Running head: DOES HUMOR BENEFIT HEALTH IN RETIREMENT Europe’s Journal of Psychology, 6(3), pp. 122-148 www.ejop.org Does Humor Benefit Health In Retirement? Exploring Humor as a Moderator Gillian P. Freeman The Univ ersity of Massachusetts Amherst, United States of America W. Larry Ventis The College of William & Mary, United States of America Abstract This research assessed the extent to w hich humor moderates the relationship between retirement stress, including hassles, and health. Two hundred sixty-five retirees over the age of 55 years responded to an on-line survey, completing the RAND 36-Item Health Survey and the Humor Styles Questionnaire. Stress was measured using the Self Perceived Stress in Retirement Scale and The Hassles Scale. The stress moderating effect of humor was examined via regression analyses. Contrary to expectation, and the assumed nature of humor styles, results suggest that the adaptiveness of humor styles depends on the level of stress or hassles one perceives, as well as gender. This is a first indication that whether specific humor styles are adaptive or maladaptive may depend on specific circumstances or person variables. Keywords – humor, retirement, coping, stress, health Both researchers and the popular media alike hav e taken an increased interest in indiv iduals’ adaptation to retirement (Beehr & Adams, 2003). Successful adaptation to retirement inv olv es coping w ith changes in income, social supports, and the loss of w ork identity and alterations in gener al identity (Hayslip, Beyer lein, & Nichols, 1997; Shar pley, 1997). While many are able to transition into retirement w ith little problem, for a large number of people, the retirement transition is disruptiv e and a period of instability (Marshall, Clarke, & B allantyne, 2001). Thus t he aim of the current study w as to better understand how the four humor styles, identified by the Humor Styles Questionnaire (HSQ; Martin, Puhlik-Doris, Larsen, Gray, & Weir, 2003), are associated http://www.ejop.org/ Does Humor Benefit Health In Retirement? 123 w ith perceiv ed retirement stress and daily life hassles. These four styles include tw o positiv e or adaptiv e humor styles (Affiliativ e humor and Self-enhancing humor) and tw o negativ e humor or maladaptiv e humor styles (Aggressiv e humor and Self - defeating humor ). To our know ledge this is the first research to inv estigate coping humor and the humor styles among retirees. I n the current inv estigation, physical and mental health outcomes w ere assessed as w ell, to explore how humor moderates the relationship betw een health and stress during retirement. Humor, Health, and Stress There exists substantial literature that suggests that life stress is detrimental to physical and psychological w ellbeing (Cohen, Janicki-Dev erts, & Miller, 2007; Gunnar & Quev edo, 2007; Miller, Chen, & Zhou, 2007). Together this body of researc h underscores the relationship betw een stress and poor health among v arious age - groups. A recent study that examined the stress and health relationship among an aging sample found indiv idual differences in self-perceiv ed stress and health outcomes in older adults (Sapolsky, 2004). Sapolsky (2004) reported that although some indiv iduals w ith significant chronic stress appear to be coping w ell, many are not and experience negativ e changes in lifestyle and health impair ments due to chronic stress. I n the present study, w e examined to w hat extent one particular coping mec hanism, humor, may be adaptiv e in buffering the stress and health relationship. I t has now been acknow ledged that humor is a multi-dimensional construct (Kuiper, Grimshaw , Leite, & Kirsh, 2004; Thorson & Pow ell, 1993) inv olv ing cognitiv e, emotional, behav ioral, physiologic al, and social aspects (Martin, 2007). I n observ ation of the multidimensionality of humor, a more recent shift in humor research has been to inv estigate both its possible beneficial and deleterious impact on health and w ell- being (Kirsh & Kuiper, 2003; Kuiper et al., 2004; Tümkaya, 2007). The dev elopment of the Humor Styles Questionnaire (HSQ) has adv anced humor research, as it assesses indiv idual differences in the four styles of humor along w hat are believ ed to be both beneficial and deleterious dimensions of humor (Martin et al., 2003). The HSQ assesses four distinct and independent dimensions of humor —tw o dimensions