Humor and power

Comedy, consensus, and conflict framework: Comedy as a norm violation can build consensus or escalate conflict in negotiations

In this work, we propose that humor violates norms that can build consensus or escalate conflict in negotiations. Drawing on social identity theory, we propose that humor commits norm violations that are more likely to be perceived as benign among ingroup observers in negotiations, but perceived as offensive to outgroup observers in negotiations. We introduce the Comedy, Consensus, and Conflict Framework to shed light on the interpersonal effect of humor on negotiations. When humor is expressed to an ingroup observer, relative to neutral communication, humor is more likely to violate weak norms that govern social group membership resulting in the violation as being perceived as benign, which promotes cooperative behaviors in negotiations such as concessions and collaborative problem-solving. By contrast, when humor is expressed to an outgroup observer, relative to neutral communication, humor is more likely to violate strong norms that define social group membership resulting in the violation as being interpreted as offensive, which triggers competitive behaviors in negotiations such as aggressive offers and hardened positions. Furthermore, we suggest that humor not only generates appraisals of social identity threats, but also affective responses that influence negotiation behavior. Finally, we expand our theoretical model about humor to consider key relational factors that influence norm strength, which motivates whether negotiators appraise norm violations as offensive or benign.

Understanding the role of gender in humor expression: Directions for future scholarship

Humor expression is a potent interpersonal and professional communication tool, conveying intelligence and competence. This review examines the role of gender in outcomes of humor expression, particularly in professional settings. Despite humor's association with masculinity and stereotypes that women are less funny than men, we highlight findings that suggest potentially nuanced benefits of humor for women, depending upon contextual moderators including humor type and status. However, we also highlight that extant findings are mixed, limited for methodological reasons, and in some cases, inconclusive, necessitating future scholarship. Given that humor can be a powerful tool, coupled with persistent gender gaps in leadership, we call for future research to better understand how, when, and why gender influences the effectiveness of humor expression.

Laughter and lies: Unraveling the intricacies of humor and deception

Deception and humor are ubiquitous in interpersonal interactions and intricately interrelated. In this article, we review and integrate prior research on humor and deception and propose a theoretical model - the Interpersonal Humor Deception Model (IHDM) - to understand the interpersonal effects of humor on deception. We argue that humor can both promote and curtail the use of deception, as well as influence the detection of deception and responses to detected deception (retraction, retaliation, and the restoration of trust). The specific effects of humor depend on whether it is successful or unsuccessful. In all, our article provides a theoretical framework to guide research on humor and deception and offers important insights into the costs and benefits of humor in negotiations, organizations, and everyday life.

Leader humor: A double-edged sword

Leader humor has been considered one of the most promising yet least understood influential tools by psychologists and management scholars. Here, I review the growing body of research on leader humor and its implications for followers and organizations, showing that despite being theorized as a positive leadership tool, leader humor can function as a double-edged sword in bringing both beneficial and detrimental outcomes for followers and organizations.In the process, I identify six distinct mechanisms (three positive and three negative) through which leader humor affects followers. In a way, leader humor can be used to reduce or increase the social and psychological distance between leaders and followers. I also discuss the directions for future research on leader humor.

Humor research in management: Humor as Social Information (HASI)

Humor research is flourishing in Management. Diverse theories have been adopted and diverse factors have been used in research. Nonetheless, these disconnected efforts pose challenges to the development of a coherent body of knowledge on humor in organizational life. I propose the Humor-as-Social-Information (HASI) framework regarding the social effects of humor, and use it to guide my review on recent humor research in Management. Humor evokes affective and inferential processes leading to perceivers' cognitions and behaviors, and these processes are moderated by two sets of factors, including (1) information-processing motivation/ability and (2) humor inappropriateness. The proposed HASI framework highlights how humor exerts social influence within organizations, and paves new avenues for future research that will help further develop "humor science."

The butt of the joke: Understanding the social evaluations of leader humor targets

Research on humor at work has tended to focus on either the social evaluations formed about the source of humor or the interpersonal consequences that accompany the use of humor. Yet, research suggests that the targets of humor - such as a follower who is the punchline of her leader's jokes - face their own unique judgements and impressions from the social environment. Indeed, humor directed toward another person can communicate important information about the individual and can shape how others perceive and evaluate them. Unfortunately, research on the social evaluations of humor targets is fragmented and relatively underdeveloped. We advance understanding of humor at work by reviewing research on the social evaluations of humor targets, with particular focus on the social evaluations of leader humor targets (i.e., followers). We conclude with several directions for future research.

