums were not made up and therefore were not formulated specifically to be found funny. These museums are considered funny because they incorporate elements of surprise, since one would not expect a museum to have these types of exhibits, and disgust because some of the exhibits are extremely weird and address somewhat taboo topics. One museum is the Glore Psychiatric Museum, formally known as Missouri’s State Lunatic Asylum No. 2. Some of the exhibits set up within the Glore Psychiatric Museum include an image of a disturbing psychiatric medical practice done to mental patients in previous centuries that may appear to be inhumane while another exhibit shows a mosaic constructed from materials disgorged from a woman out of her stomach contents who suffered from a mental illness that caused her to engage in compulsive swallowing. Even more disturbing was a museum that was dedicated entirely to a woman's menstruation. This was disturbing for many reasons: it was constructed in the Maryland basement of a man named Harry Finely, this was Harry’s private collection of menstrual products and represented his life’s work, and even has a dress made entirely out of tampons and pads.
One way that all three of these theories may be strengthened is if each had supporting empirical studies that focused not only on the processes involved in staged jokes, but also studied the effects of humor in everyday social situations. The majority of humor that one experiences is said to stem from every day interactions that involves spontaneous humor. However, the supporting researches for each of these studies are conducted primarily in laboratories that have control and experimental groups being examined. One way to measure spontaneous humor is to watch the reaction and arousal of participants who are not expecting to hear to see a humorous situation. In a “serious” news broadcast, a woman who was sleeping with her child was interviewed after a man climbed in her window and tried to rape her. Luckily, the woman was not raped because her brother came into the bedroom and chased the intruder back out. However, although this topic is not to be considered funny in its normal context, the personality of the brother who was interviewed allowed for a “transfer of excitation.” A “transfer of excitation” is created when arousal from both positive and negative emotions are correlated to enhance to enjoyment of humor. In this broadcast titled on YouTube as “Bedroom intruder,” there are elements of sex, taboo, incongruity, and surprise.
http://www.theonion.com/video/ospan-classic-cia-accidentally-overthrows-costa-ri,18056/
http://www.cracked.com/article_18686_the-7-most-horrifying-museums-earth.html
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s-ih9kzrx04
The topic I am going to focus on from this chapter is the Reversal Theory, also specifically the two states of mind Apter mentions; Telic and Paratelic. The telic frame of mind is goal-directed state that underlies more serious activities, while the paratelic frame of mind consists of playful activities enjoyed at their own sake. The psychologist Apter suggests that we reverse back and forth between these two states of mind at different times throughout the day, thus this is why it is called the Reversal theory. Both of these states of mind within this theory have a clear purpose to accomplishing tasks throughout the day. The telic frame is for serious goals, such as completing some homework, and so when in this state one is serious-minded, plan-orientated, and thus successful in their task. The paratelic frame’s purpose is essentially a safety zone. Apter saw humor as a play. The purpose of the paratelic state is a “protective frame”, which is a “psychological safety zone” that we create to isolate ourselves from the serious concerns of the real world. Perhaps one can see the paratelic state as a defense mechanism used for coping or as a stress relief from difficult conditions.
A website called Transforming the Mind provides a great example of the telic and paratelic states of mind in everyday life. Take the example of a person riding a bicycle: the behavior is cycling; the goal is arriving at a certain place. If the cyclist needs to get to work on time, his behavior is chosen to meet the goal (arrival) that is in the foreground; the means of doing this is secondary. This is a telic state - the person is serious-minded, planning oriented and seeks to avoid arousal. The alternative experience is for the behavior to be in the foreground and the goal in the background - the person may simply like the feeling of the wind in his hair as he cycles down a hill; where he is going is secondary. This is a paratelic state - the person is playful, prefers to be spontaneous, is 'here and now' oriented (pursues goals only insofar as they add to the immediate pleasure of the situation) and prefers arousal to be high, since it is pleasurable. A certain behavior (cycling) may then be associated with contrasting motivational states (ends: goal achievement versus means: behavioral satisfaction), and the cyclist may switch between these states on different occasions or even several times during one cycle ride. This helps to explain why individuals do not seek to remain at a 'safe' medium level of arousal all the time, but engage in exploration, curiosity, risk-taking, play, art, religion and humor, sometimes because they lead to the achievement of a goal and sometimes because they are pleasurable in themselves. Neurosis or distorted thinking will however reduce this range and flexibility of experience due to fears of consequences.
My second source is from the website of the Reversal Theory Society. This source did an excellent job at explaining the two states of mind in a different way, how it relates to personality, and the concept of Bistability. In the text, the idea of humor as play is derived from a broader theory of motivation and personality called the Reversal theory. According to this site, this theory provides an analysis of the experience of everyday life, showing that a normal person will display different personalities at different times, meaning that he or she will see the world, and act in it, in different ways at different moments. These different types of personality (motivational styles) are each based on a fundamental motive/value, such as achievement, control or freedom. This implies that human personality has an essentially dynamic quality, and that inter-individual differences cannot be understood without reference to intra-individual differences. Our personalities have a very powerful; self-motivated way to them and that is why they can change throughout the day. The website goes on and mentions the concept of Bistablilty. This idea looks at how motivation involves movement between two alternative stable positions (reversal). According to the site, a system is bistable if it has two alternative stable positions towards which it tends to return when disturbed. A light switch would be a simple example. Reversal theory suggests that motivational systems are bistable, in the sense that they involve a movement (reversal) between opposite metamotivational states, such that one or the other is active at all time (like the two positions of a light switch) but only one is active at any particular time. This contrasts with the well-known idea of homeostasis in motivation theory, which suggests that for the motivational variables of interest to such theories (e.g. drive, tension, and arousal) there is a tendency to return to one single position (e.g. low drive or tension, moderate levels of arousal). Perhaps the ability to enjoy humor not only depends on whether your in a telic or paratelic frame of mind, but also what is motivating oneself.
