Introduction

What is funny to whom and why is a question that can be tracked back to the pioneering studies of Eysenck and Cattell, who employed a factor analytical approach to derive humor categories and afterwards investigated their relation to personality. However, since the 1970s the focus of humor research shifted to individual differences in the use of humor in daily life (e.g., the role of humor in coping and its relation to mental health) (Martin & Ford, 2018). The first line of research relies on humor appreciation tests in which participants rate how much they like different humorous material, while the second employs self-reports or individuals provide their typical use of humor in daily life (for a review, see Martin & Ford, 2018; Ruch, 1998). In our view, there is a need to revive and strengthen the humor appreciation approach, since it was not fully investigated and it cannot be replaced by questionnaire studies as they cover different domains. For example, a questionnaire-based quantitative measure of the sense of humor and humor appreciation measure were virtually unrelated (Deckers & Ruch, 1992). Therefore, the focus of this study will go back to the question of what we can know about a person from the type of jokes they like. Although the early works of Eysenck (1943) and Cattell (e.g., Cattell & Tollefson, 1966; Luborsky & Cattell, 1947) provided some answers, we relate to the historically more recent humor appreciation approach (i.e., the 3WD humor studies; Ruch, 1992).

It has been almost forty years since the establishment of the 3WD (Witz-Dimensionen) humor taxonomy (Ruch, 1983), and yet it is still the most widely accepted categorization of humor stimuli (for a review, see Martin & Ford, 2018). The 3WD test distinguishes three types of humor: Incongruity-resolution (INC-RES), nonsense (NON), and sexual (SEX) humor. The first two are considering the structural properties of humor, while the sexual humor dimension contains jokes and cartoons with sexual content. More precisely, in INC-RES humor the punch line provides a full resolution, whereas NON humor stimuli have either no resolution at all, a partial resolution, or create new incongruities (McGhee et al., 1990; Ruch, 1992; see also Heintz, 2020 for a bimodal model).

A vast number of studies (e.g., Carretero-Dios & Ruch, 2010; Ruch, 1988, 1992; Ruch & Hehl, 1986a, b, 1987, 1993, 1998; Ruch & Malcherek, 2009; Sulejmanov et al. 2018, 2022) tested and confirmed the hypothesis that INC-RES humor is appreciated by individuals with a general need for structured and unambiguous forms of stimulation, while on the other hand, NON humor is associated with tolerance of ambiguity, openness to experience, sensation seeking, and a preference for complex, novel, and unstructured stimuli (Martin & Ford, 2018). Moreover, these studies have not focused only on utilizing the 3WD test, but also employed further humor appreciation instruments that were based on Ruch’s taxonomy (see Carretero-Dios et al., 2005; Galloway & Chirico, 2008; Sulejmanov et al., 2018). In general, since the establishment of the taxonomy, it has been shown that funniness and aversiveness reactions to humor stimuli are associated with personality, attitudes, intelligence, and art preferences (Heintz, 2020).

It became soon apparent that a score, for example, funniness of nonsense, conceptually can be subdivided into components, such as liking of jokes in general, and specific stands towards nonsense. In detail, the three aversiveness scores were highly positively correlated indicating that in addition to appreciating the three types of humor there are also individual differences in the tendency to experience more or less negative emotions in response to the jokes, i.e., to find them more or less aversive. Next, the funniness scores were mildly positively correlated, suggesting there is a milder tendency to be mildly or strongly amused by humor, irrespective of the type.

Finally, the hypotheses relate to the joke type, be it structure (e.g., nonsense) or content (e.g., sex), but, for example, the score for funniness of sexual humor also contains the liking of structure (as sexual humor is based on either incongruity-resolution and nonsense and this contributes to the variance). Hence, the effects as described above dilute the findings and it would be good to find a way to remove this unwanted variance. People who appreciate complexity should find nonsense funny and rate incongruity-resolution low in funniness. Thus, the hypothesis is actually based on the difference: a preference of one structure over the other (irrespective of the general level of appreciation) and this should not be diluted by a current good mood (or a tendency to rate more positively) that affects all of the scales at the same time.