of humor are typically positiv ely related to health and w ell-being and tw o dimensions are typic ally negativ ely related to health and w ell-being. Europe’s Journal of Psychology 124 Martin and his colleagues (2003) identified tw o uses of humor they endorse as being potentially adaptiv e. These uses of humor include Affiliativ e humor, w hich inv olv e s the use of humor to enhance one’s relationships w ith others, and Self -enhancing humor, w hich inv olv es the use of humor to enhance the self and find humor in stressful situations (Martin et al., 2003). I n addition, Martin and colleagues hav e identified tw o humor styles they propose to be detrimental or maladaptiv e uses of humor. These maladaptiv e styles hav e been identified as Aggressiv e humor and Self - defeating humor (Martin et al., 2003). Aggressiv e humor is the use of humor to enhance the self at the expense of others, w hile Self-defeating humor is the use of humor to enhance relationships at the expense of self (Martin et al., 2003). Self - defeating humor relates to tendencies to use humor in an excessiv ely self - dispar aging and ingratiating w ay, and the use of humor as a form of defensiv e denial to hide underlying negativ e feelings (Martin et al., 2003). I t is often assumed that humor benefits both physic al and psychological health, how ev er, research thus far has yielded equiv ocal results (see Kuiper et al., 2004; Martin, 2004; Nezu, Nezu, & Blissett, 1988). I t has been suggested that the div erse conceptualizations of both humor and w ell-being account for much of the confusion in comparing results across studies (Martin, 2004). Nonetheless, humor does appear to hav e physiologic al benefits, w hich may be especially important to the w ell-being of older, more sedentary adults w ho can benefit from the increases in circulation and immune function brought about by laughter (Berk, 2001). Humor and Stress During Retirement A possible explanation for contradic ting results in coping humor research is that coping, like humor, is a multidimensional construct (Carv er, Scheier, & Weintraub, 1989; Folk man & Lazarus, 1988). Prev ious research may hav e assessed coping hu mor ov er a range, not only of humor measures but also of coping situations as w ell, making comparisons across studies inappropriate. For this reason w e examined the effects of humor styles, especially coping humor, during a specific period of stress—retirement. I ncreases in health problems and many other types of stress related to aging, such as losses of friends, family, health, and mobility, are characteristic of retirement (Aldw in, Yanc ura, & Boeninger, 2007). Coping responses are among the many predic tors of adaptation to retirement including personal characteristics, and financial, social, and physical resources before and after retirement (Pinquart & Schindler, 2007; Wang, 2007). I t has been suggested that humor may be a positiv e means of coping w ith age-related loss Does Humor Benefit Health In Retirement? 125 (Simon, 1988, as cited in Celso et al., 2003). Folk man, Lazarus, Pimley, and Nov acek (1987) found that emotion-focused for ms of coping (including humor) are useful strategies for older adults w ho perceiv e stressful ev ents as out of their control. Giv en that retirement and aging mean giv ing up control and autonomy in some cases (Kelly & B arratt, 2007), humor may be one of the more useful coping strategies during this time period. Humor as a Moderator I t has been proposed that there are three possible mec hanisms by w hich humor and laughter impact physic al health. First, it has been suggested that the laughter that accompanies humor conv eys beneficial physiological changes in neural, muscoskeletal, c ardiov ascular, endocrine, and/or immunological systems (see Berk, 2001). Second, laughter and humor may directly affect health v ia their accompanying positiv e emotional states (Argyle, 1997; Edw ards & Cooper, 1988). Third, it has been posited that humor may moderate the relationship betw een stres s and health. I t has been proposed that changes in cognitiv e appraisals and attributions, as a result of a humorous outlook on life, may lead to more positiv e coping str ategies, reduce stress, and improv e health (Martin, Kuiper, Olinger, & Dance, 1993). I n this perspectiv e humor has an indirect, rather than direct, effect on physiological health v ariables—interacting