Lastly, this source provided me with an excellent overview of the Reversal theory and the two states of mind, telic and paratelic. A blogger by the name of Michael Andrews walks through the theory from his perspective. I though it was very clear, concise, and easy to understand so I wanted to use it as source of clarity. Andrews explains, “The gulf between the goals of usability (just give me what I want, no more) and emotional design (this should be fun) can be understood through a concept known as "reversal theory". Developed by Michael Apter, the theory holds there are two modes in which we operate: telic, which concerns being future oriented and achieving goals, and paratelic, which concerns being in the "here and now." People switch between these modes, but our preferences in each mode are very different. Apter argues that in the telic mode, when people want to achieve goals, they want calm. If one offers something too exciting while people are focused on goals, they get overloaded. In the paratelic mode, people are bored when things are calm and serious. They aren't focused on achieving something, so they need distraction. Usability is about the telic, emotional design is about the paratelic. What is simple and reassuring to some is dull and uninspiring to others. Different users may experience the same design as either exciting or anxiety producing -- based on their goals. If user doesn't care about winning a game, for example, the game is exciting. If he or she is dead serious about winning, it is anxiety producing. If you are goal-focused, your ideal is to be relaxed, not indifferent. If you want to have fun, you want to be excited, not over-excited. There is a thin line between these states. I think this idea has some fascinating implications. Potentially, fun might be destructive to motivating someone pursuing a serious goal. One might need to rethink ideas that "learning should be fun" if you expect students to put in effort. The slacker student figures the only thing that matters is only the immediate experience of the moment; don't worry about getting it right or wrong -- homework isn't necessary. The serious student (think Lisa Simpson) might get stressed out by the fun.” I think this information ties into humor in that if humor is a play, a state of mind, then maybe the ability to enjoy a joke or have a fun time lies within a person’s personality. If a person has a more ‘telic’ nature (goal-focused), then enjoying humor and living in the moment might seem silly and purposeless.
Sources
http://www.trans4mind.com/transformation/transform4.2.htm
http://www.rtresearchgroups.org/site/?page_id=13
http://michaelandrews.blogspot.com/2005/06/telic-and-paratelic-design.html
The topic I choose was that of the Reversal Theory because I found it intriguing compared to the other two theories. Accodring to Apter the Reversal Theory is "a state of mind, a way of seeing and being, a special mental 'set' towards the world and one's actions in it" (pg. 75). Apter came up with two states of mind in which we reverse back and forth between these two states at different times throughout our daily lives. These states of mind are called telic (serious) and paratelic (playful). Telic state is more goal-directed, one is more concerned with attaining important goals, and achieving them secondary, whereas paratelic, one's goals are secondary importance, and the ongoing activities are one's own enjoyment. According to apter international the theory of personality, motivation and emotion focuses on the way people change during the course of everyday life, as stated in the textbook. Furthermore, the main idea of this theory is that it derives from the main idea on how we shape things in our environment to alternate how we see things in our everyday life. According to both apter international and reversal theory society this theory is devised of eight categories, but paired into four domains of experience: serious/playful, mastery/sympathy, other/self, and rebellious/controlling. In addition RTS site goes in depth on what each of these domains consist of. The serious (telic) state, focused on important goals, and planning ahead, versus the playful (paratelic) state, focused on immediate enjoyment, and acting spontaneously. The conforming (conformist) state, focused on obligations and the maintenance of rules and routines, versus the challenging (negativistic) style, a challenging state which is focused on personal freedom. The mastery state, focused on power, control and dominance, versus the sympathy state, focused on kindness, caring and harmony. The self-oriented (autic) state, focused on one’s own needs, versus the other-oriented (alloic) state, focused on the needs of others. These four pairs combine with one another in a variety of way at different times to give rise to the full range of human behaviors and emotions. Furthermore, according to the last website the reversal theory perspective is that an individual is continually in flux, which means basically the flow of going back and forth between different states.
http://www.rtresearchgroups.org/site/?page_id=27
http://www.apterinternational.com/reversal_theory
http://www.raco.cat/index.php/AnuarioPsicologia/article/viewFile/64605/88631
Before reading this chapter, I have always wondered why I find some things more humorous than others in certain situations. That is why I chose to do the reversal theory, in congruence with the telic and paratelic states. Since I am a senior, I find myself more in a telic state of mind, which consists of being future oriented and is meant for achieving goals. In the telic state, high arousal is unpleasant and low arousal such as relaxation is preferred. For example, if you are trying to do your homework or write a paper, loud behavior is aversive and low arousal is preferred. The paratelic state is defined as high arousal being enjoyable and low arousal boring. If you were wanting to escape the telic state, you would transfer over to the paratelic state, which is also known as a playful frame of mind. It is easy to transfer, because you switch between these states throughout the day. This is also why it is called the reversal theory.
When relating the reversal theory with sports, it is easy to use telic and paratelic states. Usually most people who are involved in sports take part in the paratelic state of mind, especially thrill seekers such as sky divers. People who are comfortable in the telic state of mind may find these thrill seeking adventures aversive. The Skydiving Musings blog describes why thrill seekers such as skydivers and other thrill seekers do what they do for fun. Obviously you have to be in a paratelic state to attempt such an act, but this blog goes further in describing the playful state of mind, the switching of metamotivational states, and the protective state of mind. The blogger suggests that from personal experience you can actually switch from state to state even if you are constantly in the paratelic state such as skydiving. The blogger also suggests that you don’t experience a moment of maximum danger; your danger level peaks on multiple occasions throughout the jump. It seems as though the reversal theory and the paratelic state of mind coincides with the term self-reinforcement (though I am aware that the term was not in this chapter, or maybe not even in this book.)
When thinking of arousal, most people tend to think of thrill seeking adventures, going to parties, concerts, etc. But what most people may not think of is the other type of arousal that involves your everyday life, such as taking risks with money. Suze Orman, the CNBC host of the Suze Orman Show, explains on the video clip of the four money mistakes that people make with money. Though they may be mistakes, they are also risks because they are risking their own personal savings. The risks in the clip are co-signing a loan, listing a minor as a beneficiary, using credit a month before applying for a loan, and not having gap insurance for your automobile. The people who make these mistakes are most likely in the telic state of mind because they were trying to be future oriented. They could have also been in the paratelic state of mind too, for they may be seeking excitement when making a purchase or an investment. Again, this shows how you can switch from states of mind throughout the day.
Another unusual example of arousal is fear. Again, most people may not think of fear as being a type of arousal but when you put it into context it actually is. In the article, “Thrill Seekers Thrive On Scary” Frank Farley, former president of the APA, calls people who seek thrill type ‘T’ personalities. He claims that these people thrive on the intensity of activities most people would not choose to do. According to Farley, some people find these sensations pleasurable. If these people find these sensations merely pleasurable, then they would have to be in the paratelic state of mind. Though I agree with Farley, I also believe that some of these people who enjoy fear and that type of arousal also switch to a telic state of mind after experiencing fear. This would be plausible because they might want to experience a form of relaxation, which is preferred in the telic state.