Depending on how large this unwanted variance is in total, the verification of a hypothesis is more or less impaired and computing a difference score would be a simple index of structure preference. This problem became first apparent in a study on humor appreciation and sensation seeking in four samples (Ruch, 1988), where the pattern of correlations varied in some ways but also was stable in others. For example, while experience seeking always correlated negatively with INC-RES and nonsense always correlated positively the magnitude varied from sample to sample. Sometimes the former correlation was high and the latter low, sometimes this was reversed and sometimes the two correlations were of equal magnitude. The correlations were low overall (see Ruch, 1988; Table 1). When a structure preference index (SPI) was computed by subtracting INC-RES from NON the correlations were roughly the same in all four samples and, more importantly, the correlations were much higher (see Ruch, 1988; Table 4). For example, the correlations were − 0.24 (ES and INC-RES) and 0.24 (ES and NON) in the total sample of 448 participants and the correlation with the SPI was 0.40 (ranging from 0.27 to 0.50 in the four samples) underscoring that experience seeking is most reliably related to the element whether incongruities are resolved or not, and not so much to funniness of INC-RES and NON separately. Since then the structure preference index (SPI) was used successfully in a variety of studies for a more precise hypothesis testing (e.g., Ruch & Hehl, 1998, 1993; Ruch & Malcherek, 2009).

The present study focuses on the two structural dimensions of humor and their relation to the Big Five traits. Soto and John (2017) conceptualized each of the Big Five domains with three facets: Extraversion (sociability, assertiveness, energy level), Agreeableness (compassion, respectfulness, trust), Conscientiousness (organization, productiveness, responsibility), Negative Emotionality (anxiety, depression, emotional volatility), and Open-Mindedness (intellectual curiosity, aesthetic sensitivity, creative imagination). The Big Five Inventory-2 (BFI-2) operationalizes these domains, and it was shown that it has a robust hierarchical structure, controls for individual differences in acquiescence, and has conceptual breadth, specificity, and predictive power (Soto & John, 2017; see also Hřebíčková et al., 2020). Regarding humor structure appreciation, we will employ the Czech version of the Humor Structure Appreciation Scale (HSAS; Sulejmanov et al., 2022). Therefore, two domains of data will be used; a self-report of personality, and ratings of humor, which represent an actual liking/disliking of certain types of jokes. It should be noted that the sense of humor is a multidimensional construct (see Martin & Ford, 2018) and we are focusing on the conceptualization referring to an aesthetic preference. Recent studies have also investigated the association between personality traits and humor conceptualized as, for example, comic styles (e.g., Dionigi et al., 2021), humor styles (e.g., Plessen et al., 2020), or examined the role of personality during humor appreciation and employed fMRI techniques (e.g., Berger et al., 2018).

Ruch (2008) has proposed that one possible further avenue for research regarding humor appreciation is testing the hypothesized personality correlates of humor (structure) appreciation in different countries to test its universality. In line with the above-mentioned theoretical accounts and previous studies (see Appendix), we expect that open-mindedness and lower conscientiousness (especially the facet of organization; see Ruch & Hehl, 1993) will be related to preference for NON humor, while agreeableness should relate to finding INC-RES humor as funny (Hypothesis 1). At the level of open-mindedness facets, we hypothesize that aesthetic sensitivity should be the best predictor for liking of NON over INC-RES humor (H2), as previous studies (see Ruch & Hehl, 1998) have shown that having a preference for unresolvable incongruities over full resolution is also related to liking of complexity in different aesthetic fields (e.g., art photographs; preference for asymmetric polygons). However, the facets of intellectual curiosity and creative imagination should correlate with the SPI, since these two facets are aligned with the NEO-PI-R (McCrae & Costa, 2008) facets of ideas and fantasy (see Soto & John, 2017; see Ruch & Hehl, 1998 for correlations between facets of Openness and humor structure appreciation).

Finally, there is a confirmed hypothesis that extraverted individuals enjoy humor more of all types, and it assumes that this should be shown with the total score across the humor factors (Ruch, 1992; see Martin & Ford, 2018 for a review). On the other hand, it has been shown (Ruch, 1992) that introverted neurotics (who are also high in tender-mindedness) generally dislike all types of humor (measured with the total aversiveness ratings across humor factors). The universality of these findings will also be tested.