w ith stress lev els in reducing the degree to w hich stress w ould normally negativ ely affect health. I t is the stress-moderating theory that w as examined in the current study. A humorous perspectiv e on an otherw ise stressful situation may serv e as an adaptiv e coping strategy similar to positiv e reinterpretation or perspectiv e-taking (Kuiper, Martin, & Olinger, 1993; Lefcourt, Dav idson, Shepherd, Phillips, Prkachin, & Mills, 1995). I n this v iew it is the cognitiv e component of humor, rather than the physiologic al products of laughter, that is associated w ith the use of humor as a coping str ategy (Kuiper et al., 1993). The examination of humor as a moderator also introduces the possibility that certain styles and uses of humor may be more adaptiv e and health enhancing, w hereas others are maladaptiv e (Martin, 2001). Examining the four humor styles proposed by Martin et al. (2003), in ter ms of a stress-moderating perspectiv e, one can imagine Aggressiv e humor could serv e as an av oidance or defense mechanism that may be less conduciv e to effectiv e coping w ith stress than a Self-enhancing approach. Affiliativ e humor could be used to enhance social suppor t that is more beneficial to coping than utilizing a defensiv e denial strategy w ith Self-defeating humor. Europe’s Journal of Psychology 126 Thus far, studies specific ally inv estigating the stress moderating effect of humor hav e produced w eak and inconsistent results. Research has found th at depressiv e reactions to stress w ere mitigated in those w ho employed humor as a coping strategy (Nezu et al., 1988). How ev er, other studies examining the relationship betw een humor and w ell-being hav e not found any effect (Boyle & Joss-Reid, 2004; Porterfield, 1987) or hav e found signific ant results suggesting that humor has a detrimental effect on coping (Anderson & Arnoult, 1989). I t has been suggested that prev ious use of unidimensional instruments to measure humor accounts for the w eak results (Boyle & Joss-Reid, 2004), and div erse conceptualizations of both humor and w ell-being account for some of these inconsistencies betw een studies (Martin, 2004). This study w as an attempt to reconcile these inconsistencies in tw o w ays. First, by utilizing the HSQ (Martin et al., 2003), w e examined tw o positiv e and tw o negativ e styles of humor. By examining tw o seemingly adaptiv e humor styles and tw o seemingly maladaptiv e humor styles, w e hoped to better understand both the positiv e and negativ e implic ations of humor styles in relation to stress during retirement. Second, w e examined the stress-moderating theory during a specific period of stress—retirement. I n particular, w e examined humor styles in relation to stress measures both proximal (hassle intensity) and distal (global retirement-specific stress) to the occurrence of humor among retirees. Specifically regarding the stress measures, w e used those that tapped into perceiv ed stress, rather than stressors. This is particularly relev ant w ith hassles, w here perception is part of deter mining w hether something is labeled as a hassle, and if so, w ith w hat intensity. Likew ise, w ith the global retirement stress, perceiv ed stress during retirement w as measured. I n the stress literature, proximal measures of stress r efer to those that capture an indiv idual’s immediate perception and life situation, w hereas distal measures of stress typically do not describe the ongoing, immediate, pressures of life (DeLongis, Coyne, Dakof, Folk man, & Lazarus, 1982). I n this w ay Lazarus and colleagues hav e proposed that daily hassles are proximal measures of stress because they pertain to a person’s immediate life circumstances (DeLongis et al., 1982). Measures of global retirement stress perception, like life ev ents, on the other hand, are more distal to the immediate life circumstance (DeLongiset al., 1982; Row linson & Felner, 1988). Gender Differences I n studies that examined the relationship betw een stress and health reporting numerous indiv idual differences, gender has been reported to affect both stress Does Humor Benefit Health In Retirement? 