Friend or fiend? Disentangling upward humor's (De)stabilizing effects on hierarchies

Humor research in organizations focuses on leaders' humor, but we know far less about followers' humor. Here, we review and synthesize the scattered work on this "upward humor," offering a novel framing of it as a strategy for followers to deal with hierarchies. We propose a continuum of upward humor from stabilizing (i.e., a friend who uses upward humor to reinforce hierarchies, make hierarchies more bearable or stable) to destabilizing (i.e., a fiend who uses upward humor to question or reshape existing hierarchies) depending on perceived intent (i.e., from benevolent to malicious, respectively) and outline key factors that shape these interpretations. We close with novel questions and methods for future research such as power plays, multi-modal data, and human-robot interactions.

Leader failed humor and follower advice seeking

Purpose

Drawing on benign violation theory (BVT), this paper aimed to investigate the underlining mechanism and boundary condition of the relationship between follower perception of leader failed humor and follower advice seeking.

Design/methodology/approach

A three-wave survey with 256 leader-follower dyads and an online experiment with 117 participants were conducted to test the hypotheses.

Findings

The results showed that leader failed humor decreased follower liking toward leader and subsequently reduced follower advice seeking. Moreover, this negative relationship was exacerbated when leader and follower had infrequent interaction.

Originality/value

Existing research has encouraged leaders to use humor to build and maintain successful interpersonal relationships. However, the situation that a leader may fail when attempting to present humor is neglected. This study advances the concept of leader failed humor and explores its subsequent consequences.

The effect of relational status on perceptions of gay disparaging humor

A lot of popular comedians are known for their transgressive humor towards social groups, but disparagement humor is not just restricted to stages or media performances. We encounter it everywhere or perhaps use it ourselves. In this paper, we were interested in how people react to disparaging jokes (i.e., homophobic jokes) across different relational settings. Adapting Fiske’s relational models theory, we examined how status differences in relationships affect the perception of and cognition about socially disparaging jokes. In Study 1 (N = 77), we piloted seven potentially disparaging jokes about gay men in relation to how they are perceived. In Study 2 (N = 288), using one joke from Study 1, we constructed vignettes manipulating the sexual orientation of the source of the joke in the dyad (i.e., heterosexual, gay, both heterosexual) and their status differences across relational models (i.e., high, equal, and low status). We found that the joke was perceived to be less funny, more offensive, and more morally wrong, and to contain more harm intent if it came from a heterosexual person rather than a gay person. Study 3 (N = 197) used concrete status differences in relationships in terms of existing intergroup dimensions. Results showed that the joke was perceived as more offensive, less acceptable and more morally wrong when it came from a high authority source (e.g., professor rather than a student). Overall, these findings bring the first evidence to link disparagement humor with relational models and show the importance status differences in the perception of disparagement humor.

You are simply not funny: Development and validation of a scale to measure failed humor in leadership

Research has recently established the notion that humor in leadership contributes to the development of a positive professional relationship between leaders and followers. This relationship has been supposed to be the core mechanism via which humor in leadership unfolds its effects on work attitudes and behaviors. However, research has neglected the option that humor used by leaders might fail to amuse their followers. In this study, we investigate the role of failed humor for the relationship between leader and follower. More concretely, we develop a new scale for measuring failed humor in leadership and demonstrate its factorial and criterion-related validity. Using an automated item selection algorithm, we optimized the newly developed scale and derived a well-fitting six-item scale out of a pool of 12 items. In a study based on a sample of 385 employees, we were able to show that our newly developed scale is factorially valid. Moreover, we showed a negative correlation between failed humor and leader-member exchange. Furthermore, we showed incremental validity of failed humor in that failed humor predicted variance in leader-member exchange beyond well-established humor constructs such as affiliative and aggressive humor. Our study contributes to the development of the field of humor in leadership and opens up new options for further inquiry. Moreover, our study demonstrates the use of automated item selection algorithms in the applied field.