The present study

The present study aims to examine the associations between personality and humor structure appreciation. We follow the call of Ruch (2008) to investigate typical personality correlates to humor (structure) appreciation in a different setting, but we will also employ different operationalizations of both personality domains and humor structure appreciation that have not been yet explored. In particular, as one of the foci of our study is on open-mindedness facets, it is important to note that the BFI-2 open-mindedness dimension is more about cognition and aesthetics, rather than behavioral facets (Soto & John, 2017). The prominence of these facets in the operationalization of the open-mindedness should align with humor structure appreciation, or the cognitive processes that are triggered when the humor stimuli are perceived. Moreover, the humor instrument that we are employing is new and differs with the 3WD test in a way that NON humor in the HSAS measure is represented by verbal jokes, while in the 3WD the items representing NON humor are cartoons (for similarities and differences between verbal and visual humor, see Hempelmann & Samson, 2008). In sum, we aim to expand previous studies regarding the association between personality and humor structure preference in a new cultural setting, but also employ different humor stimuli and operationalization of personality.

Method

Participants and procedure

A total of 534 participants from the Czech Republic completed the measures in an online study following informed consent. Twenty-five participants were excluded due to careless completion of the questionnaires (e.g., answering all items with the same value). Therefore, the final sample comprises 509 subjects (377 female, 126 male, and 6 gender non-binary) with a mean age of 27.01 years (SD = 10.21, range 15 to 77 years). A link containing the instruments was posted on social media (e.g., Facebook). Participants were also asked to share the link with their acquaintances (“snowball” method). Respondents were not paid for their participation in the study. All procedures performed were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments.

Measures

Big five inventory 2 (BFI-2)

The big five traits (i.e., extraversion, agreeableness, conscientiousness, negative emotionality, and open-mindedness) were assessed using the 60-item Czech version of the BFI-2 (Hřebíčková et al., 2020). The items have a common item stem (“I am someone who…”) and short descriptive phrases (e.g., “Is fascinated by art, music, or literature”, “Tends to be disorganized”) (Soto & John, 2017). The scale contains 15 facets (3 for each domain; see Introduction). A 5-point scale (ranging from disagree strongly to agree strongly) is utilized for the rating of each item by the respondents. The Czech version showed adequate hierarchical structure and reliability. Hřebíčková et al. (2020) reported that the internal consistency ranged from 0.81 to 0.89 (for the personality domains), and 0.56 to 0.83 (for the individual facets). Concerning construct validity, several studies (using different language adaptations of the instrument) have provided evidence that the BFI-2 is a valid personality measure (e.g., Cemalcilar et al., 2021; Soto & John, 2017; Vedel et al., 2021). For example, Soto and John (2017) report that the BFI-2 domains and facets relate meaningfully with a variety of behavioral, psychological, and peer-reported criteria (see Soto & John, 2017, Table 10). As for the Czech version of the scale, convergent validity of the instrument was not evaluated (Hřebíčková et al., 2020).

Humor structure appreciation scale (HSAS)

Humor structure appreciation was assessed with the Czech version of the HSAS (Sulejmanov et al., 2022; see also Sulejmanov et al., 2018). The scale contains 10 items/jokes (5 INC-RES and 5 NON), and 4 “warm-up” items. A sample INC-RES joke is: A driver knocks down a pedestrian at the crossing and says, “You’re lucky that I am a doctor,” and the pedestrian replies, “But you’re unlucky because I’m a lawyer.” A joke representing the NON humor dimension is: A dog went to a newspaper office to put an advertisement. “What do you want to write there?” the editor asks. “Woof, woof, woof, woof, woof, woof, woof, woof”. “That’s eight times “woof “, you can add another “woof” there for no extra charge” he replies, “And what sense would the ad make then?” says the dog. Participants rate each joke on two 7-point scales of funniness (“not funny at all” to “very funny”) and aversiveness (“not aversive at all” to “very aversive”). Four scores can be computed, two for funniness (INC-RESf and NONf), and two for aversiveness (INC-RESa and NONa). Additionally, a structure preference index (SPI) can be obtained by subtracting INC-RESf from NONf (or vice versa), indicating the relative preference for one humor dimension over the another (Ruch & Hehl, 1998). Sulejmanov et al. (2022) showed that the Czech version of the HSAS has an adequate factor structure, and the reported Cronbach’s alpha scores were. 81 (INC-RESf), .79 (NONf), .75 (INC-RESa), .86 (NONa), and. 61 (SPI). Furthermore, initial construct validity was obtained by relating the HSAS scales to the need for closure (Kruglanski & Webster, 1996; Roets & Van Hiel, 2011). More specifically, Sulejmanov et al. (2022) report that the need for closure was positively associated with INC-RESf, NONa, and the SPI.

