Springer Nature is making SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 research free. View research | View latest news | Sign up for updates

Sardonic Atheists and Silly Evangelicals: the Relationship between Self-Concept and Humor Style

Abstract

Humor is widely used as a means of supporting group solidarity, but what determines the direction that this humor takes (i.e. its quality and targets)? I suggest that the answer lies in an interaction between self-concept, perceptions of outgroups and micro group culture. Aspects of self-concept that are central for a group’s identity work, especially how the group imagines outsiders, open possibilities for certain types of humor while closing off others. Then micro-cultural processes, heavily dependent on the exact persons present in a given interaction, influence the humorous forms used. This process explains why groups in roughly similar structural positions often make use of humor to generate solidarity in strikingly different ways, as well as why styles of humor vary, within limits, within groups. I provide illustrations of this process in two religious minority groups with very different humorous styles: atheists in the Bible Belt and evangelical Christians in Chicago.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Notes

  1. 1.

    These theories stem from a stated desire to explore the relation between individual humor styles and common psychometric measures of individual well-being. Other scholars have questioned this framework and the instruments used to measure it (Heintz and Ruch 2015).

  2. 2.

    The names of all organizations and individuals are pseudonyms.

  3. 3.

    Recent estimates of the proportion of evangelicals in the Chicago area range from 8% (Grammich et al. 2012) to 16% (Pew Research Center 2015) of the total population. While county and metropolitan level measures of atheist populations unfortunately do not exist, the best state level approximation estimates that roughly 4% of Oklahomans self-identify as atheists (Pew Research Center 2015), and there is no evidence to suggest that the proportion of atheists in the area studied varies dramatically from this assessment.

  4. 4.

    It is common to have visitors in evangelical spaces (an example of which is described below), adding to the inherent ambiguities between insider and outsider status (Naples 1996). Nothing I observed indicated that people were significantly adjusting their humor styles because of my presence. I also did not notice any interactional markers indicating suppressed behaviors relating to humor (e.g. meaningful eye contact between insiders, suppressed laughter, apologies for inappropriate jokes, etc.).

  5. 5.

    Members of this congregation fit the most common theological and social science definitions of evangelicals (e.g. Balmer 1989; Bebbington 1989; Larsen 2007; Lindsay 2007). Lake Church is comprised of theologically conservative protestant Christians who emphasize the Bible, pursue an ongoing relationship with Jesus Christ, believe that salvation is attained only through Christ’s sacrifice on the cross, attempt to convince others of their perspective, and have often had a personal conversion experience. Lake Church also has an extremely loose affiliation with a historically Baptist denomination that is a member of the National Association of Evangelicals, but the connection is not advertised and many members are unaware of it. For most practical purposes, the church is evangelical non-denominational. There is, of course, wide variation in belief, practice and culture within the larger American evangelical community (Balmer 1989; Woodberry and Smith 1998) and that diversity is reflected in this study.

  6. 6.

    I distinguish in my writing between reported speech from fieldnotes and speech transcribed from recorded interviews. Text within double quotation marks designates exact quotations from conversations where the audio was recorded, with only minor revisions to facilitate ease of reading. Text within single quotation marks is used for reported speech from ethnographic fieldnotes.

  7. 7.

    Spiritual gifts are miraculous abilities believed to be given to some Christians (e.g. healing, glossolalia, prophesy, leadership, etc.).

  8. 8.

    This online free listing task was based on a convenience sample (N = 84) of people who visit the Prairie Atheists hidden social media page. In the task people were asked, “What words best describe x? Please list as many as you can,” where “x” was “religion,” “atheism,” “spirituality,” and “Christianity.”

  9. 9.

    “Fundy” is a pejorative term for a Christian fundamentalist.

References

  1. Abrams, Jessica R., and Amy Bippus. 2011. An intergroup investigation of disparaging humor. Journal of Language and Social Psychology 30 (2): 193–201.

