What's so funny about that?: The domains-interaction approach as a model of incongruity and resolution in humor

The domains-interaction approach, originally developed in metaphor research, was used to model humor processing. Using jokes of the structure A is the B of A's domain (e.g., John Candy is the hamburger of actors), this approach allows for precise operationalizations of incongruity and resolution in terms of between-domain and within-domain semantic distance, respectively. Distances between 26 terms used in 250 of these simple jokes were derived from semantic differential ratings. As predicted, humor ratings of the jokes were positively correlated with incongruity (between-domain distance) but not with resolution (within-domain distance). Also as predicted, a significant interaction revealed that jokes with both incongruity and resolution were rated as most humorous. These findings were replicated in a second study. A third study indicated that humor perception differs from metaphor appreciation, showing main effects for both types of semantic distance, but no interaction, when the sentences were presented as metaphors instead of jokes and rated for aptness.The authors wish to thank Richard Harshman and Albert Katz for their helpful suggestions in conducting this research.     

What's so special about medicine?

Health care has increasingly come to be understood as a commodity. The ethical implications of such an understanding are significant. The author argues that health care is not a commodity because health care (1) is non-proprietary, (2) serves the needs of persons who, as patients, are uniquely vulnerable, (3) essentially involves a special human relationship which ought not be bought or sold, (4) helps to define what is meant by ‘necessity’ and cannot be considered a commodity when subjected to rigorous conceptual analysis. The Oslerian conception that medicine is a calling and not a business ought to be reaffirmed by both the profession and the public. Such a conception would have significant ramifications for patient care and health care policy.     

What's so funny? Modelling incongruity in humour production†

Finding something humorous is intrinsically rewarding and may facilitate emotion regulation, but what creates humour has been underexplored. The present experimental study examined humour generated under controlled conditions with varying social, affective, and cognitive factors. Participants listed five ways in which a set of concept pairs (e.g. MONEY and CHOCOLATE) were similar or different in either a funny way (intentional humour elicitation) or a “catchy” way (incidental humour elicitation). Results showed that more funny responses were produced under the incidental condition, and particularly more for affectively charged than neutral concepts, for semantically unrelated than related concepts, and for responses highlighting differences rather than similarities between concepts. Further analyses revealed that funny responses showed a relative divergence in output dominance of the properties typically associated with each concept in the pair (that is, funny responses frequently highlighted a property high in output dominance for one concept but simultaneously low in output dominance for the other concept); by contrast, responses judged not funny did not show this pattern. These findings reinforce the centrality of incongruity resolution as a key cognitive ingredient for some pleasurable emotional elements arising from humour and demonstrate how it may operate within the context of humour generation.     

What's so bad about human cloning?

There appears to be a consensus in the general community that reproductive cloning is an immoral technology that should be banned. It may, however, be argued, at least from the perspective of the Jewish tradition, that reproductive cloning has many positive benefits. It is thus essential that one carefully weigh the costs and the benefits before deciding on a definitive course of action.     

The effects of laughter on discomfort thresholds: does expectation become reality?

Distraction and relaxation have been controlled in previous studies as possible mechanisms for the effectiveness of mirthful laughter in coping with pain and discomfort. The purpose of this study is to control expectation of benefit from laughter. Discomfort thresholds for a blood pressure cuff at the upper dominant arm were recorded immediately before and after exposure to either a humorous or a relaxation video. Instructional sets led participants to believe that the video would either increase or decrease their sensitivity to discomfort. A 5th group watched the humorous video without manipulation of expectation. All participants completed A. Ziv's (1979) Sense of Humor Questionnaire (SHQZ). Humor and relaxation videos raised discomfort thresholds, and the effect of both video types was enhanced by expectations. Humorous personality trait (SHQZ) did not moderate effects. The larger issue of whether mirthful laughter has any unique benefit for pain or discomfort control beyond the effects of relaxation, distraction, or expectation is discussed.     

What's so special about the average face?

The past few years have seen a marked increase in our understanding of how faces are represented in the brain, with the discovery of new anatomical structures and new algorithms for representing faces. Still, the basic computational mechanism used by the primate visual system to identify faces remains a topic of intense debate. Are faces represented by matching to a set of stored exemplars, or by measuring the distance from a standard prototype along a set of different axes? A recent article by Rhodes and Jeffery provides compelling psychophysical evidence in favor of the latter 'axis' model.     

What's so different about Lacan's approach to psychoanalysis?

Clinical work based on Lacanian principles is rarely compared in the psychoanalytic literature with that based on other principles. The author attempts to highlight a few important theoretical differences regarding language, desire, affect, and time between a Lacanian approach and certain others that lead to differences in focus and technique, related, for example, to interpretation, scansion, and countertransference. Lacanian techniques are illustrated with brief clinical vignettes. In the interest of confidentiality, identifying information and certain circumstances have been changed or omitted in the material presented.     

What's so logical about the “logical” axioms?

Intuitionists and classical logicians use in common a large number of the logical axioms, even though they supposedly mean different things by the logical connectives and quantifiers — conquans for short. But Wittgenstein says The meaning of a word is its use in the language. We prove that in a definite sense the intuitionistic axioms do indeed characterize the logical conquans, both for the intuitionist and the classical logician.     

The beneficial effects of prosocial spending on happiness: work hard,make money,and spend it on others?