Results

Descriptive statistics (means and standard deviation), as well as reliability estimates (Cronbach’s alpha), were computed for the BFI-2 and the HSAS. The results are depicted in Table 1.

Table 1 Descriptive statistics and reliability analysis for the BFI-2 and HSAS
Full size table

Table 1 shows that Cronbach’s alpha was high for all of the measures used. It should be noted that on the facets level, the reliability estimates were also satisfactory (ranging from 0.64 for trust, to 0.85 for organization and aesthetic sensitivity). Furthermore, the obtained mean funniness and aversiveness scores for both INC-RES and NON are comparable to previous studies (e.g., Carretero-Dios et al., 2009; 2010; Carretero-Dios & Ruch, 2010). In addition, the correlation between the funniness scores of INC-RES and NON humor was significant (r = .42, p < .01).

Next, the correlations between the scales were computed. The results are given in Table 2.

Table 2 Pearson correlation coefficients between BFI-2 and HSAS raw scores
Full size table

Table 2 shows that open-mindedness was associated with a preference for NON humor over INC-RES (i.e., correlated with the SPI), corroborating previous findings (Galloway & Chirico, 2008; Ruch & Hehl, 1998). Furthermore, in line with Carretero-Dios et al. (2005) and Ruch and Hehl (1998), higher open-mindedness was related to lower NONa scores. Conscientiousness correlated negatively with the SPI, which is in accordance with previous studies (Carretero-Dios et al., 2005; Galloway & Chirico, 2008). On the other hand, agreeableness was not associated with humor structure appreciation. Thus, hypothesis 1 was partially confirmed. The results concerning negative emotionality showed that individuals higher in negative emotionality found both humor dimensions as less funny (cf. Galloway & Chirico, 2008). Additionally, as in Hehl and Ruch (1998), negative emotionality was positively related to INC-RESa. Finally, extraversion was only positively related to NONf (corroborating Galloway & Chirico, 2008; cf. Hehl & Ruch, 1985).

Next, focusing on the open-mindedness facets and their relation to the SPI, we found a significant relation between aesthetic sensitivity and intellectual curiosity with the SPI (both r = .13, p < .01), which is partially in line with hypothesis 2, and indicating that individuals higher in these two facets prefer unresolvable incongruities over full resolution in humor. In comparison, when open-mindedness facets were related separately to INC-RES and NON humor, the only significant association was found between aesthetic sensitivity and funniness of NON humor (r = .10, p < .05), and it was of lower magnitude.

Finally, we computed a total funniness/aversiveness score (comprised of both the INC-RES and NON humor jokes) which was related to the Big-Five domains. The total funniness score correlated significantly with extraversion (r = .10, p < .05), and negative emotionality (r = − .17, p < .01), while the total aversiveness score was not significantly related to any of the Big-five domains. However, the emotional volatility facet was significantly correlated with the total aversiveness score (r = .10, p < .05).

Structural equation modeling (SEM) analysis

The observed relationships between the HSAS and BFI-2 scales reached a maximum absolute value of 0.15 and thus barely qualify as small effects according to Cohen’s (1992) notation. Under these circumstances, the actual correlation structure can be easily hidden due to sample variance and natural variation in the estimates of the correlation coefficients. To get a clearer picture of the studied relationships, we repeated previous analyses at the latent variable level using structural equation modeling (SEM). This procedure provides a more accurate results for several reasons. (1) The correlations of latent variables are not distorted due to imperfect reliability of the measurement instruments. Unreliability typically attenuate observed correlations, however as Cole and Preacher (2014) pointed out, the observed relationship can be changed in any direction when the measurement errors are correlated. SEM overcomes this problem. (2) When modelling latent variables, item scores can be treated as ordinal variables using polychoric correlation coefficients. Especially when the item scores are highly skewed, their sum (or average) is not the optimal solution. SEM makes it possible to extract maximum information from the items regardless of the distribution and ordinal nature of the responses. The previous two points ensure that (3) tests of statistical significance within the SEM model have higher statistical power and the resulting confidence intervals are noticeably narrower.