Between the telic and the paratelic state, there is definitely a thin line. It is easy to switch between the two and switch back, hence the reversal theory again. These two states of mind relate to our personalities directly, especially being the college students as we all are.
http://shut-up-and-jump.blogspot.com/2008/01/reversal-theory-skydiving.html
http://www.betterdaystv.net/play.php?vid=19803
http://www.medicinenet.com/script/main/art.asp?articlekey=51891
An interesting topic from Chapter 3 to me was the link between anxiety and humor. In 1968, a psychologist named Arthur Shurcliff conducted an experiment at Cornell University, where male students were randomly put into one of three groups asked to perform a task involving a rat that varied on the level of anxiety it would produce. The participants could see two cages, each containing a rat, and a third cage that was facing the opposite direction, prohibiting them from seeing the rat inside, which was in fact a rubber toy rat. The low anxiety group was asked to hold the rat, and that it was very calm and the experimenter did not anticipate any problems while the participant was doing this. The second moderate level group saw two viles filled with tomato juice, which they were told were blood, and they were asked to take a syringe and extract blood from the third rat, but were also told that the rate was calm and that this wouldn’t be a problem for them to do this. The high anxiety group was also asked to extract blood from the third rat, but was told that it would be difficult and the rat might try and bite, and it could bite through the plastic gloves the participants wore. The experiment ended when the participant reached into the cage and pulled out a fake rat and those who participated filled out questionnaires about their level of anxiety, how humorous they found the situation, and how surprised they were. Shurcliff found that in his experiment that as anxiety rose, so did how high the participants rated how humorous they found the situation.
This concept might be why shows that are based around practical jokes are popular, and why we pull our own pranks on our friends. The TV show Punked was based around Ashton Kutcher setting up these elaborate pranks on celebrities, watching them get really worried or start freaking out, and then Ashton would reveal that it was all a joke. The more worked up these people got, the funnier the prank ended up being because it was all just for fun and no one actually got hurt.
The study done by Shurcliff and practical jokes correspond to the Arousal theory that was discussed in this chapter. At the time this study was conducted, this theory held a lot more weight in the psychology of humor than it does by what seems to be the majority of the class, and in the 1960’s and 70’s were studied by many. According to arousal theories, laughter is the product of built up tension and energy. Too little or too much arousal creates an unpleasant level. This is a theory not only used when studying humor, but also other topics in psychology. For example, related to the Arousal theory is the Yerkes-Dodson law. This is a law pertaining to performance and arousal, and tasks that are more difficult or demanding may need less arousal, while tasks that are easier and sometimes longer may require more arousal to keep and individual motivated. With too much, or too little arousal, a person’s performance may suffer. This could also be related to humor. Robert Priest, a psychologist from West Point came up with the Moderate Intergroup Conflict Humor theory was states for people to create jokes, they must experience some tension, but not too much, it has to be at a moderate level. If the tension is too high, the joke will just frustrate the listener instead of them finding it humorous. An example he gave of this were various sexist jokes that have been made throughout the years, but during the feminist movement, these sort of jokes were no longer socially acceptable to make. Today it might be okay to playfully make a joke about the opposite sex, but during that time it was not. This is similar to how after some events, like a death, or national disaster, people don’t start right in with jokes about it. After the events that took place on September 11th, many comedians or comedy clubs took a break from telling jokes that might even resemble anything that could be tied in some way to this disaster.
http://psycnet.apa.org.proxy.lib.uni.edu/journals/psp/8/4p1/360.pdf
http://science.jrank.org/pages/9714/Humor-Release-or-Relief-Theory.html
http://www.iep.utm.edu/humor/#SH2b
The reversal theory was the easiest for me to relate to and agree with in chapter three. There were several ideas from this theory that I support it they were interesting for me to read about. Like many of the students have already said, the paratelic and telic states of mind was the most interesting and new information that I learned about from the reversal theory. Another topic from this theory that I enjoyed reading about was the social context that Wyer and Collins discussed. I chose to gather more information about how the social context ties into humor and the reversal theory.
The first article that I researched for my topic discussed the social beneifits of laughter. These benefits apply to people of all ages, including young children. This article focused mainly on the social benefits for children who experience humor. The article describes humor as a social skill that will help children succeed in their work world as well as interpersonal relationships. An interesting fact this article mentioned was that children who experience more humor with friends than other children are more likely to participate in activities as well as being 'judged' by peers as a sociable person. Another interesting idea within this article is that humor provides children with a socially acceptable way of expressing anger. This idea ties into our text because Wyer and Collins empasized that humor is a form of social communication and that it can occur in almost all social settings. Also, the evaluation of the reversal theory in our text discusses how humor is a coping method for stress. This idea stated humor may make it possible for stressful situations (expressing anger) to be experienced as challenges to be approached in a playful way rahter than serious threats.
In the next article I researched, I found a list of social benefits that also supported the social concept that the reversal theory supports. This article described humor as a playful communication that strengthens our relationships by triggering postive emotions. Furthermore, our relationships are streghthened when we laugh with one another because a postive bond is created in which this bond can protect us all from stress, anxiety, disagreements, and more. As I stated before, the reversal theory supports the idea that the social conext of humor not only opens doors for communication and relationship building, but gives us a way to avoid stress and manage our anger.
The last article I used in my research described the social concept of humor as 'contagious.' An interesting fact within this article is that we laugh 30 times more when we are with other people than when we are alone. A 2005 study published in the Quartley Review of Biology stated that most people do not see laughter as a form of self expression, rather, the purpose of laughter is to trigger positive feelings in other people and to use humor as a way to ease tension and create a relaxed setting. This particular research even described a school in Tanzania in 1962 that experienced contagious laughing. What began with three school girls laughing uncontrollably eventually lead to 2/3 experiencing the same 'symptoms.' The school eventually had to close and the contagiono of laughter, as they call it, spread throughout Tanzania and neighboring Uganda. This story demonstrates the effects of seeing others laughing and it causes a social interaction that can spread for miles!
http://www.laughterremedy.com/article_pdfs/Developmental%20benefits.pdf
http://helpguide.org/life/humor_laughter_health.htm
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,189755,00.html
Like I expressed in my reading activity comment, the reversal theory is by far my favorite theory of humor to date. I also like the idea of incongruity in humor and since the majority of the comments thus far have been about the reversal theory, I chose to look into the incongruity theory.
I actually find incongruous humor to be very funny and agree with the book that the more unexpected or surprising the “punch line” is, the funnier I perceive the joke. I would have to say this also goes for nearly any situation. For example, most of us agree that people getting hurt is somewhat funny if not hysterical. If this action, say the ever so popular slipping on a banana peel scenario was very unexpected, I would absolutely laugh. I also laugh at unexpected things that aren’t jokes. For instance, if my roommate and I are doing homework and not really talking, one of us will just say something completely random and irrelevant to anything in the situation and just sit there and laugh until we cannot breathe.
