What's in the News?
What I would like you to do is to start applying what we are learning in class to real world matters. Some might ask, "What good is learning psychology if we can't apply it to real world matters?" So that is what we are going to do with this divergence assignment.
What I would like you to do is to either go to NPR (http://www.npr.org/ ) or the BBC (http://www.bbc.co.uk/ ) and read, watch, or listen to something that is interesting to you and relates to what we have been learning in the class.
Please respond the blog by telling us what the piece you chose was and why you picked it (what made it interesting for you)? What did you expect to see? What did you find most interesting about the piece?
Next discuss how it relates to the class using terms, terminology, and concepts that we have learned so far in class.
Include the URL in your post.
Make a list of key terms and concepts you used in your post.
Let me know if you have any questions,
--Dr. M
I chose to blog about a BBC article in which FBI agents were caught cheating on an exam. I picked this article because I found it very entertaining that even the highest of law enforcement are being caught in scandals of their own. I also thought it was funny to read about the different ways these agents managed to cheat through the exam and how they were caught.
I expected to read that the FBI agents were very sneaky and were hardly caught in the scam. Since their careers focus on investigations, I expected this article to be very complex and full of investigations. However, I found that the FBI agents were not smart about cheating on the exam and they made it very obvious that they had 'extra help.' The agents finished the exam in 20 mins or less when it was expected to take them 90 min- 2hrs. Also, I found out that it wasn't only a group of agents, it was 200 FBI agents involved in the cheating scandal!
Although I don't think this article is absolutely hilarious, I did find humor in the overall cheating process & how the agents were caught. I thought it was funny that the agents were so desperate to pass the exam that they created cheat sheets, used answer sheets, computers, and even stomped their feet loudly to indicate what parts of the lessons would be on the exam. This situation seemed to so childish and something that you would expect to happen in a high school classroom, not in a FBI department.
This article relates to what we have learned in class because we find humor in others misfortunes. The superiority theory does a good job relating to this article. In this particular case, it is funny that the FBI agents will probably be suspended or possibly fired because of their actions. Also, we have discussed in class that sometimes we use humor towards others to make deviant behavior less serious. Self-disclosure applies to this article because some readers will find the agents actions stupidly funny while others take this article very seriously.
Terms: superiority theory, self-disclosure
URL:http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-11408859
I chose an article from BBC on a live televised show that crowned the wrong winner on Australia’s Next Top Model. In the last couple minutes votes came piling in and broadcaster Sarah Muroch announced Kelsey Martinovich crowned champion winner of Australia’s Next Top Model by public vote. Murdocha fashion model and television presenter had to interrupt Kelsey’s acceptance speech while shaking her head and listening to her earpiece. She announced she felt sick about it and how sorry she was for the accident and then furthermore, crowned eighteen year old Amanda Ware the real winner. Murdoch was ashamed of herself and mentioned how she never agreed to do a live televised performance, adding “I don’t aspire to handle crowds at that level.” Martinovich did receive $25,000 in Australian currency as an apology. On the other hand the real winner Ms. Ware won an eight page spread in Harpers Bazaar women’s magazine, a contract with Priscilla’s modeling agency and $25,000 Australian dollars for a Levi’s campaign. In addition, a cash prize of 20,000 in Australian currency, a new care and a trip to New York.
Overall, I chose this news article because I thought it was kind of humorous that they mistaken the winner of Australia’s Next Top Model and had to renounce the winner on live television. Moreover, it is hard to find a live televised show these days because most television shows are shot far in advanced then aired on television.
I expected to see a photo of the mistaken winner crying and more comments about the two winners and what went through their minds when they were both announced winners, especially after they heard there was a mistake made.
What I found most interesting was that this was a live broadcast and how could they call the winner without blocking the public voting lines in time to calculate the actual winner? Moreover, how could you face thousands if not more people watching this television show as you have to announce you made a mistake…wouldn’t you feel horrible for giving the first crowned winner fame and taking it away in an instant and embarrassing her?
Moreover, this article is humorous in a way that we find humor by others mistakes. I think this article can relate to the concept of self-esteem, because once Sarah was announced winner her self-esteem was high but then when denounced it plummeted to the ground real quick. In addition, throughout our textbook, in the future of these models, I believe they will use some sort of defense mechanism in order to cope with their humiliation whenever this topic comes about.
Key Terms: Self-esteem, defense mechanism
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-11427434
Much like the author of this article, I clicked on this story because of the title – “Owner of Segway Dies on Segway”
I kind of chuckled when I read this even though I knew that the incident was tragic. It was not until I told my roommate the title that I busted a gut, mostly because she thought it was hilarious and her laughter made me laugh.