127 perception and resulting coping behav iors. Numerous reports suggest that females report being in more stressful situations and hav e more chronic stress than males (Matud, 2004; McDonough & Walters, 2001). I t has been suggested th at traditional gender-roles may play a role in stress and coping differences as females typic ally serv e as caregiv ers (Lee, 2001), may be more emotionally inv olv ed than males in social and family interactions (Kessler & McLeod, 1984), and experience more d aily demands and frustrations (Matud, 2004). Gender differences in health hav e also been consistently reported among older adults. There is a significant difference in mortality rates as w omen liv e about 6 -8 years longer than men (WHO, 2000). Although w omen liv e longer, they also hav e higher mor bidity rates compared to men their ow n age. This paradox of a low er mortality rate and higher impair ments in mobility and func tioning has been frequently reported (see Arber & Cooper, 1999). I t has been suggested t hat gender differences in self-reported health may be the cause of reported disparities. How ev er, a recent study gathered self-reported health data v ia interv iew of a sample of 544 community-dw elling participants ov er the age of 65. They found that gender differences w ere due to a w orse health status of w omen, rather than to differences in self-reports (Orfila, Ferrer, Lamarca, Tebe, Domingo-Salv any, & Alonso, 2006). Research examining humor as a moderator betw een stress and health hav e either not found or not reported gender differences (Anderson & Arnoult, 1989; Boyle & Joss-Reid, 2004; Nezu et al., 1988; Porterfield, 1987). How ev er, some gender differences hav e been found in the use of humor. Studies utilizing the HSQ hav e found that males report using both Aggressiv e and Self-defeating humor styles more often than females (Freeman & Ventis, 2008, Nov ember; Kazarian & Martin, 2004; Martin et al., 2003) or hav e found no gender differences at all (Erickson & Feldstein , 2007). I n addition, studies hav e not reported any gender differences in coping humor scores (Anderson & Arnoult, 1989; Nezu et al., 1988). Because gender appears to affect stress, health, and humor measures, it may be w orthw hile to explore if humor moderates the relationship betw een stress and health differently for males and females. Aims of Current Study I n summary, this study sought to broaden the depth of know ledge of both humor and retirement stress by clarifying the stress-moderating theory of humor on health. First, it w as hypothesized that the tw o adaptiv e humor styles, especially Self- Europe’s Journal of Psychology 128 enhancing humor, w ould be negativ ely correlated w ith stress and poor health. Second, w e expected that the tw o maladaptiv e humor styles w ould be positiv ely correlated w ith stress and poor health. Finally, it w as expected that humor styles w ould act as a moderator of stress that is both proximal to humor (daily hassles) and stress that is more distal (retirement stress) on ov erall health. Specifically, adaptiv e humor styles w ere expected to boost health scores, especially during periods of high stress or high hassles (as opposed to low stress or low hassles). On the other hand, maladaptiv e humor styles w ere expected to hav e the opposite effect. Reports of high use of negativ e humor styles w ere expected to diminish positiv e health outcomes, especially during periods of high stress. Exploratory analysis w as conducted on gender differences. Giv en that females experience more daily hassles and hav e a higher rate of morbidity than males, it w as expected that the specific stress and health relationship that is moderated by humor may differ depending on gender. Method Participants With the help of the College of William & Mary’s Alumni Association, approximately 5900 William & Mary alumni w ho graduated prior to 1976 w ere inv ited to complete an online surv ey if they w ere both ov er the age of 55 and retired. The surv ey site w as v isited 674 times follow ing the email inv itation. Of the 674 site v isits, 323 indiv iduals consented (351 site v isits did not result in participation). Of the 323 consenting participants, 10 surv eys w ere incomplete and 48 indiv iduals w ere not retired, leav ing a final sample size of 265 retired adults ranging from 55 – 91 years of age. The mean age of the sample is 67.48 years (SD = 7.293). One hundred and tw enty-one (45.7% ) participants w ere female and 143 (54.0% ) w ere male and one respondent (.4% ) did not specify a gender. The mean age of males w as 68.99 years (SD = 7.074) and the mean age of females w as 65.58 (SD = 6.989). This sample is predominantly Caucasian (n = 260, 98.1%). One participant represented Multiple Ethnicity (0.4% ), and four respondents did not prov ide ethnicity information (1.5%). Due to the manner of recruitment, this sample w as highly educated. Nearly half of the respondents had completed masters-lev el degrees (n = 113, 42.6% ). The second highest degree attained w as 4-year college degree (n = 103, 38.9%), follow ed by doctorate (n = 47, 17.7% ) and 2-year college degree (n = 2, 0.8% ). Does Humor Benefit Health In Retirement? 