  2. Attardo, Salvatore. 2008. A primer for the linguistics of humor. In The Primer of Humor Research, ed. Victor Raskin, 101–155. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.

  3. Baker, Joseph O., and Buster G. Smith. 2015. American secularism: Cultural contours of nonreligious belief systems. New York: New York University Press.

  4. Balmer, Randall Herbert. 1989. Mine eyes have seen the glory: A journey into the evangelical subculture in America. New York: Oxford University Press.

  5. Bebbington, David W. 1989. Evangelicalism in modern Britain: A history from the 1730s to the 1980s. London: Routledge.

  6. Bender, Courtney. 2003. Heaven’s kitchen: Living religion at God’s Love We Deliver. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

  7. Cann, Arnie, M. Ashley Norman, Jennifer L. Welbourne, and Lawrence G. Calhoun. 2008. Attachment styles, conflict styles and humour styles: Interrelationships and associations with relationship satisfaction. European Journal of Personality 22 (2): 131–146.

  8. Chen, Guo-Hai, and Rod A. Martin. 2007. A comparison of humor styles, coping humor, and mental health between Chinese and Canadian university students. Humor: International Journal of Humor Research 20 (3): 215–234.

  9. Cimino, Richard, and Christopher Smith. 2007. Secular humanism and atheism beyond progressive secularism. Sociology of Religion 68 (4): 407–424.

  10. Cundall, Michael. 2012. Towards a better understanding of racist and ethnic humor. Humor: International Journal of Humor Research 25 (2): 155–177.

  11. Davies, Christie. 1990. Ethnic humor around the world: A comparative analysis. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.

  12. Davies, Christie. 2010. The mirth of nations. New Brunswick: Transaction Publishers.

  13. Davis, Murray S. 1993. What’s so funny?: The comic conception of culture and society. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

  14. Effler, Erika Summers. 2010. Laughing saints and righteous heroes: Emotional rhythms in social movement groups. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

  15. Eliasoph, Nina, and Paul Lichterman. 2003. Culture in interaction. American Journal of Sociology 108 (4): 735–794.

  16. Ferguson, Mark, and Thomas E. Ford. 2008. Disparagement humor: A theoretical and empirical review of psychoanalytic, superiority, and social identity theories. Humor: International Journal of Humor Research 21 (3): 283–312.

  17. Fine, Gary Alan. 1983. Sociological aspects of humor. In Handbook of Humor Research, ed. Paul E. McGhee and Jeffrey H. Goldstein, 159–182. New York: Springer-Verlag.

  18. Fine, Gary Alan. 1984. Humorous interaction and the social construction of meaning: Making sense in a jocular vein. Studies in Symbolic Interaction 5: 83–101.

  19. Fine, Gary Alan. 2012. Group culture and the interaction order: Local sociology on the meso-level. Annual Review of Sociology 38 (1): 159–179.

  20. Fine, Gary Alan, and Michaela DeSoucey. 2005. Joking cultures: Humor themes as social regulation in group life. Humor: International Journal of Humor Research 18 (1): 1–22.

  21. Fine, Gary Alan, and Lori Holyfield. 1996. Secrecy, trust, and dangerous leisure: Generating group cohesion in voluntary organizations. Social Psychology Quarterly 59 (1): 22–38.

  22. Fominaya, Cristina Flesher. 2007. The role of humour in the process of collective identity formation in autonomous social movement groups in contemporary Madrid. International Review of Social History 52 (Supplement S15): 243–258.

  23. Goffman, Erving. 1959. The presentation of self in everyday life. New York: Doubleday.

  24. Gouldner, Alvin Ward. 1979. The future of intellectuals and the rise of the new class. New York: Seabury Press.

  25. Grammich, Clifford, Kirk Hadaway, Richard Houseal, Dale E. Jones, Alexei Krindatch, Richie Stanley, and Richard H. Taylor. 2012. 2010 U.S. Religion Census: Religious Congregations & Membership Study. Association of Statisticians of American Religious Bodies. Downloaded from the Association of Religion Data Archives www.TheARDA.com. Accessed 16 August 2016.