This article does not have a lot of content, except saying that the owner, Jimi Heselden, was a great man who donated a lot of money to charities. He apparently drove a segway off a cliff (it doesn’t definitively say it was suicide but I think it’s a good assumption). I honestly didn’t know what to expect when I clicked on this, but I was a little disappointed that the article really didn’t bear a lot of information about the incident. Was he having personal problems that could have maybe explained the incident, was it an accident, etc.?
Initially, I planned to write about the irony involved in this situation, but when I told my roommate about it, it became obvious that the majority of the humor I found in this situation is social in nature. Without my roommate’s laughter, I would never have laughed so hard about an event like this, but as they say, laughter is contagious. This situation also demonstrates that you laugh more often when you are with others than you do when you are alone. I think the idea of the “paratelic” state, which is part of the reversal theory, also had an effect on how funny we thought it was. We have both been really busy lately doing homework and other various things and got to a point where we had had enough. Because of this, we were both kind of in a silly mood and laughed at practically everything, including this story.
This story also created a picture in my roommates mind of the movie “Mall Cop” because the mall cop rides a Segway around everywhere. Although our conversation about it is over and I’m back to be being serious writing this up, I still find myself laughing at images of the mall cop which according to our book would be classified as “pseudo-social” in nature.
Overall, the social interactions of laughter can best explain why I thought this story was as funny as I did. I feel a little irresponsible for laughing at a story about someone dying, but I’m going to blame it on my roommate…she made me laugh!
Terms used: irony, social theory, paratelic state, reversal theory, pseudo-social, social interactions of laughter
http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2010/09/27/130153449/owner-of-segway-dies-on-segway
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/cricket/9042005.stm
"Butt refuses to apologize to England"
I picked this article because of the headline on the BBC website. It just caught my eye and I got a little chuckle out of it, so I decided to follow up on it.
Basically, Iljaz Butt, is the cricket coach for the Pakistan mens squad. Butt claims that England had planned to throw away games to other teams. It seems as if its just an off-hand statement and there really isn't too much evidence behind his claim besides some "suspicious scoring patterns" in past matches. All of the major cricket organizations are looking deeply into this small, off beat statement that Butt probably made in a lapse of judgment.
However, now the English cricket association is threatening to sue Butt over defamation if an apology is not issued shortly. Once the apology is issued, all charges will be subverted.
There is a bit of a superiority theory going on with this. It seems kind of childish to sue somebody over an off-beat statement and try to attempt to get major national parties involved. I kind of look down on the parties behavior and get a laugh because I think I would never put myself in that situation.
I suppose my paratelic state of mind trumped my telic side when I stumbled upon this article. The title in general made me laugh. Also, being a big soccer/Manchester United fan, the last name "Butt" strikes me as an English name. The fact that the article is about a man from Pakistan really touches on some of the incongruity theory (Butt is a popular English surname and also a popular Manchester United last name of a player from the 90's) and is also a play on formally set schemas, as I now know people elsewhere in the world are named Butt. Also, I just laughed at typing "Butt", the name might seem strange to us here in America. Our schema for the word "butt" is often in conjunction with the curse word ass, or the idea of someones naked behind. I think American's would draw more humor out of this than an Englishman. I checked on Wikipedia, and the term "butt" in an English schema often means a mark in archery.
When we make this connection of misguided schemas, we are able to get a good laugh out of it.
Superiority, telic/paratelic, schema, inconguity
http://www.npr.org/blogs/health/2010/09/27/130158014/ben-jerry-s-takes-all-natural-claims-off-ice-cream-labels
This article is about how the ice cream brand Ben & Jerry’s removed the words “All Natural” from some of their carton labels because some people from the Center for the Science in the Public Interest were concerned about the following ingredients: alkalized cocoa, corn syrup, and partially hydrogenated soybean oil. The article also mentions that the FDA doesn’t have a concrete definition for the term “natural” so lots of products and brands can use it to make consumers think it’s healthier for us to eat.
I didn’t think this article was really laugh-out-loud, outwardly funny, but more funny in an ironic sense. The text defines irony as “a figure of speech that communicates the opposite of what is said.” I’m taking Health Psych this semester and right now we’re learning how much of a struggle it is these days for us to eat healthy. And I guess I think that this is kind of ironic that even if foods aren’t necessarily “healthy,” manufacturers are still allowed to put the word “natural” on the box to make us feel better about eating it. Ironic. And I’m not really concerned about just Ben & Jerry’s ice cream; you can apply to almost any of the food you see today in grocery stores. The article mentions that we see various products from potato chips to cereal that claim to be natural, but since the FDA doesn’t have any parameters concerning that word, you could probably put it on just about anything. That’s just great…in a country where being overweight and obese has become pretty much an epidemic we can put the words “all natural” on a bag of potato chips so people at least THINK they’re eating something healthier than something that doesn’t have those words on the bag. Ironic.
