A Reference Group Theory of Partisan Coalitions

1991 ◽  
Vol 53 (4) ◽  
pp. 1134-1149 ◽  
Author(s):  
Arthur H. Miller ◽  
Christopher Wlezien ◽  
Anne Hildreth
1966 ◽  
Vol 18 (2) ◽  
pp. 600-602 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert F. Priest

Jokes about Gold water and Johnson were rated by 130 Ss on election day in 1964. The difference in their response to these two types of joke correlated .53 with their candidate preference, even with the differences in their understanding of the points of the jokes partialled out. The multiple correlation of differential comprehension and candidate preference with differential humor is .62. The evidence supports a reference group theory of humor.


1990 ◽  
Vol 33 (2) ◽  
pp. 201-218 ◽  
Author(s):  
Leslie Clarke ◽  
Leonard Beeghley ◽  
John K. Cochran

Social Forces ◽  
1969 ◽  
Vol 47 (3) ◽  
pp. 373
Author(s):  
Francis C. May ◽  
Herbert H. Hyman ◽  
Eleanor Singer

1986 ◽  
Vol 39 (11) ◽  
pp. 1053-1066 ◽  
Author(s):  
Darlene Violet ◽  
T. Neal Garland ◽  
Brian F. Pendleton

1969 ◽  
Vol 34 (1) ◽  
pp. 118
Author(s):  
Marc Pilisuk ◽  
Herbert H. Hyman ◽  
Eleanor Singer

1967 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
pp. 305-306 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lawrence La Fave

Priest maintains that all relevant studies prior to his own support a reference group theory of humor. However, only La Fave's experiment does unequivocally. Both the Wolff, Smith, and Murray and the Middleton experiments make methodological errors, acknowledged by the authors themselves, which render a reference group interpretation of their data debatable. However, these authors also furnish perceptive, post mortem analyses which suggest that, were their methodologies less inadequate, the reference group construct would have won support


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document