  26. Guenther, Katja M. 2014. Bounded by disbelief: How atheists in the United States differentiate themselves from religious believers. Journal of Contemporary Religion 29 (1): 1–16.

  27. Guenther, Katja M., Kerry Mulligan, and Cameron Papp. 2013. From the outside in: Crossing boundaries to build collective identity in the New Atheist movement. Social Problems 60 (4): 457–475.

  28. Guenther, Katja M., Natasha Radojcic, and Kerry Mulligan. 2015. Humor, collective identity, and framing in the New Atheist movement. Research in Social Movements, Conflicts and Change, 38:203–27. Emerald Group Publishing Limited.

  29. Habib, Rania. 2008. Humor and disagreement: Identity construction and cross-cultural enrichment. Journal of Pragmatics 40 (6): 1117–1145.

  30. Heiner, Robert. 1992. Evangelical heathens: The deviant status of freethinkers in Southland. Deviant Behavior 13 (1): 1–20.

  31. Heintz, Sonja, and Willibald Ruch. 2015. An examination of the convergence between the conceptualization and the measurement of humor styles: A study of the construct validity of the Humor Styles Questionnaire. Humor: International Journal of Humor Research 28 (4): 611–633.

  32. Holmes, Janet. 2000. Politeness, power and provocation: How humour functions in the workplace. Discourse Studies 2 (2): 159–185.

  33. Holmes, Janet, and Meredith Marra. 2002. Having a laugh at work: How humour contributes to workplace culture. Journal of Pragmatics 34 (12): 1683–1710.

  34. Huller, Harry H. 1983. Humor and hostility: A neglected aspect of social movement analysis. Qualitative Sociology 6 (3): 255.

  35. Jefferson, Gail, Harvey Sacks, and Emanuel Schegloff. 1987. Notes on laughter in the pursuit of intimacy. In Talk and Social Organisation, ed. Graham Button and John R.E. Lee, 153–205. Philadelphia: Multilingual Matters.

  36. Kuipers, Giselinde. 2008. The sociology of humor. In The primer of humor research, ed. Victor Raskin, 8:361–98. Humor Research. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.

  37. Kuipers, Giselinde. 2015. Good humor, bad taste: A sociology of the joke. Berlin, New York: Mouton de Gruyter.

  38. Kutz-Flamenbaum, Rachel V. 2014. Humor and social movements. Sociology Compass 8 (3): 294–304.

  39. Lamont, Michèle, and Virág Molnár. 2002. The study of boundaries in the social sciences. Annual Review of Sociology 28 (1): 167–195.

  40. Larsen, Timothy. 2007. Defining and locating evangelicalism. In The Cambridge companion to evangelical theology, ed. Timothy Larsen and Daniel J. Treier, 1–14. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

  41. LeDrew, Stephen. 2015. The evolution of atheism: The politics of a modern movement. New York: Oxford University Press.

  42. Lindsay, D. Michael. 2007. Faith in the halls of power: How evangelicals joined the American elite. New York: Oxford University Press.

  43. Martin, Rod A. 2007. The psychology of humor an integrative approach. Burlington: Elsevier Academic Press.

  44. Martin, Rod A., Patricia Puhlik-Doris, Gwen Larsen, Jeanette Gray, and Kelly Weir. 2003. Individual differences in uses of humor and their relation to psychological well-being: Development of the humor styles questionnaire. Journal of Research in Personality 37 (1): 48–75.

  45. Merton, Robert King. 1968. Social theory and social structure. New York: Free Press.

  46. Meyer, John C. 2000. Humor as a double-edged sword: Four functions of humor in communication. Communication Theory 10 (3): 310–331.

  47. Mulkay, Michael J. 1988. On humour: Its nature and its place in modern society. Cambridge: Polity Press.

  48. Naples, Nancy A. 1996. A feminist revisiting of the insider/outsider debate: The ‘outsider phenomenon’ in rural Iowa. Qualitative Sociology 19 (1): 83–106.