Previous research has shown that the way people spend their money is as important to happiness as how much money people earn. Specifically, it has been shown that spending money on others contributes more to an individual’s happiness than spending money on oneself. In the present study, we investigated this effect and examined the role of the money’s origin. Students were randomly assigned either to spend a small amount of money on themselves or to spend the money on others. Moreover, half of the participants received the money as a wage, whereas the other half received the money as a windfall. The results replicated previous research indicating that prosocial spenders report greater happiness than do selfish spenders. However, the happiness effect was unaffected by the source of the money (i.e. wage vs. windfall). Implications for well-being and happiness are discussed.     

When do low‐power customers complain? The joint effects of chronic sense of personal power and complaint success on complaining intentions

In the customer complaint literature, researchers have found that the lack of an incidental sense of power is one of the reasons why customers do not complain. However, two issues are left unanswered: does a chronic sense of power influence consumer complaining behavior, and how individuals who feel chronically powerless can be encouraged to complain when dissatisfied. The present study is intended to address this topic. Drawing on the approach–inhibition theory of power, we argue that the probability of complaint success increases the complaint behavior of customers with a low chronic sense of power, thereby mitigating the differences in the complaint behavior of consumers with low and high power. The three studies indicated that a low chronic power was negatively associated with complaining intentions and that this association was mitigated by the perceived success of complaining.     

What's so special about slithering serpents? Children and adults rapidly detect snakes based on their simple features

Snakes are among the most common targets of fears and phobias around the world. In visual search tasks, both adults and young children have repeatedly been found to visually detect snakes more rapidly than other kinds of stimuli. An important question that remains unstudied is what accounts for humans’ rapid response to snakes? Here we suggest that specific features of snakes themselves lead to their rapid detection. The results of five experiments suggest that a snake's shape is the crucial factor in their rapid detection.     

What's in a picture? The impact of face-ism on trait attribution

Previous research indicated a ‘face-ism’ bias in media depictions of men and women: me media tend to represent men with their faces, whereas women's depictions include larger parts of their bodies, rendering their faces less prominent. To explore the impact of facial prominence on impression formation, male and female subjects received either full-body or portrait-style photographs, made from the same negatives, of male and female stimulus persons of different likeability. Male and female subjects evaluated all stimulus persons as more competent (intelligent, assertive, ambitious, etc.) if presented with a high (portrait) rather than a low (full-body photograph) degree of facial prominence. This main effect of facial prominence was not qualified by interaction effects with any of the other variables. PIUS, the media's face-ism bias is likely to contribute to a perception of men as more competent than women. In addition, female but not male subjects also evaluated stimulus persons as more expressive and likeable under conditions of high facial prominence, reflecting a global positive effect of facial prominence.     

The effects of good moods on systematic processing: “Willing but not able,or able but not willing?”

Previous research has indicated that good moods may disrupt systematic processing of persuasive messages (e.g., Worth & Mackie, 1987). Three experiments were conducted to attempt a replication of this disruptive effect and determine whether this effect is attributable either to cognitive capacity deficits (i.e., ability) or to motivational concerns (e.g., mood maintenance, desire to think about something other than the experimental topic). Several similarities were noted across the experiments. First, no interactions between mood and argument strength emerged on measures of message-based persuasion. Similarly, the quantity of message-related thoughts generated by our subjects was not consistently influenced by the manipulation of mood. Most importantly, consistent findings regarding the relationship between polarity of message elaborations and message-based persuasion implied that good moods may have disrupted message processing when (a) the message was low in personal relevance, (b) source information preceded the message itself, or (c) subjects were led to believe that their moods were stabilized by a drug. These results call into question the robustness of the alleged disruptive effect of positive mood on systematic processing, and are incompatible with the view that such effects are attributable to cognitive capacity deficits.Portions of this research were presented at the Annual Meetings of the American Psychological Association, Boston, August 1990, and San Francisco, August 1991. The authors wish to thank Richard E. Petty and several anonymous reviewers for their helpful comments.     

What's so unhealthy about hostility? Construct validity and psychosocial correlates of the Cook and Medley Ho scale

The Cook and Medley (1954) Hostility (Ho) scale, a measure of hostility derived from the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI), was recently found in one cross-sectional study to be related to the severity of coronary artery disease and in two prospective studies to predict the development of coronary heart disease. Unfortunately, little information is available to clarify the meaning of the scale, and little is known about the psychosocial characteristics of individuals with high Ho scores. As a result, interpretation of the previous studies is difficult. Our two studies attempted to address these concerns. In Study 1, the Ho scale demonstrated convergent and discriminant validity. Data indicated that the scale primarily assesses suspiciousness, resentment, frequent anger, and cynical distrust of others rather than overtly aggressive behavior or general emotional distress. In Study 2, individuals with high scores displayed comparatively more anger, less hardiness, more frequent and severe hassles, and fewer and less satisfactory social supports. Thus, we propose that the Ho scale assesses cynical hostility and conclude that high scores are associated with a particularly unhealthy psychosocial risk profile. These findings refine our understanding of the Ho scale and assist in the interpretation of previous studies using this measure.     

The effects of social change within a group on membership preferences: to leave or not to leave?

Two studies examined immediate (Study 1) and long-term (Study 2) behavioral consequences of previously documented asymmetries in cognitive and evaluative reactions to change in majority and minority positions within a group. Study 1 found an overall decrease in preferences for group membership immediately following change, which was preceded by decategorization and devaluation of the group in response to loss, together with lack of categorization and positive evaluation in response to gain of the majority position. Study 2 found a gradual increase in preference to stay with (vs. exit) the group among former minorities with prolonged interactions that confirmed their gained majority position. A gradual increase in preference for group membership was paralleled with gradual increases in perception of both inclusion within and differentiation from the group.