129 Measures Humor Styles Questionnaire (HSQ; Martin, Phulik-Doris, Larsen, Gray & Weir, 2003). The HSQ is a 32-item questionnaire that assesses four different styles of humor. Respondents indic ate on a sev en-point Likert scale the degree to w hich they agree or disagree w ith each item. Self-enhancing and Affiliativ e humor styles w ere identified as tw o facilitativ e humor styles and Aggressiv e and Self -defeating humor styles w ere identified as the tw o deleterious styles. The Self -enhancing dimension inv olv es the use of humor as a coping mechanis m. I tems assessing eac h of the humor styles follow : ―If I ’m by myself and I ’m feeling unhappy, I make an effort to think of something funny to c heer myself up‖ (Self-enhancing); ―I laugh and joke a lot w ith my friends‖ (Affiliativ e); ―I let people laugh at me or make fun at my expense more than I should‖ (Self-defeating); ―I f I don’t like someone, I often use humor or teasing to put them dow n‖ (Aggressiv e). The test-retest correlations are: 0.81 for Self- enhancing humor; 0.85 for Affiliativ e humor; 0.82 for Self-defeating humor; and 0.80 for Aggressiv e humor (Martin et al., 2003). I n the present sample, internal consistencies (Cronbach’s α) for the Self-enhancing, Affiliativ e, Self-defeating, and Aggressiv e humor sc ales w ere 0.80, 0.86, 0.80, and 0.75, respectiv ely. Daily Hassles Scale (Kanner, Coyne, Schaefer & Lazarus, 1981). The Hassles scale measures the occurrence and intensity of 117 hassles that characterize ev eryday dealings w ith the env ironment. Daily hassles include: ―inconsiderate smokers,‖ ―filling out for ms,‖ and ―troublesome neighbors‖. Circling the hassle indicates occurrence of hassles. I ntensity is measured on a three -point scale ranging from 1 (somewhat severe) to 3 (extremely severe). This scale prov ides an easy w ay to demonstrate an indiv idual’s need to cope. The test-retest correlation is 0.48 for hassles intensity (Kanner et al., 1981). The internal consistenc y coe fficient (Cronbach’s α) w as .95 for the present study. Self-Perceived Stress in Retirement Scale (Sharpley, 1997). The Self-perceiv ed Stress in Retirement Scale measures the amount of stress a retiree experiences on a day-to-day basis. The scale presents 14 items including ― Your physical health,‖ ―Loss of purpose,‖ and ―Boredom,‖ w hich are rated on a fiv e -point scale ranging from 1 (little to no stress) to 5 (extreme stress). For the present study, the internal consistency coefficient (Cronbach’s α) w as 0.80. RAND 36-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36; Hays, Sherbourne, & Mazel, 1993). The SF-36 is a 36-item surv ey that assesses both physical and mental health. Each item is scored on a 0 to 100 r ange so that the higher number represents a more fav orable health state. I tems intended to measure physical health include: physical Europe’s Journal of Psychology 130 functioning, pain, general health, and role limitations due to physical problems. I tems designed to measure mental health include: energy/v itality, social func tioning, emotional w ellbeing, and role limitations due to emotional problems. Many psychometric analyses hav e been published on the SF -36 reporting good reliability and v alidity. The internal consistency coefficients (Cronbach’s α) for the present study r anged from 0.70 to 0. 