The pairs were instructed to come to an agreed list of
emergency supplies for the hypothetical scenario of being
stranded in the desert. The interaction was then recorded
and each instance of humour was counted and coded
(e.g. tension releasing, disparaging of the task, or putting
down the partner).
Results showed that most of the interactions showed
some use of humour, although there were 10 pairs used
no humour at all. Interestingly, these ten pairs were all
male-male. Indeed, despite popular belief that males use
more human than females, in this experiment females
used significantly more humour than their male counterparts.
Position of power did not influence the total amount of
humour used, suggesting that it isn’t just those in high
power positions that are free to make jokes. But those in
equal relationships were more likely to use tension releasing humour and humour making fun of the task. This was
particularly apparent for bonding humour – humour where
the pair realized they agreed, or in some way acknowledged being “in this together”. Bonding humour was used
exclusively by females.
One of the more interesting findings of the paper was that
those who used more humour had their input vetoed less
frequently by their leader partner. The authors interpreted
this to be the use of humour to influence one’s partner,
but a more accurate interpretation is the use of humour to
prevent being influenced. I find this extremely fascinating
and I’m curious about the mechanism behind this.