When it comes to understanding this irony and the way I processed it, I would have to say that I took it in pretty quickly, supporting the Processing Equivalence Hypothesis, which basically says that irony isn’t processed any slower than literal language. I don’t think it took me any longer to understand maybe because, like I said before, I’m in Health Psych so this article really jumped out at me. However, for anyone else in the general public reading this article who isn’t slightly skewed like I am on that topic, that might be in favor of Giora’s theory, which basically says the opposite—grasping ironic statements takes a little longer to comprehend than literal ones. Maybe there is no definite theory we can have about ironic statements, maybe it’s relative to what you already know about the base subject, or whether you’ve recently talked about it or read about it or saw something about it.
Terms: Irony, Giora’s Theory, Processing Equivalence Hypothesis
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=106229157
This article "Is Al Franken Too Funny For the Senate?" perfectly relates to the ideas we've been discussing in class so far. The article, as the title suggests, analyzes the pro's and con's of being a comedian and a politician. I chose this article do to it's relevance, and the fact that I find Al Franken to be really funny. Also, the title is phrased as a question; that roped me in to reading the article since I found it to be an interesting question.
At first glance it would seem like the two are contradictory and would lead to trouble; comedians are by definition humorous and non-serious, whereas politics is an incredibly important and generally serious field and politicians are thus often seen as non-emotional or serious. They quote one politician form the 1850's who said "Never make them laugh" clearly indicating his belief that humor will result in people not taking your seriously and therefore you will not succeed in politics.
However, they also mention that some humor, or being seen as having the ability to be humorous should the need arise is often a benefit to politicians. This is why so many politicians try to include a one-liner or two (not too many…) in their speeches, or make appearances on Saturday Night Live. Also with the popularity of Stewart and Colbert (you almost don't need to mention their T.V. show's by name anymore they are so widely discussed) humor has taken a front row seat in political commentary.
So far we have established that humor is an emotional response to some kind of incongruity that most often takes place in social settings (always, if you count pseudo-social situations like watching T.V. and reading a book). The important role that the presence (or resolution) of incongruity plays in humor causes it to be an incredibly useful linguistic tool due to the ambiguity inherent in the incongruity. As a result of this many theories have developed focusing on humor's ability to bring balance to social situations since , if the quip is taken too seriously the person can back away and claim that it was "only a joke". Similarly it can help individuals cope with stress and anxiety by finding a positive twist to a situation, or by allowing them to minimize the importance of various problems (e.g. by showing 'dominance' over the problem).
The chapter on the social psychology of humor offers some important ways that humor may be incredibly beneficial to a politician. As already discussed humor is a beneficial linguistic tool (and politicians talk a lot). Also politicians are required to motivate and persuade others, and act as leaders in both to their pears, and to their constituency. Humor, when used appropriately, can increase group cohesion (pg. 122-123) which would obviously benefit a politician involved in motivating a group to continue pursuing a particular bill they were in favor of. Also it may help to maintain the person's status within the social hierarchy (pg. 120) which has obvious benefits.
This ambiguity however, also means that just as often as humor may bring balance or provide an emotional benefit it may also create an imbalance by being taken to seriously, as being seen as inappropriate, as stepping over the line, or as being seen as too goofy, as though the person lacks the ability to take anything at all seriously. The text specifically mentioned that humor is not always the most persuasive message type (pg. 136). Here we can see how just enough humor must be used, so being a comedian certainly isn't a necessity, though it may give him a better idea of when and where to utilize her/his talents.
The article's answer to the question was that it really could go either way, and the above explanation more or less confirms this fact. Humor is mostly playful in nature and thus can help bring balance to overly serious situations, yet also hinder progress unless it is used prudently. Most of the politicians who have become famous and loved by the people used 'just the right amount' of humor to endear themselves to the people, yet not so much to be seen as aloof or a buffoon. In this way the effective use of humor is a kind of 'balancing act'.
Terms: emotional response, incongruity, ambiguity, group cohesion, motivating, social hierarchy, balance/imbalance, persuasion(persuasive message types)
I chose to blog over a video, not an article on bbc.com. The video, titled “Fisherman’s ‘inseparable relationship’ with crocodile”, is about a fisherman named Chito who has an unusual bond with a crocodile who he has named Pocho. Chito found the crocodile 20 years ago with a gun shot wound, and now plays with it like it is a dog.