89. Demographics. I tems concerned general background infor mation (e.g., gender and ethnicity) as w ell as the respondent’s pre-retirement income. Procedure I n this correlational study, all self-report surv eys w ere uploaded onto Opinio’s online surv ey softw are. The surv ey took approximately 45 minutes to answ er. Participants w ere encouraged to complete the surv ey independently, in a quiet location. Results Initial Analysis Means and standard dev iations of the humor, stress, and health measures for the entire sample, as w ell as for females and males separately, are presented on Table 1. I nitial independent-measures t-tests rev ealed significant gender differences betw een means along humor, stress, and health v ariables. I t is w orth noting that, in this sample, signific ant correlations w ere not found betw een time since retirement and our v ariables of interest. First, analysis of the sample as a w hole w ill be discussed, follow ed by the outcomes of gender differences. __________________________________________________________________________________ Combined Male Female __________________________________________________________ M(SD) M(SD) M(SD) __________________________________________________________________________________ Affiliativ e humor* 42.57 (9.21) 43.85 (8.21) 41.08 (10.14) Self-enhancing humor 40.11 (7.55) 39.82 (7.09) 40.44 (8.11) Aggressiv e humor *** 22.98 (8.16) 26.16 (7.93) 19.29 (6.72) Self-defeating humor** 24.67 (8.31) 25.96 (7.73) 23.01 (8.69) Retirement Stress** 21.84 (5.73) 21.00 (5.09) 22.83 (6.29) Hassles I ntensity 1.15 (0.28) 1.12 (0.28) 1.18 (0.27) General Health 68.16 (19.93) 68.25 (18.91) 68.00 (21.23) Physical Functioning 80.56 (20.32) 82.08 (19.15) 78.90 (21.61) Does Humor Benefit Health In Retirement? 131 Role Limitations (Physic al) 79.13 (31.51) 82.56 (28.60) 75.00 (34.31) Role Limitations (Emotional) 88.95 (24.25) 89.55 (22.69) 88.15 (26.13) Energy/Vitality 65.25 (19.57) 66.29 (19.12) 64.06 (20.18) Social Functioning 91.18 (16.98) 92.31 (15.62) 89.77 (18.47) Pain* 76.57 (18.56) 79.16 (16.33) 73.57 (20.61) Emotional Wellbeing* 82.36 (13.42) 83.90 (13.17) 80.52 (13.59) _________________________________________________________________________________ Note. Asterisks after v ariable names indicate a significant gender difference, *p < .05 **p < .01 ***p <.001. Table 1. Means and Standard Dev iations for Humor, Stress, and Health Measures Generally, the expected significant correlations betw een humor styles, stress, and health w ere found. The intercorrelations are presented in Table 2. Looking at the correlations betw een humor styles and stress, as expected, both adaptiv e humor styles had negativ e correlations w ith the stress measures Affiliativ e humor had a significant negativ e correlation w ith Hassles I ntensity, but not Retirement Stress. Self - enhancing humor had significant negativ e correlations w ith both stress measures. ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 1. Aff .49** .14* .32** .10 -.13* .08 .02 -.07 -.02 .07 .03 .04 .14* 2. SE .01 .17** -.25** -.22** .17** .05 .07 .12 .20** .12 .13* .29** 3. Agg .39** -.04 -.12 -.04 .09 -.02 .01 .05 .08 .13* -.06 4..SD .11 .05 -.07 -.01 -.07 -.03 -.13 -.05 -.01 .23** 5. SPRS .50** -.40** -.30** -.41** -.38** -.49** -.43** -.37** -.59** 6. HI -.25** -.20** -.23** -.30** -.39** -.31** -.31** -.48** 7. GH .58** .48** .28** .55** .43** .48** .38** 8. PF .55** .27** .56** .46** .54** .25** 9. Lim PH .41** .50** .58** .58** .28** 10. Lim EH .35** .42** .27** .45** 11. Vitality .55** .59** .57** 12. SF .54** .48** 13. Pain .29** 14. EWB ______________________________________________________________________________ * p < .05 ** p < .01 Note: Aff = Affiliative Humor, S E = S elf-enhancing Humor, Agg = Aggressive Humor, S D = S elf-defeating Humor, S PRS = Retirement Stress, HI = Hassles Intensity, GH = General Health, PF = Physical Functioning, Lim PH = Role Limitations due to Physical Health, Lim EH = Role Limitations due to Emotional Health, S F = S ocial Functioning, EW B = Emotional W ell-being Table 2. I ntercorrelations Betw een Subscales of Humor Styles, Stress, and Subscales of Health Europe’s Journal of Psychology 132 Examining the correlations betw een humor styles and health, both adaptiv e humor styles had positiv e correlations w ith some optimal health outcomes. Affiliativ e humor w as positiv ely correlated w ith Emotional Well-being only. How ever, Self-enhancing humor w as positiv ely correlated w ith General Health, Vitality, Pain, and Emotional Well-being. Self-defeating humor w as negativ ely correlated w ith Emotional Wellbeing, as hypothesized. How ev er, Aggressiv e humor had a significant positiv e correlation w ith Pain, w hich w as not in the expected direction. This incongruity betw een expectations and outcomes for the Aggressiv e humor style w ill be elaborated upon in the Disc ussion. All of the correlations