I also think things that are what as one of my websites describes as “out of place” funny as well. For example, we all have seen those signs/billboards/etc. that “fail” because they are incongruous but for some reason, we find them funny. After reading this chapter though, I realize that it is the incongruity itself that I find funny rather than finding it funny that somebody actually placed a sign where they did or really made a sign say something outrageous.
As another website implies, I agree that incongruous humor has its place and time. There are some days where incongruous, smart ass comments really perturb me and are really annoying. It may not mean that I don’t think that the joke or situation wasn’t funny, I just didn’t feel it was funny at the time. I guess this sort of relates to the concept of telic and paratelic states as described in the reversal theory. Incongruous humor is more funny to me when I am in a paratelic state, but when I am concentrating (telic state) or not necessarily in the best mood I just may give the jokester a dirty look or just ignore them altogether.
Apparently, in 2002 the world’s funniest joke was this:
“Two hunters are out in the woods when one of them collapses. He doesn’t seem to be breathing and his eyes are glazed. The other guy whips out his phone and calls the emergency services. He gasps: ‘My friend is dead! What can I do?’ The operator says: ‘Calm down, I can help. First, let’s make sure he’s dead.’ There is a silence, then a shot is heard. Back on the phone, the guy says: ‘OK, now what?’”
This joke is certainly incongruous in nature, but to me, not very funny at all. I guess it is sort of ironic, and certainly incongruous that this is the funniest joke, but not really funny at all! (at least to me).
Overall, I believe incongruity is definitely a cause of humor, but at the same time, it does not explain all humor.
http://www.richardwiseman.com/LaughLab/incon.html
http://www.helium.com/items/331326-the-incongruity-theory-and-its-effect-on-humor
http://news.scotsman.com/funniestjokes/The-worlds-funniest-joke.2366108.jp
http://www.helium.com/items/329026-what-makes-something-funny?page=2
http://www.languagefoundry.co.uk/comedy.html
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/38648888/ns/health-behavior/
In reading the chapters and so far in what I’ve learned in this class humor is fueled by a couple main points. Incongruency and aggression. I’ve been wondering if that is really all there is to humor, so in researching for this assignment I simply googled “what makes things funny?” In return, I received a number of other components of funny.
In the first chapter, we went over things like the different forms of humor, and while these are obviously very important parts of humor, they don’t explain what makes things funny. However the structure was one thing that was mentioned to be important. Funny stories and jokes need to have conflict, build tension and release the tension in a punch line. I can also see this happening in most forms of humor, in a very simple way. Of course part of structure is the delivery of the punch line. This is a commonly easy way to ruin a joke, but when done right, certainly adds to the humor, in a very essential way. This reflects both social and cognitive theories. Socially, delivery is everything, because you cannot make people laugh if there is no one around to laugh, and you also are most likely not going to make them laugh if the delivery of the joke is completely off. Cognitively, structure adds to the thinking process of understanding the joke.
One thing important to structure is an element of surprise. This can happen in that the punch line provides an incongruent situation, and/or is in contrast with a ‘social norm.’ which was another element discuss. That humor is a ‘benign violation of the way the world ought to be.’ One example was a Superbowl commercial in which Betty White gets tackled. Why is this funny? Because old ladies shouldn’t be tackled. This incongruent situation had all the elements mentioned so far. The conflict of the football game, and the tension and its release were in a player tackling another player, who happened to be an old lady. This surprising ending made the commercial funny.
A few components that were deemed necessary were, to me what makes some humor aggressive. The idea that jokes are all simple truths, and a part of our need to feel intelligent. This is where aggressive humor would take shots at people deemed ‘less intelligent.’ The idea introduced from a young age that people put others down and laugh at them to make themselves feel better. Which I think is a small part of all aggressive humor. Watching someone fall is funny, because they’re not supposed to fall, and the person laughing most likely didn’t fall. The person that fell could be laughing at how silly it was of them to fall. I feel like a lot of this is a part of a need to feel intelligent or a method of self-reinforcement, of what good people we are.
There are a lot of components of humor, and I think that I found only some of them, but I think it would be interesting to compile a huge list of every component that goes into what is funny, and why.
The book and the Reversal Theory Society’s website help explain the Reversal Theory. In simplest terms, all of us have two mind states, telic and paratelic . The former, telic is your state of mind when you are “goal orientated” and serious. This is obvious in our everyday life. We have tests or papers due weekly, we are constantly pushing ourselves in activities. The website and book states that when someone’s mind set is telic, too much arousal leads to stress or annoyance, thus the person purposes avoids playful arousal. However, low arousal could be relaxing. Suggesting, why must of us enjoy watching tv or a movie after a long day at school. Luckily for us, we do not always have to stay in this high tension and serious state. The website for the Reversal Theory Society states that these human states of mind are very fluid. From day to day, moment to moment, we can change of mind set. In a paratelic or playful mind set, we enjoy arousal, in fact we seek it. Audience having a paratelic state of mind is very beneficial for comedians to land his or hers jokes. Furthermore, it is my opinion that no one can really sit through and enjoy movies that lack plots, like “Stepbrothers” or “Anchorman”, without being in a paratelic state of mind.
The reversal theory emphasizes that exciting or high arousal activities are pleasing to a paratelic mindset and low levels can be relaxing in telic. Similarity to this idea, arousal theory proposed by Berlyne suggests that everyone is seeking a “optimal level of arousal”. This level is different for everyone. There are different elements, or collective variable that can make a “stimulus” or joke pleasing to different people., Berlyne proposed that these collective variables are factors such as the “novelty, level of surprise, complexity because they require the individual to perceive various elements of a stimulus together in order to compare and contrast them”. Like the book suggests about telic and paratelic states of mind, in the arousal theory, Berlyne proposed that stimulus are pleasing if it gives a boost to our arousal, “arousal boost mechanism”. Or is an “arousal jag mechanism”, which is a joke or stimulation reduces arousal level that is too high.