Before watching the video, I guess I expected the man to just pet the crocodile rather than tossing it around and playing with it like it was tame. After watching this video, it was clear that this was not a normal relationship. Chito tossed the crocodile around and even kissed it! What I found to be the most interesting aspect of this was the idea that someone could even get so close to a normally untamed creature.
After watching this video, I began to think about what exactly made it funny. The irony of such an unlikely duo makes this video funny, along with the possibility that the crocodile might freak out and attack Chito. I think this video coincides with the superiority/disparagement theory because Chito might get attacked by Pocho, therefore the humor would arise from seeing someone suffer. There was one part in the video where I actually thought Chito was going to get hurt by the crocodile, where Pocho pushed his face out of the way with his hind leg. This made me laugh involuntarily because I expected him to get hurt, but he actually wasn’t.
While searching for an article or video, I was in the telic state of mind because I wanted to finish this blog. After reading the title for this video, I wasn’t necessarily side tracked, but switched over to the paratelic state of mind because I thought this video would be funny to watch. (Maybe this was just my fictional ADHD kicking in).
The fact that someone would want to be friends with a crocodile is also humorous, because the schema for a crocodile is that they are vicious and wild, rather than friendly and tame. When we imagine the schema of a crocodile in our head before watching the video, it makes it more humorous to actually see that the crocodile is actually tame.
Terms used: Irony, superiority/disparagement theory, paratelic, telic, shema
Here is the URL:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-11424547
For this assignment I chose to read about the monkey problem in Delhi. The article talks about the growing nuisance problem around the city and what is being done to counteract it. Smaller simian monkeys roam around public offices, get into the metro transportation systems, and have invaded the Prime Minister's office and Defense Attorney. Delhi has taken matters into their own hands by "deploying" langur monkeys to patrol certain areas, specifically outside venues in the Indian capitol and boxing and hockey stadiums where they have been increasingly becoming a problem. The langur monkeys are used to combat the problem; they are handled by trainers and then relased to chase the smaller monkeys away because they are larger and more aggressive. The article also says four langurs will patrol the each stadium and two will be available for stand-by if needed.
This article was interesting to me because I imagine the monkeys as part of a military operation upon reading about how they have been "deployed from the neighboring state of Rajasthan" to "patrol given areas." It sparked an image of monkeys in camoflauge outfits holding weapons in my mind and I couldn't help but laugh. It also seems like a scene from a middle school playground. The smaller children in this case simian monkeys, being bullied around by the older, langur monkeys by telling them they "can't play here."
I didn't really know what to expect to read about, but the headline mentioned monkeys and security purposes so I simply assumed humans were securing an area from the monkeys. Imagine how humorous it is to find out the monkeys are patrolling ... the monkeys! The part I found most interesting about the peice is that these langur (or "military" monkeys) are actually trained specifically for this purpose; to ward off the smaller, weaker monkeys, and that they are brought in from a neighboring state for this purpose.
I would say that this article relates closely to the superiority theory with respect to aggression. Although the purpose of the langur monkeys to contol the area may be present, they probably exhibit some sort of playful aspects (if not with the simian monkeys, than certainly within each other). When they are not "patrolling" and have nothing to do, they probably demonstrate some behaviors humans would find entertaining. They most likely poke fun and play socially with each other with rough and tumble games (where the aggression plays a role), they "tease" which is evident by their facial expressions and "screech like laugh" and there are most likely more dominant monkeys in the group who assume to more superior/dominant roles which may tend to bully the others in the group more. The concept of "humor as play" has been noted in chapter one when discussing chimpanzees and how they engage in forms of "laughter and play" relating this to an evolutionary standpoint, humor can be seen as a focus of natural selection even in humans. I believe even Apter's reversal theory is crucial here. Even though the cognitive sytems of the langur monkeys are not capable of making such comparisons, they are probably using a primitive method of telic when engaging in "work" and paratelic when playing with each other.
Key concepts used: Superiority Theory and aggression, humor as play, natural selection, Reversal Theory
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-south-asia-11433539
The title of my article is “Goldilocks’ Temperature is Just Right for Life.” In researching for this assignment, this title caught my eye because of the name ‘Goldilocks.’ The article is about a planet 20 light-years away which has conditions that are “not too hot, and not to cold and liquid water can exist” This story makes use of irony. One of the main themes of the psychology of humor (so far) is that humor is a way to communicate a playful state, or the emotion of mirth. The Reversal Theory is one of my favorites, and is an example of a theory that is all about this playful, or paratelic state. After the title, and the explanation of the planet, the entire story is read from a playful state of mind.