betw een health outcomes and stress w ere significant, such that positiv e health outcomes w ere negativ ely correlated w ith stress and hassles intensity. These signific ant correlations demonstrate that there is indeed a strong relationship betw een health and stress and serv e as a sturdy foundation on w hich to examine the moderating effects of humor. Stress Moderating Effect of Humor Regression analyses w ere used to examine the stress moderating effect of humor. Moderator effects were examined as interactions betw een either stress or life hassles and the moderating v ariables—the four humor styles (Aiken, L. S., & West, 1991). For each of the eight health outcomes and for each of the four moderators, w e assessed the main effects of stress (retirement stress or life hassles), the moderator, and their interaction. Only regressions for w hich signific ant interactions w ere found are described below , as these are the only instances in w hich a Humor Style w as acting as a moderator betw een stress and health. For all regressions depicted in the Figures below , increasing scores on the y -axis represent optimal health outcomes. Self-enhancing Humor as a Moderator Hassles I ntensity and Self-enhancing humor did not result in significant interac tions across any health outcomes. Self-enhancing humor and Retirement Stress resulted in significant interactions for tw o health outcomes. Specific ally, the regression of Emotional Well-Being on Retirement Stress at v arying lev els of Self -enhancing humor w as significant (F (3, 257) = 56.48, p < .001). The corresponding Retirement Stress × Self-enhancing interac tion w as significant, indicating a moderating effect (β = .15, p < .01). I n addition, the regression of Role Limitations due to Emotional Problems on Retirement Stress at differing lev els of Self-enhancing humor w as significant (F (3,256) = 19.19, p < .001). The corresponding interaction—Retirement Stress × Self-enhancing humor—w as also significant (β = .21, p < .001). Does Humor Benefit Health In Retirement? 133 As demonstrated in Figure 1, under low stress, reports of Emotional Well-Being w ere high and unaffected by humor style. How ev er, w hen stress w as high, retirees w ho reported high lev els of Self-enhancing humor reported higher Emotional Well-Being than participants w ho reported low lev els of Self-enhancing humor. This result supports the hypothesis that Self-enhancing humor w ould boost health scores, especially during periods of high stress. The regression of Role Limitations due to Emotional Problems at v arying lev els of Self-enhancing humor demonstrated a similar significant pattern. 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 Low S tress High S t ressRet irement S tress E m o ti o n a l W e ll- b e in g Low S elf-Enhancing Humor Mean Self-Enhancing Humor High Self-Enhancing Humor Figure 1. Regression lines predicting Emotional Wellbeing scores from Retirement Stress at v arying lev els of Self-enhancing humor Affiliative Humor as a Moderator Four interac tions w ere found using Affiliativ e humor as a moderator betw een both Retirement Stress and Hassles I ntensity and v arious health outcomes. Specifically, the regression of General Health on Retirement Stress at differing lev els of Affiliativ e humor w as significant (F (3, 257) = 18.23, p < .001). The Retirement Stress × Affiliativ e humor interaction w as significant, denoting a moderating effect, w ith β = -.11, p < .05. Additionally, the regression of Emotional Wellbeing on Hassles I ntensity at differing lev els of Affiliativ e humor w as significant (F (3, 252) = 28.98, p < .001). The corresponding Hassles I ntensity × Affiliativ e humor interaction w as significant (β = -.16, p < .01). Moreover, the regression of Social Functioning on Hassles I ntensity at differing lev els of Affiliativ e humor w as significant (F (3, 252) = 10.99, p < .001) and the Europe’s Journal of Psychology 134 interaction—Hassles I ntensity × Affiliativ e humor—w as significant (β = -.14, p < .05). Finally, the regression of Role Limitations Due to Emotional Problems on Hassles I ntensity at differing lev els of Affiliativ e Humor w as significant (F (3, 251) = 10.71, p < .001). The corresponding Hassles I ntensity × Affiliativ e humor interaction w as significant, β = -.157, p < .05. Figure 2 show s that w hen hassles w ere low , retirees w ith high Affiliativ e humor did not appear to differ from those reporting low Affiliativ e humor. I n high hassles situations, how ev er, retirees w ith low Affiliativ e humor appeared to hav e less Role Limitations due to Emotional Problems. All four regressions, portraying Affiliativ e humor as a moderator, follow ed a similar pattern to that depicted in Figure 2. 