The HSAS humor scales have previously been modeled as a two-factor structure, each tapping on five relevant items (Sulejmanov et al., 2022). We also used this solution to analyze the relationship between personality and humor structure appreciation.

The structural model parameters were estimated using the diagonally weighted least squares method (DWLS) based on a matrix of polychoric correlation coefficients. This solution was preferred because some items showed noticeable skewness (from − 0.19 to 1.18). As in previous studies, the two-factor model provided an acceptable fit, χ2(34) = 125.5, CFI = 0.982, TLI = 0.976, RMSEA = 0.073 [0.059, 0.087], SRMR = 0.056. Thresholds for well-fitting model are considered to be CFI and TLI > 0.95, RMSEA < 0.07, SRMR < 0.08 (Hooper et al., 2008).

In addition to the two HSAS factors, we included in the model latent variables corresponding to the scales or subscales of the BFI-2 inventory and also the associated items. The scales of the BFI-2 inventory were examined one at a time as the attempt to embrace the hierarchical structure of the BFI-2 led to convergence issues. Thus, a total of 20 structural models each containing HSAS scales, and one BFI-2 scale or subscale were fitted. See an example of a path diagram showing model or relationships between HSAS latent variables and Openness of mind dimension in Fig. 1. The correlation coefficients found by SEM are shown in Fig. 2.

Fig. 1
figure 1

Path diagram of a SEM model quantifying relationship between HSAS and Openness of mind

Analogous models were used to determine correlations between the HSAS and other scales and subscales of the BFI-2 inventory. Numerical labels indicate standardized coefficients. Abbreviated items of the HSAS were adapted from Sulejmanov et al. (2022).

Full size image
Fig. 2
figure 2

The correlation coefficients of BFI-2 and HSAS latent variables

The individual points represent the BFI-2 scales. Correlation coefficients with INC-RES and NON humor latent variables are plotted on the x and y axes. Error bars represent 95% confidence intervals. If the error bars do not contain zero, the correlation is statistically significant.

Full size image

The results confirmed a number of associations between humor appreciation and personality traits. Adding that the magnitude of the observed effects was still small (|r| < 0.2), however, the SEM approach provides enough statistical power for most of the relationships found to reach statistical significance. A closer look at Fig. 2 reveals that the facets falling under the dimensions of extraversion, negative emotionality, and agreeableness were located diagonally, thus the correlation with the NON humor factor is of similar magnitude to the correlation with INC-RES for these variables. The dimension of agreeableness did not show a statistically significant relationship with any type of humor (cf. Ruch & Hehl, 1998). Finally, outside the diagonal were the facets belonging to the open-mindedness and conscientiousness dimensions. The observed correlations corresponded well with theoretical assumptions, as we discuss below.

Discussion

In Ruch’s (2008) review concerning the psychology of humor, investigating typical personality correlates to humor appreciation in different cultural settings was proposed as one possible avenue for further research. However, thus far, studies focusing on the Big Five traits and humor structure appreciation are sparse. The first aim of the present research was to examine the associations between the Big Five personality domains and humor structure appreciation in the Czech Republic. It should be stressed that the Czech Republic is different in language and culture compared to the prior investigations, and we have used different and smaller number of items/jokes representing the humor dimensions. In other words, we have aimed to replicate previous findings in a distinct setting. In that sense, we will firstly focus on the findings regarding the correlations between the broad personality domains and appreciation of INC-RES and NON humor.

In line with previous studies (see Appendix), open-mindedness was related to a preference for NON over INC-RES humor. Soto and John (2017) emphasize the mental experience seeking in their conceptualization of open-mindedness. As experience seeking (i.e., seeking new and stimulating experience through art, music, travel, food, and unconventional life style choices) component of the sensation seeking construct (Zuckerman, 1979) is one of the most robust predictors of a preference for residual incongruities over full resolution (Carretero-Dios & Ruch, 2010), it is no surprise that open-minded individuals preferred the more abstract NON humor jokes over the more conventional INC-RES humor stimuli. In fact, our study extends the well-documented findings that openness to experience/sensation seeking is related to enjoyment, but also lower aversiveness, of NON humor (Ruch & Hehl, 1998) to a further cultural setting.

