The present study introduces eight comic styles (i.e., fun, humor, nonsense, wit, irony, satire, sarcasm, and cynicism) and examines the validity of a set of 48 marker items for their assessment, the Comic Style Markers (CSM). These styles were originally developed to describe literary work and are used here to describe individual differences. Study 1 examines whether the eight styles can be distinguished empirically, in self- and other-reports, and in two languages. In different samples of altogether more than 1500 adult participants, the CSM was developed and evaluated with respect to internal consistency, homogeneity, test–retest reliability, factorial validity, and construct and criterion validity. Internal consistency was sufficiently high, and the median test-retest reliability over a period of 1–2 weeks was 0.86 (N = 148). Exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses showed that the eight styles could be distinguished in both English- (N = 303) and German-speaking samples (N = 1018 and 368). Comparing self- and other-reports (N = 210) supported both convergent and discriminant validity. The intercorrelations among the eight scales ranged from close to zero (between humor and sarcasm/cynicism) to large and positive (between sarcasm and cynicism). Consequently, second-order factor analyses revealed either two bipolar factors (based on ipsative data) or three unipolar factors (based on normative data). Study 2 related the CSM to instruments measuring personality (N = 999), intelligence (N = 214), and character strengths (N = 252), showing that (a) wit was the only style correlated with (verbal) intelligence, (b) fun was related to indicators of vitality and extraversion, (c) humor was related to character strengths of the heart, and (d) comic styles related to mock/ridicule (i.e., sarcasm, cynicism, but also irony) correlated negatively with character strengths of the virtues temperance, transcendence, and humanity. By contrast, satire had a moral goodness that was lacking in sarcasm and cynicism. Most importantly, the two studies revealed that humor might be related to a variety of character strengths depending on the comic style utilized, and that more styles may be distinguished than has been done in the past. The CSM is recommended for future explorations and refinements of comic styles.

Humour styles, personality and psychological well-being: What’s humour got to do with it?

The present meta-analysis investigates gender differences in the 24 VIA character strengths. Based on a literature search on quantitative studies that assessed character strengths, 65 samples consisting of both published and unpublished data were included (total N = 1,189,924). A random-effects model yielded significant gender differences for 17 of the 24 character strengths, although only four of these differences showed at least small effects: Females scored higher than males in appreciation of beauty and excellence, kindness, love, and gratitude. Thus, males and females were mostly similar in their character strengths. The size of the gender differences did not vary with nationality (i.e. the US, Switzerland, Germany, and Israel), while age and type of measure were significant moderators for 13-14 character strengths. The most pronounced differences emerged between children/adolescents and the VIA-Youth in comparison to adults and the VIA-IS as well as the short measures.

The recent emergence of positive psychology gave rise to the idea to conceptualize humor from a “good character” perspective. Present constructs, however, show a “virtue gap,” and the two concepts of benevolent and corrective humor were developed to fill this gap. The former describes a humorous outlook on life that entails the realistic observations and understanding of human weaknesses (and the imperfection of the world) but also their benevolent humorous treatment. By contrast, corrective humor involves moral-based ridicule—that is, the use of mockery to fight badness and mediocrity. Corrective humor, akin to satire, uses wit to ridicule vices, follies, abuses, and shortcomings with the intent of shaming individuals and groups into improvement. Participants (N = 340) filled in statements assessing the two virtue-related humor concepts, general sense of humor (subsample of n = 144), mockery, and 24 character strengths. As expected, benevolent humor showed positive correlations with most of the 24 character strengths and uniquely related to the strengths of several virtues (justice, temperance, and transcendence) beyond general sense of humor. Corrective humor related most strongly to strengths of the virtues wisdom, courage, and justice, especially once mockery was controlled for. Thus, both constructs capture important virtue-related humor aspects over and above the sense of humor and mockery and are thus suitable for—at least partially—filling the “virtue gap” in humor research. They have the potential to pave the way for developing and investigating further humor constructs that meaningfully relate to strengths and virtues. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2016 APA, all rights reserved

Although psychological humor research has expanded in the last decades, the humor behaviors that people show in their everyday lives are still poorly understood. To fill this gap, this diary study explores the dimensionality of 45 daily humor behaviors and their relationships with the Big Five personality traits and subjective well-being. Furthermore, the humor behaviors were utilized to investigate the criterion validity of the Humor Styles Questionnaire. A hierarchical factor analysis of the humor behaviors (N = 123) revealed seven dimensions: Cheerful, witty, deriding, amused, sarcastic, self-directed, and canned. These humor behavior dimensions correlated with emotional stability, extraversion, lower agreeableness, and culture/openness. Also cheerful, amused, and self-directed humor behaviors correlated positively with subjective well-being, even when personality and the humor styles were controlled for. The criterion correlations of the humor styles to their constituting humor behaviors were medium to large for affiliative and self-enhancing, and small to medium for aggressive and self-defeating. Overall, investigating humor behaviors seems a promising venue for future research and applications of individual differences in humor