The last theory to cover which is mentioned in the text is the incongruity theory. This, as stated in the book focuses on the cognition of a joke or situation, particularly when the punch line is inconsistent with what is expected. It is a disorganization of our senses and thus surprises us into laughter or enjoyment. With the exception of natural situation, the website “The incongruity theory and its effect on humor” suggests we might be frustrated by an incongruity with in a joke, like a prank. Going back to telic and paratelic mind states of the reversal theory, we can all think of situations when we were in conflicting states with someone. We had a joke or did a prank only to have it fail when the others were not in a telic or serious state of mind. Thus as the website suggests it takes skill of the joke teller to produce a positive outcome for the audience. Finally, I found it interesting that like the book, many websites also makes a parallel between our appeal for art, music and our appeal for humor. Different collective variables, moods, and environment cues all affect the way we are delighted.
http://www.helium.com/items/331326-the-incongruity-theory-and-its-effect-on-humor
http://www.rtresearchgroups.org/site/
http://www.trans4mind.com/transformation/transform4.2htm
One of the areas in the chapter that interests me the most was the Reversal Theory, specifically the idea of being in telic or paratelic states. The researcher, Apter says that the telic state is one that is serious and goal-oriented, more future driven. The paratelic state is a playful, relaxed, present oriented frame of mind. His theory says that people switch between these two states of mind multiple times a day. In order to experience humor we need to be in the paratelic state of mind. Arousal plays a big role in how one experiences humor, depending on your state of mind. “In the telic state, high arousal is unpleasant (anxiety) and low arousal is preferred (relaxation), whereas in the paratelic state, low arousal is unpleasant (boredom) and high arousal is enjoyable (excitement).” Reading about these two states of mind made me wonder, do people with type A personalities experience less humor or laugh less often than those with type B personalities? One could hypothesize that type A people are much more goal-oriented and looking toward their future. If this is the case, according to reversal theory they would be in the telic state more often than the paratelic state. In the book, it is discussed how high arousal in the telic state is unpleasant. But we also learn that arousal, in general, can lead to increases in the enjoyment of humor. Therefore, you could say those in a telic state are trying to keep their arousal low and aren’t as open to enjoying humor.
My first website helps me describe some of the characteristics of both type A and type B personalities. Type A personalities are very driven, competitive, busy, work-oriented multi-taskers. Type B personalities are often calmer, easy-going and enjoy more free time activities. My second website is actually a research article (PDF) produced by Apter, where we goes more in depth about his reversal theory. He states that the telic and paratelic states are a “bistable pair of opposite but complementary” states. He lists three factors that encourage reversal between the two states. The first are contingent factors. These are certain situations that occur in your life and can determine your state of mind. Stressful, anxiety ridden situations are likely to put you in a telic state. The second factor is frustration. Many type A personalities might experience more frustration than others. Examples could come from them not meeting goals they had set or simply form being stuck in traffic. With an ‘on-the-go’ type A, waiting could be extremely frustrating. Finally, the third factor is called satiation. This basically says that the reversal process is a process that occurs without us thinking about it. If we are in one state (paratelic or telic) too long, our brains will automatically reverse to the other state. Apter also goes on to explain how people can be telic or paratelic dominant, meaning that they are more likely to experience one state over the other at any given time. One website describes both telic dominance and paratelic dominance as not ideal mind sets. The telic dominant is seen as fearing loss of control over their life and the paratelic dominant is seen as not having goals or vision for life. Being able to successfully switch between mindsets is healthier for your personality and body. It might be possible that someone who is telic dominant is too focused on controlling their lives to experience enjoyment of humor. My hypothesis of whether those with type A personalities experience less humor or laugh less may not be something that could actually be tested. I just thought it was an interesting concept to think about when considering how people experience humor. If one actually does have to be in the paratelic, playful state to experience humor, than those people who are not as often in that state of mind may experience less humor. I did find a few research articles that discussed personality traits and telic or paratelic states of mind, but I was unable to read any of the full articles. So I’m not sure of any hard evidence to back up the relationship between these two concepts, but I found it to be an interesting subject to research. If we discuss personality and humor later on, I think reversal theory could help explain some of those concepts.
http://stresscourse.tripod.com/id166.html
http://www.raco.cat/index.php/AnuarioPsicologia/article/viewFile/64605/88631
http://www.trans4mind.com/transformation/transform5.4.htm
While reading chapter 3 I became very interested in the terms telic and paratelic in regards to the two different states of minds. These two terms come from the reversal theory of humor. The chapter also discussed two other theories including the arousal and incongruity theory. Michael Apter proposed the reversal theory of humor. He hypothesized that our mind flips between these two states of mind. The telic state is very goal oriented and focuses more on serious activities. The paratelic state refers to the more playful side and focuses on what’s happening in the present time. This topic relates directly to chapter 3 because it is a topic that is discussed on page 76. The reason I liked this topic was because I could easily relate it to my life. The idea that depending on the state of mind you are in has an effect on whether something is humorous or not.
The articles agreed upon the relationship between arousal and emotions. When in the telic state high arousal is consistent with anxiety; low arousal is consistent with relaxation. While in the paratelic state, a high arousal is correlated with excitement and with a low arousal it is correlated with boredom.
The first article I found described the term state of mind as something that can change quickly, and can last for various amounts of time. They can also be affected by environmental cues, interpersonal transactions, cognitive processes, biological changes and motivation. The article uses the example of cycling to describe the process. The clear behavior is riding the bicycle and the goal is arriving somewhere. The behavior of getting to the goal is the telic state because it is the more serious goal-oriented state of mind. Another example would be a student doing their homework. A student who remains in the telic state the entire duration has the goal of completing their homework and the behavior required is whatever is necessary to complete the homework. On the flip side a cyclist who is in the paratelic state would generally be finding enjoyment and be somewhat spontaneous about the path they are going to take. In regards to a student doing homework in the paratelic state would take them a little bit longer. They may be easily distracted or may just not worry about getting the homework completed as soon as possible.
The second website comes from the Reversal Theory training site. This site changes the terms slightly. The telic state is referred as the serious state and the paratelic state is called the playful state. They also include a few other states including the self-other (autic-alloic) and the rebellious (negativistic). The sites major goal is the help people understand their emotions and instead of emotions happening to “us” we can actually create reversals to create new emotions.
The video clip demonstrates one example how a flip between the two states of mind can happen in an instant. When I saw this video I knew I should include it because it clearly demonstrates how you can be happy and in the paratelic state but quickly flip to the telic state.
After doing more research on the telic and paratelic states of mind, I do feel like I now better understand the theory and feel like I can apply it in my daily life a little easier. The sites were difficult to find but overall I was glad I choose this topic.
http://www.trans4mind.com/transformation/transform4.2.htm
http://typetalk.com/blog/learn-the-theory/
http://typetalk.com/blog/reversal-theory-training/training-video-cell-phones/
The area that I choose to do more research on was the paratelic and telic state that is discussed in the reversal theory. The reversal theory describes humor as a playful non serious activity. Play is further defined as a state of mind, a way of seeing and being, a special mental set toward the world and ones actions in it. The paratelic state is perceived as the playful, present-orientated, high-arousal mind set while the telic state is focused on the future, goal oriented and serious.