The finding that higher conscientiousness was negatively related to the SPI is also in accordance with previous studies which have shown that conscientiousness was associated with a higher appreciation of INC-RES humor (Galloway & Chirico, 2008), and was negatively related to NON humor (Carretero-Dios et al., 2005). In our study this trend was confirmed, but only when the relative preference is taken into account. Nevertheless, the finding that individuals high in conscientiousness have a preference for full resolution jokes over NON humor, is also in line with a previous study focusing on humor appreciation and needs (Ruch & Hehl, 1993). In particular, it was shown that the need for order, which conceptually overlaps with the organization (or preference for order and structure) facet of the conscientiousness domain, relates to the funniness of INC-RES humor. Moreover, it is interesting to note that high openness and low conscientiousness were found to be the best predictors of the nonsense comic style (Dionigi et al., 2021), which is aimed at exposing the ridiculousness of the sheer sense (Ruch et al., 2018).

Negative emotionality was related to both structure dimensions concerning the funniness scores, or individuals higher in negative emotionality tend to find humor (irrespective of the structural properties) as less funny. These findings are interesting since previous studies (see Appendix) have not reported a relationship between neuroticism/negative emotionality and the funniness scores of the structural dimensions of humor. One exception is the Galloway and Chirico (2008) study which showed that neuroticism is linked with a preference for INC-RES over NON humor, suggesting that more neurotic/anxious individuals prefer structured situations (i.e. jokes) over unstructured ones. However, our findings might indicate that negative emotionality can account for an overall tendency not to enjoy humor stimuli. This is in line with the study of Weber et al. (2014) in which emotional stability was related to higher humor appreciation. It should be noted that the construct of humor appreciation in Weber et al. (2014) was operationalized with funniness ratings of jokes from the New Yorker, and did not consider their structural properties. Additionally, the negative relation between negative emotionality and aversiveness of INC-RES humor is partially in line with the findings of Hehl and Ruch (1985).

When taking into account the total aversiveness score (comprised of both humor structure dimensions) and its relation to negative emotionality, we failed to replicate the findings that neuroticism/negative emotionality is associated with a general tendency to dislike humor of all types. However, the facet of emotional volatility, which is about moodiness/instability and its relation to anger/irritability (Soto & John, 2017) did relate to finding humor in general as aversive. In other words, individuals who are emotionally volatile are inclined to experience negative emotions more easily, and find typical positive stimuli (i.e., jokes) as negative/aversive.

Finally, our result that extraversion was related to finding NON humor as funny, is in contrast to Hehl and Ruch (1985), but in line with Galloway and Chirico (2008). Nonetheless, the total funniness score was associated with extraversion, which corroborates the notion that extraverted individuals enjoy humor more of all types (Ruch, 1992). In addition, Martin and Ford (2018) relate this to the findings that individuals high in extraversion (and low in neuroticism) have a greater activation of the limbic system reward centers when exposed to humorous cartoons (Mobbs et al., 2005; see also Samson et al., 2009; cf. Berger et al., 2018). Interestingly, in Weber et al. (2014) study, extraversion (alongside emotional stability, openness, and conscientiousness) was related to humor appreciation.

A more fine-grained depiction of the relationships between humor appreciation and personality dimensions was provided by the SEM approach. The facets of negative emotionality were located in the bottom left quadrant, which is consistent with the above statement that negative emotionality is opposed to any kind of humor. This dependency is most pronounced for the facet depression. In contrast, the facets of extraversion were located in the upper right quadrant. This suggests that extraverted individuals (especially those with high levels of sociability) tend to appreciate any kind of humor.

Remarkable is the role of agreeableness. This dimension did not show a statistically significant relationship with any type of humor. However, this is due to the fact that its facets respectfulness and confidence were related to humor appreciation in quite the opposite way. While respectful individuals are reserved in appreciating any kind of humor, confident individuals tend to appreciate both INC-RES and NON humor.

