Humor is subjective within most settings, but within the anatomy laboratory, it is likely to be significantly more contentious. While humor may be considered a component of the hidden curriculum of medical education, it has yet to be studied specifically from a basic sciences perspective. This study sought to understand if, when, how, and why humor may be used in anatomy labs and the implications this may have in basic sciences education. A survey consisting of demographic and qualitative items was designed to sample widely from academics, students, and health professionals with anatomy laboratory experience. A total of 185 respondents, representing 9 countries participated following purposive sampling and snowball recruitment. Findings of significance were 72% of respondents who had experienced dark humor within the anatomy lab. Themes identified from free-text pertained to the use of internal and external barometers to ascertain the appropriateness of humorous remarks and the use of humor as a mechanism for diffusing stress. Polarity in responses concerning the acceptability of dark humor and rude mnemonics was also observed. This study highlighted that while dark humor may be a perceived tension release, many individuals make use of very specific internalized gauges to determine when and what humor may be appropriate. The data emphasized the need for not only future humanistic-focused anatomy but also basic sciences, education research, to better understand and have ideal educational experiences for all. Finally, this study provided further evidence of the impact of the hidden curriculum associated with the use of humor within educational and professional settings.

Efforts to integrate the basic sciences into the ever‐changing curriculum are a trending area of research in health professions education. Low‐stakes, high‐frequency assessment methods such as the progress test are now widely implemented in the United Kingdom and Northern Ireland as a means of furthering curricular integration toward contemporary goals of competency and professional identity formation. The anatomy educator's experience vis‐à‐vis these curricular changes is not well understood. This study aimed to explore how anatomy educators make sense of the shifting demands of their role. The interviews were semi‐structured, particularly concerned with the phenomenon of teachers adapting to the complexity of their learning environment. The study used interpretative phenomenological analysis (IPA) to focus on the lived experiences of participants coping with the phenomena in question: how do anatomy educators make sense of the learning environment in the United Kingdom? Interviews were transcribed verbatim and interpreted inductively, identifying four key themes: confidence through connectedness, variations in appraisals of curricular integration, managing expectations to perform in paradoxical situations, and the emergence of innovative teaching. Results point to the learning environment as a complex system and highlight the importance of feeling support from and connection to colleagues, enabling individual educators to develop confidence, meet the top‐down demands of changing curricula, and experience personal identity development and uncertainty tolerance within their role. This IPA study offers insight into the lived experiences of anatomy educators whose experiential interpretations of a complex and changing curriculum can uniquely inform stakeholders in health professions education.

Beyond studies and discussions regarding learning outcomes related to dissection, prosection, and anatomy lab experiences, there has been a recent increase in examining the role of the ‘hidden curriculum’ in anatomy education. Lab experiences of many types can help foster professionalism and more humanistic views towards donors, and eventually patients, via this integrated hidden curriculum. But what has been overlooked are the potential darker aspects of the hidden curriculum that may begin in anatomy labs. While the days of ‘cadaver antics' and directly objectifying donor bodies are no longer tolerated, there is little research regarding the more subtle use of dark humour and language still present in anatomy education. Thus, our study aims to better understand the use of black, or cynical, humour as a component of the hidden curriculum of anatomy labs. An Ethics‐reviewed study was designed, and participants were recruited from the Hull York Medical School to voluntarily complete an online survey comprised of 3 demographic, 5 open‐ended, and 6 rating‐scale items. Eligible participants included medical students, MSc anatomy students, anatomy lab tutors, and anatomy faculty. Responses were analysed by descriptive statistics, and open‐ended questions were coded for common themes. Data continues to be collected and analysed, but preliminary findings suggests there are certain themes regarding the perceived appropriateness of black humour in medical education settings. Our findings suggest that the themes of context and situation of humour are key in determining appropriateness, and that while some participants express discomfort at the use of black humour, humour in the anatomy lab is more widely regarded as an appropriate means of coping with stress. An additional emergent theme is the use of (cynical) humour to promote camaraderie amongst teammates. While our data analysis is still ongoing, the preliminary themes suggest outcomes of this study may have implications for better understanding how to address the darker hidden curriculum of anatomy. Additionally, we hope that our findings help to further develop best practices for fostering humanistic future practitioners, throughout all levels of medical training, but starting in anatomy labs with students' ‘first patients.’This abstract is from the Experimental Biology 2019 Meeting. There is no full text article associated with this abstract published in The FASEB Journal.

No abstract