According to the book online, Progress in Reversal Theory, the object that is under examination in reversal theory is our consciousness. Depending on what mood we are in is how we experience actions. For example if we are in a bad mood we may not enjoy light hearted jokes from our friends. The telic and paratelic states are self-perception determined and differ in three areas: the ways in which one experiences goals, times and intensity of experience. When in the telic state you react to behavior while in the paratelic state you initiate behavior. Reversal theories believe that both states are necessary for healthy living. If we are unable to enjoy being relaxed and having a good time we can feel isolated and if we are incapable of being serious it’s difficult to stay out of trouble or hold a job.
When initially reading about the paratelic and telic state I wondered if it was possible to get stuck in one state or the other, I then found an article regarding the reversal theory and clinical implications where I discovered that there are numerous problems that can arise regarding the paratelic and telic states. The reversal theory proposes five fundamental psychopathologies. One is inhibited reversal. Telic dominated people are described as having the difficulty to enjoy situations that produce immediate gratification such as going to a party or hanging out with friends on the other hand people who are paratelic dominate are only interested in immediate gratification and have trouble reaching goals and accomplishments. The second psychopathology is inappropriate reversal which occurs when an individual has the tendency to switch at inappropriate times such as feeling anxious when you should feel excited. Another clinical implication of telic and paratelic states is functionally inappropriate strategies. This occurs when an individual uses strategies that will not allow one to be satisfied with the mode for example in the telic mode one may plan a trip down to the t but this may lead to not enjoying opportunities that arise spontaneously. Similarly temporarily inappropriate strategies are when one uses strategies to meet immediate attainments or avoid immediate dissatisfactions. This can become a problem when using short term avoidant strategies when dealing with long term problems. The last psychopathology that is mentioned is socially inappropriate strategies. This occurs when people use strategies that may cause them satisfaction but is not enjoyable for others. For example a person who is more of a telic mode may be a perfectionist and impose this on their children.
I found these psychopathologies to be interesting although they did not directly relate to humor they do relate to the different mind sets that were discussed in this chapter. The paratelic state accounts for the tendentious aspects of humor in terms of arousal boosting while the telic state can account for why some people find things funny and others don’t or why you may find something not enjoyable such as a movie one day but find the same movie funny a different day.
http://www.raco.cat/index.php/AnuarioPsicologia/article/viewFile/64619/88645
http://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=RtVjh1Pre88C&oi=fnd&pg=PR5&dq=telic+and+paratelic+state+clinical+implications&ots=IZz0AvkwXs&sig=NhcDXnwL-DDdthWtfvqFgHGHdbU#v=onepage&q=telic%20and%20paratelic%20state%20clinical%20implications&f=false
I decided to investigate incongruity theory, more specifically the two stage, "Incongruity Resolution Model" proposed by Suls (1972). Our text explains that when we hear the setup to a joke we make a prediction about what the ending will be. This is the first stage. If the ending to the joke is the same as our prediction we do not find the joke funny. If the ending is unexpected however, we continue on to stage two and try to discover a rule which would explain the unexpected incongruity. If we do not find the rule we are merely 'puzzled.' If we are able to find a rule to explain the incongruity however laughter ensues. The text argues that this view is problematic because humor is explained as the resolution of incongruity rather "than from the ongoing presence of an incongruity" (p.65).
Although cognitive theories of humor seem more popular than most theories like the ones presented in this chapter pose a couple of problems and these served as the source of my webs earch.
First, is it the presence or removal of incongruity that creates humor? One argument presented in the text was that incongruity is expected in humor, and many times there is an explicit verbal setup to jokes that removes all doubt. This would suggest that the presence of incongruity alone is insufficient for humor because we already expect the incongruity, it's present prior to the humor so it can't be the source. I found one good example of 'getting' the punch-line before it comes, and I think the joke is funnier for it (this idea was also discussed in the text). About 40 seconds in to the youtube clip posted at the end the comedian tells a joke about mothers always telling their kids to 'stand up straight.' With this setup he brings up the idea that this probably relates to evolution. His actual punch-line involves explicitly stating that this may have been 'the driving force behind evolution', but knowing that the jokes involve science you can get there WAY before he does.
Similarly I watched a family guy clip where after a series of "Oh no!" exclamations the kool-aid guy breaks through a wall and says "Oh YEAH!" before slowly walking back out. The incongruity is created because there is no reason for someone to say "Oh yeah!" given the fact that someone (Peter I think) has been sentenced to a jail term of some kind. However, this incongruity alone is insufficient, it is only by recognizing that the big pitcher is 'the kool-aid guy' and he always says 'oh yeah!' Does this make the situation congruent? I don't think so. It still makes no sense that the kool-aid guy would bust into a random room and shout his catch phrase. I really don't see how incongruity could be resolved in this situation. I feel like it only makes the situation even MORE incongruent (and thus more funny) when you realize how out of it the kool-aid guy must be to make an appearance such as this. So it would be unfunny if you did not know who the kool-aid guy was, or what his catch phrase is. Knowing this does not make the scene congruent it either makes it MORE incongruent, in this way humor must be a 'threshold of incongruence' (though this must not be the case b/c you can imagine complete chaos which would be as incongruent as you can get and that would not necessarily be funny), or it must be recognition of a particular type of incongruence. I don't see how understanding the joke necessarily means that the original ambiguity is resolved or eliminated from the equation.
Second, one big problem with incongruity theories is that they only explain how a joke is funny, they don't explain the emotional response we have after we 'discover' why something is funny. The text highlights this idea by quoting Suls (1983) as saying that cognitive theories explain 'humor comprehension but not humor appreciation.' I found a wonderful column article online that discusses the relationship between the cognitive appraisal of humor and the emotion of mirth described in the text. Throughout the text have been references to the evolutionary determinants of humor. Several hypothesis have been proposed including that laughter was a way to get rid of excess aggression after battle, or communicate playfulness to other members of the species.
This article discussed an evolutionary 'false alarm' theory of humor. Basically it's better to error on the side of caution when a potential threat is detected. This means a lot of false alarms are raised and laughter has developed out of this secondary call signaling the false alarm. According to this theory perception of an incongruity raises the alarm that a threat is possible which has the immediate affect of mobilizing bodily resources like the 'fight or flight' mode and other emotions like fear, anxiety, etc. This explains why, regarding humor, there is such a close line between cognitive appraisal and the emotional experience of mirth. Specifically the article explains that positive emotions are caused when the cognitive appraisal of incongruity "switches off" the alarm. This could also closely relate to the paratelic state discussed in the reversal theory but is to much to include in this post.