The placement of the facets of open-mindedness and conscientiousness indicates the different sign of the correlation coefficient with the NON and INC-RES humor variables. While a person with a high degree of conscientiousness is more likely to appreciate a joke where the punch line provides a full resolution (INC-RES humor), an open-mindedness (especially the intellectual curiosity and aesthetic sensitivity facets) allows us to appreciate absurdity (NON humor).

Facets of open-mindedness and humor structure appreciation

The role of personality in humor structure appreciation is better depicted when the focus is on lower ordered facets. As open-mindedness is one of the most robust predictors of preferring unresolvable or residual incongruities over full resolution, we posed the question of which facets of open-mindedness are mostly relevant for humor structure appreciation. Our results indicated that both aesthetic sensitivity and intellectual curiosity are associated with the SPI. This is in line with a previous study by Ruch and Hehl (1998), in which the facets of aesthetics and ideas, but also fantasy and values (from the NEO-PI) were related to preferring NON over INC-RES humor. These findings are quite impactful, since although we have used a different humor appreciation measure with less items, and focused on a distinct cultural context, on the one hand, the SPI generated higher correlation with open-mindedness at a broad personality level, but also we corroborated previous findings regarding the relation between facets of openness and humor structure appreciation.

Limitations and future directions

Although the obtained results corroborate and extend previous findings regarding the association between personality and humor structure appreciation, one might argue that the correlations are low. However, the results are comparable to previous studies (see Appendix). Furthermore, as this is the first research in the Czech Republic relating the Big Five domains with appreciation of INC-RES and NON humor, further replication studies are needed which will employ larger and more representative samples. Such studies may also employ other constructs, which was shown that relate to humor structure appreciation (e.g., need for closure, conservatism, intolerance of ambiguity), but also may examine the predictive power (over and above the broad personality domains) of other variables not yet related to humor structure appreciation. For example, Lauriola et al. (2016) proposed a recent operationalization of the attitudes toward ambiguity, which comprises three aspects: discomfort with ambiguity, moral absolutism/splitting, and need for complexity and novelty. This construct is a good candidate for future research since it might explain a greater amount of variance (compared to the personality domains) in humor structure appreciation. In addition, the simultaneous exploration of the attitudes to ambiguity and personality is further supported by the findings that these constructs are related, but do not overlap (Lauriola et al., 2016; see also Jach & Smillie, 2019 for a network perspective).

Next, the HSAS contains stimuli with a salient structure and they are different in content. It should be mentioned that sexual jokes are not included. Recently, Heintz (2020; see also Ruch & Platt, 2012) showed that individual differences in humor appreciation are better captured by bimodal models. This approach enables modeling both the structure and content features of humor. Future studies are needed that that will consider both the structure and content of the humor stimuli. Such research should provide a better understanding of the relative contribution of both humor properties, regarding enjoyment and negative reactions to humor, and their relation to personality.

Finally, another possible avenue is to focus on the shared and non-shared environmental factors which might contribute to humor (structure) appreciation. Weber et al. (2014), in a twin study, concluded that both the funniness and aversiveness scores of the humor structure dimensions are mostly explained by environmental influences. Consequently, instead of focusing on personality dimensions and their relation to humor structure appreciation, future studies could focus on what type of humor production an individual has been mostly exposed to. Specifically, what type of humor was predominantly used by parents, friends, and teachers. An example item for INC-RES humor could be “My friends’ jokes usually involved making fun of certain stereotypes”, whereas an indicator of NON humor may be “My friends’ jokes were most often bizarre”. Such scores relations to the ratings of INC-RES and NON humor stimuli should be examined, and perhaps will show more robust relations than the ones obtained when the focus is on personality (or attitudinal) factors association with humor structure appreciation.

In conclusion, our study extends previous findings regarding personality and humor structure appreciation to a further cultural setting. Moreover, we provide additional insights by focusing on the facet level of personality. The correlations obtained can be considered as representing true substance, and not just method overlap. In other words, in our study we employed a self-report questionnaire of personality and a behavior measure of humor appreciation, so the associations do not represent only overlaps of verbal material. Finally, as the relation between personality and humor structure appreciation is not a robust one, we provide three specific recommendations for future research.