The present paper outlines the relevance of cheerfulness, seriousness, and bad mood for humor research. A state-trait model of exhtiaratability is presented which incorporates the three concepts äs both states and traits. Definitions of the concepts are undertaken utilizing a facet approach and the relationships among the three concepts are outlined. The construction strategy for the various forms of the German Version of the State-Trait-Cheerfulness-Inventory (STCI) is outlined and the following versions of the trait form will be elaborated: (a) the pilot form with 122 items (STCI-T<122>); (b) a component (or long) form with 106 items (STCI-T<106>); (c) the Standard form with 60 items (STCI-T<60>) and (d) the international form with 106 items (STCI-T<106i>). The development ofthe twoforms, the replication ofthepsychometric character-istics, and the evaluation of the facet model utilized samples of German and American adults comprising more that 1,300 subjects altogether. The hypothesized facet structure emerged and appeared to be highly generaliz-able across the samples. The psychometric characteristics ofthe facets and scales appeared to be satisfactory. While there were no sex differences in any of the scales, seriousness increased steadily öfter age 40. Correspondence between seif· and peerevaluation was examinedand turned out to be sufficiently high. The construction seemed to have been successful in promding a reliable Instrument for the assessment ofthe temperamental basis ofthe sense of humor.

The present study investigates the relationship of self-report inventories of "sense of humor" and behavioral measures of humor as well as their location in the Eysenckian PEN system. 110 male and female adults in the ages from 17 to 83 years answered the following inventories: SHRQ (Martin and Lefcourt 1984), SHQZ (Ziv 1981), SHQ-3 revised (Svebak 1993), CHS (Martin and Lefcourt 1983), MSHS (Thorson and Powell 1993), HIS (Bell, McGhee, and Duffey 1986), 3 WD-K (Ruch 1983), CPPT (Köhler and Ruch 1993), TDS (Murgatroyd, Rushton, Apter, and Ray 1978), STCI-T (Ruch, Freiss, andKöhler 1993), and EPQ-R (Eysenck, Eysenck, and Barrett 1985). Reliability of the humor scales is examined and convergent and discriminant validity of homologous scales of humor appreciation and humor creation is determined. Behavioral measures and self-report instruments yield only meager correlations. While humor appreciation and humor creation form distinct traits in the behavioral measures, they can not be validly discriminated in the self-reports. Factor analysis of self-report inventories yields that the sense of humor is composed of the two orthogonal dimensions of cheerfulness and seriousness.Extraversion is predictive of cheerfulness, low seriousness, and quantity of humor production. Psychoticism is associated with low seriousness, wit and quality of humor production. Finally, emotional stability correlates with cheerfulness. All in all, the general state of the art in the assessment of the sense of humor and its components appears to be far from being satisfactory. Sources of variance -2 -

The present paper outlines the relevance of the states of cheerfulness, seriousness, and bad mood for research on the emotion of exhilaration. Definitions of the concepts are undertaken and the construction strategy for the State-Trait-Cheerfulness-Inventory (STCI) is outlined. The pilot version with 40 items was administered to altogether more than 800 subjects. Empirical analyses of the concepts included the study of the homogeneity of the items in both inter-and intraindividual variation, the identification of sub-clusters, and the demonstrations of the sensitivity of items for mood alterations. The standard state form with 10 items per scale, i.e. the STCI-S[30] was developed based on the data of a construction sample (N = 595) utilizing five criteria for the selection of items. The internal consistency of the scales proved to be satisfactory in various independent subject samples and the expected scale intercorrelations emerged. The factor structure of the items appeared to be highly generalizable across different sources of variation, gender, nationality (U.S.A. vs Germany), and time spans covered. A joint factor analysis of the state and trait items yielded factors of cheerfulness, seriousness, and bad mood both as traits and states with the homologous concepts correlating positively. Convergence of states and traits was also obtained for peer-evaluation data. Finally, the possible range of variation in the three scales across different (experimentally manipulated or naturally occurring) conditions was explored.

There is bothywvutsrponmlihgfedcba interindividual (i.e., between individuals) and intraindividual (i.e., across situations) variation in humor behavior. Some people tend habitually to appreciate, initiate, or laugh at humor more often, or more intensively, than others do. In everyday language this enduring disposition typically is ascribed to the possession of a "sense of humor" and various type nouns (e.g., cynic, wit, wag) and trait-describing adjectives (e.g., humorous, witty, cynical) exist to describe individuals extreme in one form or the other. Aside of interindividual differences with a relative stability over time there are also actual dispositions for humor which do vary over time. We are all inclined to appreciate, initiate, or laugh at humor more at given times and less at others. In everyday language phrases like to be in good humor, in the mood for laughing, out of humor, ill-humored, in a serious mood or frame of mind etc. refer to such states of enhanced or lowered readiness to respond to humor or act humorously. The temperamental basis of humor In the present chapter we present a state-trait approach relevant for the behavioral and experiential domain of humor. We argue that cheerfulness, seriousness, and bad mood as traits form the temperamental basis of humor, and that cheerfulness, seriousness, and bad mood as states represent intrapersonally varying dispositions for humor. The present approach considers that humor is not (a) unidimensional (people differ on more than one dimension), (b) unipolar (humorlessness needs to be represented as well), and (c) covers affective and mental factors (the dispositions need to relate to moods/temperaments and frame of mind). Furthermore, (d) it acknowledges that the disposition for humor varies intra-and interpersonally and that the utilization of the same concepts as both states and traits allows us to study the relevance of homologous actual and habitual dispositions. Finally, (e) while we attempt to define some traits considered to be relevant for the domain of behavior a "sense of humor" concept should predict, we do not (yet) utilize this concept. We take the position that the "sense of humor" is still more of a folk-concept and has

There is bothywvutsrponmlihgfedcba interindividual (i.e., between individuals) and intraindividual (i.e., across situations) variation in humor behavior. Some people tend habitually to appreciate, initiate, or laugh at humor more often, or more intensively, than others do. In everyday language this enduring disposition typically is ascribed to the possession of a "sense of humor" and various type nouns (e.g., cynic, wit, wag) and trait-describing adjectives (e.g., humorous, witty, cynical) exist to describe individuals extreme in one form or the other. Aside of interindividual differences with a relative stability over time there are also actual dispositions for humor which do vary over time. We are all inclined to appreciate, initiate, or laugh at humor more at given times and less at others. In everyday language phrases like to be in good humor, in the mood for laughing, out of humor, ill-humored, in a serious mood or frame of mind etc. refer to such states of enhanced or lowered readiness to respond to humor or act humorously. The temperamental basis of humor In the present chapter we present a state-trait approach relevant for the behavioral and experiential domain of humor. We argue that cheerfulness, seriousness, and bad mood as traits form the temperamental basis of humor, and that cheerfulness, seriousness, and bad mood as states represent intrapersonally varying dispositions for humor. The present approach considers that humor is not (a) unidimensional (people differ on more than one dimension), (b) unipolar (humorlessness needs to be represented as well), and (c) covers affective and mental factors (the dispositions need to relate to moods/temperaments and frame of mind). Furthermore, (d) it acknowledges that the disposition for humor varies intra-and interpersonally and that the utilization of the same concepts as both states and traits allows us to study the relevance of homologous actual and habitual dispositions. Finally, (e) while we attempt to define some traits considered to be relevant for the domain of behavior a "sense of humor" concept should predict, we do not (yet) utilize this concept. We take the position that the "sense of humor" is still more of a folk-concept and has