One thing that has been reiterated in almost every reading is that humor is based on incongruencies. What is incongruent about this title is the fact that Goldilocks is a fictional character from a well known children’s story. Comparing her to a planet that humans could live on doesn’t go together very well, so these two ideas together are incongruent. As pointed out in a number of theories, such as the Incongruity theories, Psychoanalytic theory, etc.
The Arousal theory, by Daniel Berlyne, states that humor is “an expression of pleasure resulting from the change of arousal.” This “change in arousal” happens when two different schemas are presented together. This theory also states that a medium level of arousal and processing are required for the funniest reaction. This article fits the criteria (although I do not believe it is all that incredibly funny…) The two schemas are again Goldilocks and a planet that could support human life, and the medium amount of processing is understanding what this article is about.
Terms used: Schema, Arousal theories, Psychoanalytic theories, Reversal Theory, Incongruent, Irony, paratelic, Mirth, Incongruence theories, Arousal
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=130215192
The title of my article is “Goldilocks’ Temperature is Just Right for Life.” In researching for this assignment, this title caught my eye because of the name ‘Goldilocks.’ The article is about a planet 20 light-years away which has conditions that are “not too hot, and not to cold and liquid water can exist” This story makes use of irony. One of the main themes of the psychology of humor (so far) is that humor is a way to communicate a playful state, or the emotion of mirth. The Reversal Theory is one of my favorites, and is an example of a theory that is all about this playful, or paratelic state. After the title, and the explanation of the planet, the entire story is read from a playful state of mind.
One thing that has been reiterated in almost every reading is that humor is based on incongruencies. What is incongruent about this title is the fact that Goldilocks is a fictional character from a well known children’s story. Comparing her to a planet that humans could live on doesn’t go together very well, so these two ideas together are incongruent. As pointed out in a number of theories, such as the Incongruity theories, Psychoanalytic theory, etc.
The Arousal theory, by Daniel Berlyne, states that humor is “an expression of pleasure resulting from the change of arousal.” This “change in arousal” happens when two different schemas are presented together. This theory also states that a medium level of arousal and processing are required for the funniest reaction. This article fits the criteria (although I do not believe it is all that incredibly funny…) The two schemas are again Goldilocks and a planet that could support human life, and the medium amount of processing is understanding what this article is about.
Terms used: Schema, Arousal theories, Psychoanalytic theories, Reversal Theory, Incongruent, Irony, paratelic, Mirth, Incongruence theories, Arousal
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=130215192
I found an article on the NPR website that discussed McDonald’s threatening to cut skimpy health plans. I found this to be a little funny considering McDonald’s food is not good for anyone’s health and yet they are a company that’s considering cutting their health care for their employees. McDonald’s sent the feds a letter stating that 30,000 employees were in jeopardy of losing their coverage unless they got a waiver. Currently the law requires employers to spend approximately 80% of revenues on health care; therefore they believe McDonald’s must not be spending near that much on their health care since they are asking for a waiver.
I believe I found this article to be funny because it’s ironic that a fast food restaurant that serves very unhealthy food is at risk of losing some of their health care for their employees. I also found it ironic because these employees probably eat at McDonald’s fairly often since they work there. It’s just a matter of convenience. I also think it’s funny because McDonald’s is always turning a profit. They continue to be one business that continues to do so during the down economy and yet they want a waiver to not spend as much on their employees and their health care. It’s reported in the article that the most premium plan maxes out at $10,000 and the lowest plan is $2,000! The last paragraph states that people should go to Starbucks for their morning coffee because they can rest assured that those employees have better health insurance.
McDonald’s is arguing that these reports are false which in my belief companies always do no matter what the real story is. No company wants to be portrayed in this light. Let the defense mechanism’s begin…
Terms: Irony, Defense mechanisms
http://www.npr.org/blogs/health/2010/09/30/130239354/media-takes-note-when-mcdonalds-threatens-to-cut-skimpy-health-plans
I chose an article on the NPR website titled “Ochocinco Cereal Box Uses Sex Line Number”
Chad Ochocinco, a receiver for the Cincinnati Bengal’s has a new cereal called OchocincO’s and as an effort to do something good, he included the number for people to call to donate to Feed the Children on the side of his box. The area code for the number was screwed up, so people who call this number will not be greeted by someone from Feed the Children, but will be greeted by a woman saying inappropriate things to them, asking for their credit card number. On Wednesday, before this mistake was known, Ochocinco promoted his cereal via Twitter, saying “order my cereal OCHOCINCOs. Start your day with a lil suga!!!”
I always think typos and whatnot are funny, simply because there is probably a whole team of people working to make sure the design of the box is perfect, and working to market this product, but not one thought to call this number beforehand to make sure that they actually had the number for Feed the Children. It makes it even funnier that they were trying to promote a charity, but in actuality they used a number for something very unwholesome, such as a sex line. Imagine some little old lady calling in, wanting to do something good, and wind up talking to one of these girls.
