Uncover the Offensive Side of Disparagement Humor: An fMRI Study

Disparagement humor is a kind of humor that denigrates, belittles an individual or a social group. In the aim to unveil the offensive side of these kinds of jokes, we have run an event-related fMRI study asking 30 healthy volunteers to judge the level of fun of a series of verbal stimuli that ended with a sentence that was socially inappropriate but funny (disparagement joke -DJ), socially inappropriate but not funny (SI) or neutral (N). Behavioral results showed disparagement jokes are perceived as funny and at the same time offensive. However, the level of offense in DJ is lower than that registered in SI stimuli. Functional data showed that DJ activated the insula, the SMA, the precuneus, the ACC, the dorsal striatum (the caudate nucleus), and the thalamus. These activations suggest that in DJ a feeling of mirth (and/or a desire to laugh) derived from the joke (e.g., SMA and precuneus) and the perception of the jokes’ social inappropriateness (e.g., ACC and insula) coexist. Furthermore, DJ and SI share a common network related to mentalizing and to the processing of negative feelings, namely the medial prefrontal cortex, the putamen and the right thalamus.

Where’s your sense of humor? Political identity moderates evaluations of disparagement humor

Two experiments ( N = 449; 246 men, 198 women) examined how political identity moderates appreciation of disparagement humor that violates different moral foundations described in moral foundations theory. In Experiment 1, liberals evaluated memes violating the individualizing moral foundations as more offensive and less funny than conservatives, whereas conservatives rated memes violating the binding moral foundations as more offensive and less funny than liberals. Moreover, conservatives judged the memes across all experimental conditions more favorably than liberals because they more strongly endorse cavalier humor beliefs. Experiment 2 examined the mediating role of perceived personal moral violations. Specifically, liberals evaluate humor violating the individualizing foundations as more offensive than conservatives because they see it as a greater personal moral violation. Similarly, conservatives judged humor violating the binding foundations as more offensive compared to liberals because they see it as a greater personal moral violation.

Is it really just a joke? Gender differences in perceptions of sexist humor

Benign violation theory suggests humor mocking normative values is funny if the humor is non-threatening. Research suggests sexism toward women (versus men) is particularly threatening due to inequalities in social power. In Study 1, we examined whether men and women differ in how amused and offended they were by sexist humor. We predicted men would perceive sexist humor as more funny and less offensive than women would. In Study 2, we examined whether perceptions of threat were related to perceptions of sexist jokes. We predicted women would perceive more threat than men from sexist humor, which would lead to lower amusement and greater perceived offensiveness. Across both studies, jokes targeting women were perceived to be less funny, more offensive, and more sexist than jokes targeting men. Additionally, greater perceptions of threat were related to greater perceptions of jokes as offensive and sexist. However, women were not more threatened than men by sexist jokes. While these findings were not entirely consistent with our hypotheses, our findings suggest disparagement humor targeting lower-status groups is perceived more negatively than disparagement humor targeting higher-status groups and these perceptions may be inextricably rooted in threat posed to lower-status groups.

What’s in a Tweet? Gender and sexism moderate reactions to antifat sexist humor on Twitter

The present study investigated whether antifat sexist humor (compared to antifat sexist statements or control statements), conveyed via Tweets, would impact perceptions of an overweight female target depicted in a workplace harassment scenario. We examined whether gender, antifat attitudes, and sexism would impact joke perceptions and moderate perceptions of the joke-relevant target. Participants (n = 451) were drawn from MTurk and completed the study online. They were randomly exposed to one of three tweet conditions and then read and responded to the harassment vignette, among filler vignettes, before completing sexism and antifat measures. Antifat attitudes unexpectedly shifted as a function of study prime and were thus not considered as a moderator. Results showed that men high in hostile sexism reported a greater likelihood of retweeting/favoriting antifat sexist jokes than men low on hostile sexism or women high in hostile sexism. Individuals high in hostile sexism in the joke condition found the behavior of the target less appropriate, and the behavior of the ostensible perpetrator more appropriate, than those in the control condition and those low on hostile sexism. Similar findings were obtained for benevolent sexism. Findings underscore the power of social media as a vehicle for disparagement humor and its consequences.

Disparagement humor and anti-obesity attitudes

People with obesity are often the target of disparaging humour. The typical derision of obesity found in everyday life also extends into the realm of the media. Many assumptions have been made about the effects this type of humour may have on the public’s attitudes toward people with obesity, but little empirical research exists. In the present research, two studies sought to uncover whether jokes and humorous media depictions of people with obesity affect individuals’ attitudes. In Study 1, participants (N = 271) either read a list of derogatory jokes about obesity, read a list of derogatory comments about obesity, or read a list of jokes that were unrelated to obesity. All participants were then asked to report their 1) attitudes toward people with obesity in several domains, 2) level of belief in stereotypes about obesity and 3) judgement of the social acceptability of jokes about obesity. Participants’ scores on these dependent measures did not differ across groups suggesting obesity jokes do not have an immediate impact on attitudes. In Study 2, participants (N = 146) were shown video clips from film and television programmes that featured derogatory humour targeting obese characters. Again, participants’ scores on dependent measures did not differ across groups. The results of these studies suggest that brief exposure to derogatory weight-related humour may not affect individuals’ attitudes toward people with obesity as might be assumed. Longer exposure to disparaging humour may be required to shift individuals’ attitudes about people with obesity

Cracking wise to break the ice: The potential for racial humor to ease interracial anxiety

We explore the idea that humor focused on social group disparities can be a viable tool to reduce some of the negative outcomes associated with interracial interactions. These interactions are crucial in promoting common understanding about the causes of social, educational, and economic disparities and crafting solutions to redress them. However, investigations have demonstrated that interracial interactions can be emotionally and cognitively taxing, and for these reasons are often avoided. When not avoided, these interactions often result in negative outcomes. Anxiety has been identified as a key factor in these outcomes as majority group members cope with concerns over appearing biased and minority group members cope with concerns over being discriminated against. Humor may be able to alleviate anxiety that contributes to negative outcomes associated with intergroup dialogue. To explore this claim, we first review the literature on interracial interactions and the role of anxiety in shaping them. We then discuss investigations exploring the impact of group-related humor, specifically disparagement humor, on intergroup perceptions. Finally, we draw from both literatures to consider factors that might determine race-related humor’s potential to facilitate positive interracial dialogue through anxiety reduction. We conclude with some possible areas for further research.

Quid rides?: Targets and referents of RoastMe insults

This article offers a qualitative and quantitative socio-cultural examination of RoastMe, a peculiar humorous practice deployed on Reddit and reposted on various social media. First, RoastMe is characterized from the emic (user) perspective and conceptualized in the light of humor theory (superiority and incongruity approaches). RoastMe consists in some users’ posting pictures of themselves with a view to being roasted, i. e. pelted with jocular insults, by other online community members. Albeit a type of disparagement humor, RoastMe is an innocuous humorous activity enclosed within a humorous frame; it is a form of affiliative humor based on users’ unbounded creativity. Second, this paper reports the findings of a quantitative study on the predominant types of targets/roastees depending on their (lack of) salient features, as well as the source and nature of the jocularly disparaged referents in roasting comments, i. e. the central features that roasters make harmless fun of most often, relative to the different categories of roastees.Roasting (v.) – To humorously mock or humiliate someone with a well-timed joke, diss or comeback. (…) Hone your roasting skills, meet other roasters, and get yourself roasted! Everybody needs to laugh at themselves! And other people, of course!(https://www.reddit.com/r/RoastMe/)