Suchergebnisse

A two-part study was conducted to determine if groups producing many different instances of laughing and joking were better at problem solving than groups displaying fewer of these behaviors. In the first phase of the study, nominally high, medium, and low wit individuals were selected to form six all-male and six all-female groups. These groups were then evaluated during a second phase of the study for the amount of joking and laughing produced as well as forgroup performance on a simple anagrams task and on a more complex decision task requiring an optimal ordering of alternatives. Initial results revealed that cross-phase predictability for humorous behaviors was low for male groups and somewhat better for female groups. For this reason, behaviorally high, medium, and low humor groups were then defined in terms of the amount of laughing and joking produced during phase 2. When total seconds of laughter was used, significant differences favoring high over medium and low groups were found for the number of anagrams produced but not for the more complex ordering task. When number of jokes was used to rank groups, no clear effect was obtained for either task. The different roles laughing and joking play in group problem solving and the methodological difficulties involved in the cross-situation selection of witty individuals are discussed.

The present experiment concerned an evaluation of the number, nature, and pattern of targeted and nontargeted humorous remarks produced by individuals in six different group settings. Results indicated that humorous targeting occurred in about two-thirds of the cases except for short-term problem-solving groups where only 36%l'o of humorous remarks were directed. For all six groups, however, the ratio of appreciative to deprecating targeted remarks was about 2:1 or 3:1. Humorous remarks often occurred in episodes of from two to five remarks, with enduring groups producing more and longer episodes. Single item and more extended episodes contained a greater number of appreciative and neutral remarks while episodes of intermediate length contained more deprecating remarks. For groups in which cross-person targeting was evaluated, there was a reasonably strong correlation between targeting and being targeted by others. Present results were interpreted to suggest that the meaning and function of a humorous event can best be understood from the point of view of the group and not from some external, objective point of view. When this is done, even deprecating remarks can be seen as providing a condition of group support for such remarks allow an acceptable expression of personal and group discomfort even as they single out and specially note individual group members. In addition, such remarks strengthen intragroup bonding by bringing about the communal response of group laughter.