This is an unintentional form of humor. I think the theory that best fits why this is funny is the incongruity theory, because donating to a charity and calling a 1-800 number to talk to a seductive woman are about as polar opposite as you can get, making this pretty ironic. People calling this number wanting to donate would be very caught off guard when they heard who picked up the other end of the phone call. There's lot of cases of wrong numbers, but because the goals of the businesses who have these numbers are so different, it makes it funny. If the number was just a disconnected number, or a number for computer repair or something, it wouldn't be as funny.
I think it’s also funny because just a couple days ago, Ochocinco was promoting this cereal and he said that you could start your day off with some suga’, which could have an alternate meaning. On Wednesday when he released this tweet, this could just mean to begin your day with something sweet, but after the realization that the phone number was not for Feed the Children, it could take on a whole different schema, making an entirely different interpretation.
Finally, there was a lot of hype behind this cereal. On one website I read that a lot of store had special displays of these OchocincO’s and that these displays had been up for about a month before anyone noticed that there was a problem with the number on the box. Going along with the superiority theory, although I’m sure the Chad Ochocinco probably had very little to do with the production and design of this box, it makes him look foolish because his name is on it. This also makes the company that produced this (PLB Sports Inc.) and maybe the whole team look stupid too.
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=130239281
Terms: Irony, Incongruity Theory, Schema, Superiority Theory
Communication is a big issue in our human interaction. The philosopher Jean-Paul Sartre goes so far and to suggest that once words leave our word we have no control over them, meaning that the other person could interpret them anyway that they wish. In Chapter 5, the question is answered, what form of communication is the best, serious or humorous? I personally believe that humor is the best way to deal with awkwardness in just about every situation.
As we saw in the book, communication can be a good predict of the success of relationship. First of the all, the book contents that humor should be a norm in the workplace. Humor loosens the channels of communication between like workers and their boss, parent and children, or between two arguing peers so that communication is enhanced. Secondly, that it is leader or superior in the group’s responsibility, as the leader to set this norm of humor, like the boss or the parent. Furthermore, the books states that using humor can improve communication between coworkers with “opposing” or incongruity viewpoints. Finally the book states this project of making humor apart of the communication will overall create a more relaxed and less awkward situations. Teasing is intended to remind people of appropriate actions within the group and can be very useful when done correctly. If teasing is done between co-workers or people in close relationships is done correctly researchers finds that the bond will grow. Parents, bosses, and all group leaders should set a standard of humor in communication. However, this article points out that there are risks within teasing. People’s teasing, who are considered “cold and unfriendly” can be seen as painful, unwanted, or bulling that causes “anxiety, pain and embarrassment”.
Although book point out that humor, when delivering arguments that others might disagree with is a good thing, republicans viewed Stephen Colbert’s report as being taunting or being disrespectful, because humor is not the norm within congress. Where others viewed his message with positive feelings, and efficiently got an important message across. More of the public can relate to this humorous communication of an important message ( like peers or people in a close relationship can sometimes more effectively talk about serious and important using humor, especially if other ways had failed in the past). I think the bond between the Americans and Colbert grew out of this teased of both Americans ignorant views and Congress inefficiency on the topic.
After reading “Stephan Colbert Gives ‘Truthiness’Jolt on Capitol Hill. I believe what Colbert did was very interesting. He cut to the heart of racial intension and stereotypes about hard-working undocumented workers in agricultural industry, using humor and thus making the incongruent message socially acceptable. He did this with humor which was streaked with novelty and surprise. The article states the House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, commented that she believes that the Colbert’s humor was appropriate in his speak. Setting the tone for a new norm within the House as the Speaker? Might be a good way to shake up the ineffectiveness of Congress, the article even states that the invitation to Colbert was a good way to spark things up within these hearings.
http://www.npr.org/blogs/itsallpolitics/2010/09/24/130106000/stephen-colbert-gives-truthiness-jolt-on-capitol-hill
The BBC article I chose was titled, Male Fish in Mexico Sports Sexy ‘Moustache’. The article’s title is what pulled me in because I have never imagined a fish with a moustache until now. The article is also humorous to me because I instantly began comparing a man with a moustache and what that may mean to a fish having a moustache. The article goes into detail about the male Molly fish in Mexico and the existence of a moustache that makes them appear sexier to females than other male mollies. According to the article, scientists were unsure why male Mexican mollies wear an extravagant moustache-like structure on their top lip, but a recent study has revealed that female fish find the moustache sexually attractive, and it is likely to be a sexually selected trait. As well as being visually-attractive to the females, the moustache may be used to rub the female fish's genitals, exciting them. The information that was just previously mentioned is exactly why I found this full of possible humor. In my opinion, for someone to successfully approach this article and its content as funny, one would need to identify the moustache as an exclusive human male characteristic (secondary sex characteristic). Learning that there is a type of male fish that grows a moustache like a human man, and the purpose of this upper lip hair is arguably similar too, is quite funny to me.
