What makes things humorous

Warren, Caleb; McGraw, A. Peter

doi:10.1073/pnas.1503836112

Cited by 43 publications

(31 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…We build on the preceding discussion of congruence (i.e., Mandler 1982) with theory in sociology, psychology, social science, business, and humanities (i.e., Alden, Mukherjee, and Hoyer 2000; Warren and McGraw 2016; Woltman Elpers, Mukherjee, and Hoyer 2004) to further propose that a departure from standard and mainstream social norms for a brand embracing a sociopolitical cause is an incongruence that can surprise consumers. The positive or negative interpretation of that unexpected brand activism campaign depends on how benign the viewer perceives the violation of social norms to be (i.e., Warren and McGraw 2015, 2016). Contested social norms in brand activism are a violation that some consumers will view as a threat to their identity and well-being but others will view as benign and harmless (McGraw and Warren 2010).…”

Section: Boundary Conditions Of Brand Activism: Optimal Incongruencementioning

confidence: 99%

Brands Taking a Stand: Authentic Brand Activism or Woke Washing?

Vredenburg¹,

Kapitan²,

Spry³

et al. 2020

Journal of Public Policy & Marketing

395

304

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In today’s marketplace, consumers want brands to take a stand on sociopolitical issues. When brands match activist messaging, purpose, and values with prosocial corporate practice, they engage in authentic brand activism, creating the most potential for social change and the largest gains in brand equity. In contrast, brands that detach their activist messaging from their purpose, values, and practice are enacting inauthentic brand activism through the practice of “woke washing,” potentially misleading consumers with their claims, damaging both their brand equity and potential for social change. First, the authors draw on theory to inform a typology of brand activism to determine how, and when, a brand engaging with a sociopolitical cause can be viewed as authentic. Second, a theory-driven framework identifies moderate, optimal incongruence between brand and cause as a boundary condition, showing how brand activists may strengthen outcomes in an increasingly crowded marketplace. Third, the authors explore important policy and practice implications for current and aspiring brand activists, from specific brand-level standards in marketing efforts to third-party certifications and public sector partnerships.

show abstract

Section: Boundary Conditions Of Brand Activism: Optimal Incongruencementioning

confidence: 99%

Brands Taking a Stand: Authentic Brand Activism or Woke Washing?

Vredenburg¹,

Kapitan²,

Spry³

et al. 2020

Journal of Public Policy & Marketing

395

304

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…All but two of the general humor theories listed in Table 1 include one or more of these antecedents. Three theories identify all three, albeit using different terminology: reversal theory (Apter, 1982; Wyer & Collins, 1992), detection of mistaken reasoning theory 6 (Hurley et al, 2011), and the benign violation theory (McGraw & Warren, 2010; Veatch, 1998; Warren & McGraw, 2015). The conditions described by these three theories (e.g., diminishment vs. mistake vs. violation appraisal) are not exactly the same, but they are similar enough that we were unable to find studies that test the subtle differences between them.…”

Section: General Discussion and Takeawaysmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Another example involving wordplay illustrates how removing one of these antecedents reduces humor appreciation. Consider a customer who compliments a baker for having “nice buns” (Warren & McGraw, 2015). Although it is generally considered inappropriate to publicly comment on someone’s buttocks, this norm violation might seem acceptable because “buns” can refer to the baker’s bread rather than his backside.…”

Section: General Discussion and Takeawaysmentioning

confidence: 99%

What Makes Things Funny? An Integrative Review of the Antecedents of Laughter and Amusement

Warren

Barsky

McGraw

2020

Pers Soc Psychol Rev

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Despite the broad importance of humor, psychologists do not agree on the basic elements that cause people to experience laughter, amusement, and the perception that something is funny. There are more than 20 distinct psychological theories that propose appraisals that characterize humor appreciation. Most of these theories leverage a subset of five potential antecedents of humor appreciation: surprise, simultaneity, superiority, a violation appraisal, and conditions that facilitate a benign appraisal. We evaluate each antecedent against the existing empirical evidence and find that simultaneity, violation, and benign appraisals all help distinguish humorous from nonhumorous experiences, but surprise and superiority do not. Our review helps organize a disconnected literature, dispel popular but inaccurate ideas, offers a framework for future research, and helps answer three long-standing questions about humor: what conditions predict laughter and amusement, what are the adaptive benefits of humor, and why do different people think vastly different things are humorous?

show abstract

“…Stahl and the presentation of Reagan's (un)successful humour may be premised upon the humour being interpreted as a benign violation of expectations (McGraw, Williams, & Warren, 2014;Warren & McGraw, 2015) , as opposed to ridicule that is received as more aggressive and less socially acceptable.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Laughter and effective presidential leadership: A case study of Ronald Reagan as the ‘great communicator'

Stewart¹,

Senior²,

Dye³

et al. 2019

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

President Ronald Reagan’s expert use of media and his charismatic connection with viewers earned him the moniker “the great communicator”. This study examines one aspect of his charisma, the influence of elicited laughter, during a much-discussed and highly critical 5-minute news story by CBS reporter Leslie Stahl during the 1984 US presidential election. Production choices regarding observable audience responses (OAR) on viewer perceptions of politicians have not been extensively studied. The focus of the present study is to explore the effects of audience laughter on perceived leadership traits. Two experiments examining the mediating effects of audience laughter on perceptions of presidential leadership are reported. The first shows that perceptions of Reagan’s perceived warmth significantly diminish when strong laughter is removed from the presentation, whereas perceptions of competence remain unaffected. The second study proposes a between-subjects experiment (preregistered report) to confirm and extend the findings of the first study by considering trait charisma and the influence of specific humorous comments that are accompanied by laughter.

show abstract

What makes things humorous

Cited by 43 publications

References 13 publications

Brands Taking a Stand: Authentic Brand Activism or Woke Washing?

Brands Taking a Stand: Authentic Brand Activism or Woke Washing?

What Makes Things Funny? An Integrative Review of the Antecedents of Laughter and Amusement

Laughter and effective presidential leadership: A case study of Ronald Reagan as the ‘great communicator'

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About