This helps explain to me also how recognition of appraisal can be thought of as 'resolving' incongruity which I discussed above as a problem. Perhaps what is 'resolved' is the incongruity which might have lead to the fight or flight mode. What is maintained is the cognitive incongruity of the situation. The text specifically states that at step two of the model, if a rule is not found puzzlement remains. The 'false alarm' was not able to be successfully sent and thus the person remains in a state of either heightened attention or wonder (still trying to find out whether the alarm is real or not) both the emotional incongruity and the cognitive incongruity remain. Maybe it's only by 'resolving' the emotional incongruity that allows for the expression of mirth.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vn8uzB0eypk
http://www.sutherlandsurvey.com/Columns_Papers/False%20Alarm%20Theory%20-%20How%20Humorous%20Ads%20Work.pdf
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N3NbpJyGz6c
Throughout the theories, we have read many mentions of anxiety in relation to laughter. I decided to try and find different ideas of the connections between anxiety and laughter. As I was looking for this information I came across the topic of nervous laughter. So in the true spirit of the web divergence activity, I diverged.
It is obvious when we see or hear nervous laughter. It can be uncomfortable for the listener. For me, like when I watched the video I posted, I felt bad for the girl giving the speech. If you don’t watch the video, it is a girl giving a high school graduation speech. It is obvious that she is very nervous and she keeps laughing at inappropriate times. I think most of us have at one time or another displayed nervous laughter. Nervous laughter is a certain type of conscious defense mechanism, but according to the information I’ve found, it is not effective. I would think this is contradictory to the previous information I have found that says even forced laugher can be a stress reliever.
Although many of the theories in the text say that laughter is a release of built up anxiety or tension, another consequence is that nervous laughter increases anxiety when in a stressful or embarrassing situation. One explanation of laughter is that it is a result of functions in the brain. So why we laugh at inappropriate times might be the result of a function of the brain that we cannot actively control. An experiment using electrodes to stimulate a certain region of the brain found that stimulation produced smiles and when the stimulation was increased, laughter was produced. A nerve miscommunication may be the cause of some inappropriate laughter but nervous laughter is often forced or actively (consciously) produced.
It is said that nervous laughter comes from the anxiety. Most laughter is seen as uncontrollable but when it comes to nervous laughter has been described as a behavior. Over time, it can become a sort of habit.
With that being said, if the laughter about an anxious or embarrassing experience can be made into a humorous story, you can laugh with your audience in an appropriate setting and release some tension about the situation. This is commonly seen in professional comic routines.
Since nervous laughter is a habit, we can learn to stop it. If you face your anxiety and “practice” avoiding nervous laughter, it will become easier to avoid. Personally, I had and still have anxiety when speaking in front of people. I used to move around, say “um”, and just do awkward things while giving a speech. After taking Oral Communication, I learned how to appear comfortable which makes you feel more comfortable. Practice really is important in avoiding anxiety related habits.
I hope to find some information on nervous laughter somewhere in the text since this post really is not related much to the chapter.
http://www.myshrink.com/counseling-theory.php?t_id=47 http://www.ehow.com/how_2176852_stop-nervous-laughter-during-conversation.html
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jjuj5jWPdSU
http://bodyodd.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2010/04/14/4380063-uncontrollable-laughing-or-crying-is-no-joke?pc=25&sp=25
I decided I wanted to focus on the Incongruity Theory of humor. This theory basically says that incongruity determines whether or not something is funny. We find things funny when they’re surprising, peculiar, unusual, and different from what we normally expect. There was an article that I found online where a woman talks about humor and how the element of surprise is very important. This woman talks about how all her life she’s been making people—sort of using it as a defense mechanism. She mentions that she’s been trying to figure out what it is exactly that she’s doing to make people laugh. And she came to the conclusion that she says or does something that people don’t expect her to do, and that it’s the element of surprise that makes it work. I think the whole point of the article was to try and teach the reader how to be funny, but she had a couple of funny examples why we laugh when the unexpected happens: like when someone is walking down the street we expect them to keep moving without interruption, but then if they fall, it’s funny. Or when a big football player screams like a girl at the sight of a bug, it’s funny because we assume that he’s tough and not scared of something like that.
I agree with her points, and I think it makes sense—incongruity and the element of surprise in humor is definitely funny. Not just in jokes either, there have been countless times that I’ve been with my friends and something hysterical happens just from spontaneous, conversational, or accidental humor! But there are also instances where that’s not always the case. In the book under the Empirical Studies section on page 71, a study was done by Kenny (1955) where his results showed that people find jokes funnier when they can see the punch line coming rather than when it’s unexpected. And I can understand that too. There’s a joke that my friends and I hear all the time, and if you’re an avid fan of the show The Office, it’s a joke you hear a lot as well—the classic “that’s what she said” joke. When I’m watching that show, even if I was seeing the episode for the first time, there was a time or two when I could predict that joke was going to take place just by something that a character says. I know it’s going to happen, but I still think it’s hilarious.
And just kind of a side note on the whole “that’s what she said” humor: I think that sometimes this joke could be an example of the incongruity-resolution theory. Someone says something, not even knowing that they’re potentially setting up a joke, and then someone else swoops in and says, “that’s what she said!” And most of the time—just like the book says, “this prompts the listener to go back and search for an ambiguity in the setup that can be interpreted in a different way and that allows for the punch line to make sense” (pg 64). Also, (I could be way off on this next part here, I don’t know) “that’s what she said” might also be what Koestler termed biosociation. Whatever someone says to set up the joke is not necessarily meant to be taken in a sexual way, but after someone says “that’s what she said,” it suddenly becomes sexual and takes on a double meaning. Who knew “that’s what she said” could be analyzed this much?!
But back to what I was saying before about hearing things over and over and yet they’re still funny: that goes for a lot TV shows or movies that you watch over and over again. I’m a big fan of the show Friends, and I have some of the seasons on DVD, and even though I’ve seen some of those episodes countless times, it still never fails to make me laugh, even though I know what’s coming. Even if I’m quoting funny parts from movies and TV with my friends, I know exactly what they’re going to say, but it’s still funny, time after time.
However, I can think of an example where incongruity definitely played a part in how funny this little quoting movies game can be, even if you’ve seen the movie more than once or almost know it by heart: My sister and I really love the movie Wedding Crashers, and it’s a movie that we quote a lot and we laugh just thinking about it. Right around the time that it came out on DVD, we’d watched it maybe only a couple time, and we were quoting it A LOT (an annoying amount). So we were just sitting there talking about it randomly, and I said something like, “I love that maple syrup part.” And my younger sister just spews out that entire quote—dead on (even with the little hand gestures!). And even though I’d heard those words several times, the fact I didn’t know she knew that entire thing (I mean at the time she’d only seen it 2 or 3 times) or that she could even talk that fast caused me to pretty much fall out of my chair laughing because I wasn’t expecting it!