This article relates to the psychology of humor on a definite cognitive level, specifically the concept of incongruence. The idea that some sort of incongruity is the basis of all humor seems to be generally supported. These theories suggest that the perception of incongruity is the crucial determinant of whether or not something is humorous: things that are funny are incongruous, surprising, peculiar, unusual, or different from what we normally expect. What is not normally expected directly connects to another cognitive aspect of humor and that involves schemas. Perhaps this is funny because the average schemas of moustaches are most likely involving human men and not fish, so the peculiarity/incongruence of this interesting fish fact is what makes this humorous.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/earth/hi/earth_news/newsid_8767000/8767973.stm
Terminology Used: Congruence Theory and Schemas.
I watched a video clip on BBC News titled, “World’s oldest twin’s on secret to long life.” I picked this clip because I have great aunts that are twins so I was curious to know the age the world’s oldest twins. Also when I first seen the title to this clip I wanted to know the secret. I expected to see two old sisters with walkers, sipping coffee, revealing the secret to their long life were simply having each other. This is not what I seen. The twins look young for their age and are mobile. The clip discusses how the sisters, who are ninety-eight, remain very active throughout their lives. The sisters played basketball into their sixties and swam in the sea well into their nineties. The sisters still enjoy dancing at a club, playing cards, and visiting with friends. When the sisters are asked what the magic potion was to their long life, one answers pastis and the other one says whiskey. This is what I thought was the funniest. I found it interesting that these elderly ladies were both capable of remaining highly active in such old age and also that they enjoy drinking alcohol.
The humor in this video clip relates to the incongruity theory. The incongruity theory suggests that incongruity is the main determinant of whether or not something is humorous. Our schema of elderly people usually does not include them playing basketball, getting down at a club, in a swimsuit, or taking shots therefore incongruity is present. Irony is also present in this clip. The sisters suggest drinking alcohol as a technique to extend life this is ironic because we usually think of alcohol as detrimental to our health.
Terms: Incongruity theory, Schema, Irony.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-11441063
I chose an article titles "Extreme Baby Carrots: An Experiment in Marketing". This article is about new marketing for baby carrots. The article talks about how farmers are trying to boost sales so they are changing the way baby carrots are marketed to make them seem cool to kids. The first step is ads that are filled with action, there is a woman shooting carrots out of a machine gun. The second step is packaging and distribution. They made the bag look similar to that of a bag of chips and are now selling them in vending machines.
I think this article can be viewed from through the incongruity theory. This theory says that laughter is caused by 2 or more inconsistent parts that are put together. This article fits that because the marketing tries to make carrots look like junk food yet everyone knows they are a very healthy snack. The ad is inconsistent with what we already which is why I think it's funny. When we think about carrots we generally don't think that they are cool, that idea doesn't fit into the schema of carrots. The new marketing campaign is trying to change the schema and instead of placing carrots with health foods our minds would put it together with junk food.
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=130321785
John Stewart has been a source of laughter for more than ten years, but his sense of humor is based more in on a stake of society that we all hold. His satire is crafted, obviously toward a particular political direction, but also toward a particular audience. To a regular member of Stewart's fan base, his humor is about balancing social status. John targets the elite, the well off, those who actually have a voice in this country and blasts them with humor that is pretty aggressive. We see these people everyday in the media and on their shows they are the center of the universe, their opinion is the only one that matters. On Stewart's show they are brought down to the same level of your everyday American, getting ridiculed for being a complete moron. We feel that gain status vicariously through John Stewart's bashing of people who we feel have snatched said status from us. Why is Bill O'Reilly's opinion important enough to be on national television? For some reason he has been given a much higher place in society than your average American and when we close the social gap between us we get pleasure.
Although Stewart's humor is obviously aggressive, he uses it in a conscious way to promote political and social awareness. John Stewart doesn't hate or disrespect the people that he roasts, his target is their views.
John Stewart also operates to set a sort of social standard for how he believes American society should be. By mocking people Stewart creates prototypes of people who we don't want to be. We don't want to be known as the racist or the irrational radical so we laugh at those who we perceive act in these ways. In a sense Stewart is promoting an idioculture for his idea for society.