  49. Oring, Elliott. 2003. Engaging humor. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.

  50. Owens, Timothy J., Dawn T. Robinson, and Lynn Smith-Lovin. 2010. Three faces of identity. Annual Review of Sociology 36 (1): 477–499.

  51. Pew Research Center. 2015. America’s changing religious landscape. http://www.pewforum.org/files/2015/05/RLS-08-26-full-report.pdf. Accessed 16 Feb 2016.

  52. Raskin, Victor. 1985. Semantic mechanisms of humor. Dordrecht: D. Reidel Publishing Company.

  53. Robinson, Dawn T., and Lynn Smith-Lovin. 2001. Getting a laugh: Gender, status, and humor in task discussions. Social Forces 80 (1): 123–158.

  54. Rosenberg, Morris. 1979. Conceiving the self. New York: Basic Books.

  55. Sacks, Harvey. 1974. An analysis of the course of a joke’s telling in conversation. In Explorations in the ethnography of speaking, ed. Richard Bauman and Joel Sherzer, 337–353. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

  56. Smirnova, Michelle. 2014. What is the shortest Russian joke? Communism. Russian cultural consciousness expressed through Soviet humor. Qualitative Sociology 37 (3): 323–343.

  57. Smith, Christian. 1998. American evangelicalism: Embattled and thriving. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

  58. Smith, Jesse M. 2011. Becoming an atheist in America: Constructing identity and meaning from the rejection of theism. Sociology of Religion 72 (2): 215–237.

  59. Smith, Jesse M. 2013. Creating a godless community: The collective identity work of contemporary American atheists. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion 52 (1): 80–99.

  60. Stieger, Stefan, Anton K. Formann, and Christoph Burger. 2011. Humor styles and their relationship to explicit and implicit self-esteem. Personality and Individual Differences 50 (5): 747–750.

  61. Sumerau, Jason E., and Ryan T. Cragun. 2016. ‘I think some people need religion’: The social construction of nonreligious moral identities. Sociology of Religion 77 (4): 386–407.

  62. Swidler, Ann. 2001. Talk of love : How culture matters. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

  63. Terrion, Jenepher Lennox, and Blake E. Ashforth. 2002. From ‘I’ to ‘we’: The role of putdown humor and identity in the development of a temporary group. Human Relations 55 (1): 55–88.

  64. Tsakona, Villy, and Diana Elena Popa. 2011. Humour in politics and the politics of humour: An introduction. In Studies in political humor: In between political critique and public entertainment, ed. Villy Tsakona and Diana Elena Popa, 1–30. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

  65. Turner, John C., Penelope J. Oakes, S. Alexander Haslam, and Craig McGarty. 1994. Self and collective: Cognition and social context. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 20 (5): 454–463.

  66. Williamson, David A., and George Yancey. 2013. There is no god: Atheists in America. Lanham, Maryland: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.

  67. Woodberry, Robert D., and Christian S. Smith. 1998. Fundamentalism et al: Conservative protestants in America. Annual Review of Sociology 24 (1): 25–56.

  68. Zuckerman, Phil. 2012. Faith no more: Why people reject religion. New York: Oxford University Press.

Download references

Acknowledgements

I would like to thank Nidia Banuelos, Courtney Bender, Michaela DeSoucey, Jan Doering, Alessandra Lembo, John Levi Martin, those present at my 2014 American Sociological Association presentation, and three anonymous reviewers from Qualitative Sociology for their very helpful feedback. This research was supported by the National Science Foundation (Award number SES-1333672).

Author information

Correspondence to Rick Moore.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Moore, R. Sardonic Atheists and Silly Evangelicals: the Relationship between Self-Concept and Humor Style. Qual Sociol 40, 447–465 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11133-017-9364-9

Download citation

Keywords

  • Humor
  • Self-concept
  • Interaction
  • Atheism
  • Religion
  • Evangelicalism