One very interesting journal article that I found while perusing the internet had to with element of incongruity in humor in advertising, especially on television advertisements. Usually the first thing that comes to my mind when it comes to humorous TV ads is the Super Bowl. You can almost always expect to see funny commercials on Super Bowl Sunday. There was one Doritos commercial that I remember watching during the Super Bowl that I thought was hilarious, so I looked it up on You Tube. I thought that advertisement definitely used the element of surprise, and I think that definitely adds to the humor of it. The article mentioned that there haven’t been very many studies concerning the fact that humorous ads vary when it comes to customer evaluations. After going over studies done in psychology and linguistics, most TV ads use “incongruity from expectations” for humor. The study done for the journal article used the following hypothesis: “Higher levels of incongruity will result in stronger viewer surprise when viewers have high familiarity with the situation presented in the ad than when they have low familiarity.” Unfortunately, the entire article wasn’t posted so I couldn’t find the results of the study. But it just goes to show incongruity or the element of surprise is used frequently and even studied frequently concerning advertising, which I thought was interesting.
Another sort of, different type of humor that I thought out of the blue that has some incongruity aspects to it is Saturday Night Live digital shorts. I think that those videos are so random and completely unexpected. I know some people don’t think these videos are funny at all, but I think it’s something new. I remember watch a special that was on NBC a while ago looking back on the past 10 years of SNL (or something like that anyway). And I remember Jimmy Fallon mentioning the breakout of the Digital Short and it being this entire new way of projecting comedy. And I think that’s true, most (not all though) of the digital shorts are songs and rap songs about things I didn’t even think you could sing or rap about in a humorous way. It’s completely unexpected, at least in my opinion.
I think that incongruity and incongruity-resolution is an important element in humor and at trying to figure out why we find certain things funny. But don’t think that it’s necessarily essential all the time. I think there are plenty of examples and other theories that might, in some ways, go against this theory, or disagree with parts of it. But I think that makes some very relevant arguments.
Humor – The Element of Surprise
http://ezinearticles.com/?Humor---The-Element-of-Surprise&id=556878
“That’s what she said” clips from The Office
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q-wf2pP7T0Y&feature=related
Wedding Crashers – Maple Syrup clip
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H5_bIiWR0nM
“The Effects of Incongruity, Surprise and Positive Moderators on Perceived Humor in Television Advertising”
http://www.accessmylibrary.com/article-1G1-67939262/effects-incongruity-surprise-and.html
Super Bowl Doritos Commercial
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4rsEnwKrsvc
SNL Digital Shorts Video Library
http://www.nbc.com/saturday-night-live/video/categories/digital-shorts/2260/
A topic in this chapter I was interested in learning more about was that of bisociation, a concept developed by Arthur Koestler. In the text, Koestler describes bisociation as a process that occurs when two different events, ideas, or frames of reference converge into one. He states, “A single event is made to vibrate simultaneously on two different wavelengths” (Koestler, 1964). When used in a humorous situation, bisociation can be found in the incongruity theories as well when demonstrating how two parts of a joke, the setup and the punch line, are used in a cognitive mind set. For example, when an individual cognitively processes a joke and must search for the incongruities, they are looking at the first part after the punch line has been delivered to establish why it is funny. Thus, bisociation is at work with the two parts having two different and unique thoughts.
The first article Monday Muse explains how Koestler’s concept of bisociation extends from simply a process in humor to a process in creativity. Bisociation may refer to creative bounds in artwork, technology, and innovation by combining two different ideas which may result in a finished product. The examples in this article refer to technological advances such as a shaving razor and how it has evolved over the course of time due to adding additional blades, battery power, and multi-purpose functions. Bisociation has made this product and others better by bringing different ideas together.
The article The Artful Mind explains through the use of models how “planes” and “matrices” can be used to describe the structure of jokes. It also analyzes the process of arousal and emotion through humor and how the rise and the fall of the two are relevant to how humor operates.
The third article, a creativity lecture, goes into detail on word association, the structure of humor across two planes (the bisociation of humor), and problem solving skills using planes (in mathematical issues). It demonstrates the use of bisociation in a more scientific way and shows there are many uses for the concept in a scientific setting.
By researching more on the topic of bisociation I am now able to understand how it relates to more than just humor (even though in the textbook this is what it mostly surrounds) and due to the concrete evidence I have been presented with, I am able to see that bisociation is a distinctive part of innovation and creativity in many business practices today, especially since technology is ever-changing.
http://monday-muse.blogspot.com/2008/01/bisociation.html
http://www.casbs.org/~turner/art/deacon_images/index.html
http://www.informatics.sussex.ac.uk/users/christ/crs/gc/lec15.html
Something that has been of great interest to me that ties into the psychology of humor would be the art of attracting women!! Now one might say how does this relate to what we’ve been reading about humor? Attraction involves obtaining an emotional response from the woman. Lets take this scenario, for instance a Man sees a FINE woman at the bar and she is sitting at the table all by her lonesome self. The man wants to approach her but he doesn’t really want to cause he may get turned down. What should the helpless Man do in this situation to get this women attracted to him? First the Man has to make sure his approach elicits a positive sense of mirth as well as an emotional or he can CANCEL CHRISTMAS!!! There are many ways he can trigger all these things but since were in a humor class, he should use a humorous approach. Before he approaches he has to observe the scenery because he needs to use some spontaneous conversational humor. So he walks by her and says:
“Hmm your perfume smells nice what brand is it? Her: its XYZ Type
Him: Hmm My granny use to wear that on back in the 60s!!! After shes laughs then he could say something like your smile is cute. I was told to be careful of girls who have a cute smile!!!
Her: Why?
Him: There is always a bad girl hiding behind that cute smile…
Are you a bad girl?
Now he has successfully opened the conversation with her because he used a unique approach that she wasn’t used to hearing. His approach had some Arousal aspects in it. By him utilizing the collative variables such as unusual, surprise, and incongruous her emotional response what that of positive sense of mirth. and incongruity in it. Now if his approach is a common he would have got what I call THE BURN UP!! While he’s on a roll and his conversation is going good. he could use bit of the psychoanalytic approach by using a bit of aggression to bring out some of the sexually aroused emotions she is unconsciously feeling by saying something like
“Ok missy! Don’t get any ideas here…This doesn’t mean I’ll go back to your house after this.” You see its all in the delivery of your words and your body language. There are many other aspects that go along with attraction but if a male uses humor to attract women.
http://www.makewomenlaugh.com/
http://www.bullz-eye.com/relationships/double_your_dating/2005/092705.htm
http://www.nurturingrelationships.com/articles/get-girls-with-humor.html