And of course with matters in Politics approaching the issue in humor often makes people much more receptive to the message. Many people don't like to talk politics because it inevitably leads to arguments, shouting etc... The issues are easy to joke about, though, and through some casual joking Stewart can throw in a message that drives home his ideas.
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=130321994
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-11505792
I found a video talking about Russia’s military inventing blow up weapons to save money and to develop on of the best strategies for the military. This video shows how they hall it and blow it up. When I say blow it up I actually mean inflatable tank!! They believe that this will be the new military technique that will place theirs over everybody else’s. When I first looked at the title I thought it was going to be about a new missile of something that is actually going to BLOW UP something, not some silly inflatable toy bouncy thing for kids!!!! And the funny thing is it says in the tittle inflatable weapons, but I looked right pasted it and saw Russia Military blow up and weapons.
Now the funny part about this is deep. Who in their right frame of mind would come up with this particular idea that Inflatable tanks and weapons would work towards enhancing their military and making it above everyone else’s? I mean you are competing with America which has the most powerful militia in the world also our intelligence is one of the best in most cases!!!LOL How can you possible think that we wouldn’t know a fake tank from an inflatable one. We’ve got remote control cars that carry cameras and bombs on them!!!!! Lol. I think this is hysterical because the military chief in Russia actually presented this to their prime minister and he in fact went with this!!! I’m surprised that the Russian Prime Minister didn’t bust out laughing rolling around on the floor when this idea was presented. I always like turning the tables around and imagining if General Patraus brought this idea to President Obama what would he say? HE would be fired immediately and he would probably lose all his metals and be committed into a military psychiatric clinic. Another funny thing about this story is that you made a video and got on the news to tell your secret so now we really know what you’re up to!!!! WOW this dumb decision amazed me. It is so stupid I was like this can’t be a real news item. This has to be some sort of joke but it is actually real!!! Why would anyone who wanted to trick someone tell them the trick so they can expect it? Your main objective is to get the enemy in multiple ways and without them knowing how you’re getting them.
I guess relating this back to what we have learned in class I think that this news item has a lot of ground for sarcasm because this can be used mostly when something is not planned out and has a lot of mistakes that are easily pointed out such as peoples actions, verbal bloopers, and many others as well. Also we can say that this could also be seen as unintentional humor because Russia actually thought this was a great idea and were serious about making this video. This item would be a good conversational humor topic in which discourse management could be applied by everybody taking turns making a joke or putting their two cents in about this topic!!!
Terms: Sarcasm,Unintentional Humor,Discourse Manegement, Conversational Humor
For my blog, I chose a radio newscast that is titled, “Painting the Future: Rockman Blends Reality and Fantasy.” I chose this article because I thought the idea of fantasy in art might portray effects of humor on cognition as it relates to creativity. Before I played the newscast, I looked through Rockman’s paintings and each one was phenomenal. Every one of Rockman’s paintings portrayed disparate settings that reflected a surreal type of art. His work depicts a world that is real and fanciful, genuine and synthetically altered. In chapter 4, I found the section about creativity to be very interesting because painting happens to be one of my past times. Before playing the newscast, I expected the interview to be slightly entertaining in terms of Rockman’s technical talent, but I did not expect the interview to be so droll. The interview was humorous in a very subtle way. What I found most interesting about this interview was when Rockman explained the reason for his 30-foot depiction of icebergs in Antarctica. When asked why Rockman decided to paint these icebergs his response was, “Why not make a group portrait of ice and think of it like a family portrait of what's not going to be here forever?”
This newscast relates to the material covered in class because it exemplifies the notion that humor and creativity are overlapping domains. As stated in our text, just as elements like incongruity, theorists see surprise, and novelty as necessary elements of humor, creativity theorists also see these as defining characteristics of creativity. Both humor and creativity involve a switch of perspective, a new way of looking at things. It is obvious by looking at Rockman’s paintings that he has a different way of looking at the world to depict such surreal images of nature. Rockman agrees with the interviewer by stating that his unrealistic painting of farm animals seems to be frightening. Rockman believes that his paintings represent the truth of nature through black humor. According to Rockman, black humor is important in paintings because it reduces the likelihood of alienating the world with tough images.
I believe that Rockman’s art provides evidence that exposure to humor can enhance creative thinking, and that this effect can mediate the positive emotions associated with humor. In out textbook, Martin asked the question, “Does exposure to humor cause people to be more creative in their thinking?” It is in my opinion that yes, humor causes an increase in creativity. People who are humorous and creative must be flexible in their way of thinking in order to have an adaptive opinion about one’s perspective on life.
Terms: Cognition, creativity, humor, incongruity
http://www.npr.org/templates/transcript/transcript.php?storyId=131420189