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100 105 Low Hassles High HasslesHassles Intensity R o le L im ita tio n s D u e t o E m o tio n a l P ro b le m s Low Affiliativ e Humor Mean Affiliativ e Humor High Affiliativ e Humor Figure 2. Regression lines predicting Role Limitations due to Emotional Problems scores from Hassles I ntensity at v arying lev els of Affiliativ e humor Self-defeating Humor as a Moderator Turning now to the maladaptiv e humor styles, tw o significant interactions w ere rev ealed w ith Self-defeating humor as a moderator. The regression of Pain on Retirement Stress at differing lev els of Self-defeating humor w as significant (F (3, 256) = 15.66, p < .001). The corresponding Retirement Stress × Self-defeating humor interaction w as also significant (β = .13, p < .05). I n addition, the regression of Pain on Hassles I ntensity at differing lev els of Self-defeating humor w as significant (F (3, 252) = 10.70, p < .001). The Hassles I ntensity × Self-defeating humor interaction too w as significant (β = .14, p < .05). Does Humor Benefit Health In Retirement? 135 Plotted, the tw o significant regressions suggested that Self-defeating humor only appeared to be maladaptiv e w hen daily hassles/stress w ere low . How ev er, w hen daily hassles/stress w ere high a higher Self-defeating score w as related to less reported pain, and thus appeared to hav e an adaptiv e quality for retirees (see Figure 3). 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 Low Hassles High HasslesHassles Intensity P a in Low S elf-Defeating Humor Mean Self-Defeating Humor High Self-Defeating Humor Figure 3. Regression lines predicting Pain scores from Hassles I ntensity at v arying lev els of Self-defeating humor Aggressive Humor as a Moderator Three significant interactions w ere discov ered using Aggressiv e humor as a moderator. First, the regression of Energy/Vitality on Hassles I ntensity at differing lev els of Aggressiv e humor w as significant (F (3, 253) = 17.50, p < .001). The Hassles I ntensity × Aggressiv e humor interaction w as also significant at β = .14, p < .05. Additionally, the regression analysis of Pain on Hassles I ntensity at differing lev els of Aggressiv e humor w as significant (F (2, 253) = 12.72, p < .001). The Hassles I ntensity × Aggressiv e humor interaction w as significant at β = .17, p < .01. Finally, the regression of Pain along Retirement Stress at differing lev els of Aggressiv e humor w as significant ( F (3, 257) = 17.92, p < .001. The corresponding interaction of Retirement Stress × Aggressiv e humor w as significant, β = .14, p < .05. The three signific ant regressions depicting Aggressiv e humor as a moderator suggest that w hen hassles/stress w as low , there did not appear to be a distinction betw een high and low Aggressiv e humor use. How ev er, in contexts of high hassles/stress, Europe’s Journal of Psychology 136 higher use of Aggressiv e humor w as related to more optimal health outcomes (see Figure 4). 60 65 70 75 80 85 Low S tress High Stress Retirement S tress P a in Low Aggressiv e Humor Mean Aggressiv e Humor High Aggressiv e Humor Figure 4. Regression lines predicting Pain scores from Retirement Stress at v arying lev els of Aggressiv e humor Gender Differences Statistical examination of the sample demonstrated that the extent to w hich a humor style w as adaptiv e depended on the stress context in w hich it w as examined. As other contexts might result in similar patterns, w e then examined w hether gender, a dispositional f actor, also affected the stress moderating effect of humor. Initial Analysis of Gender Differences I ndependent t-tests w ere used to examine gender differences on humor, stress, and heatlh outcomes. Refer to Table 1 for corresponding means and standard dev iations. A significant difference w as found in the use of Aggressiv e humor (t (261) = 7.49, p < .001), w ith means for males higher than means for females. There w as also a significant difference in Self-defeating humor (t (260) = -2.90, p = .004), w ith means for males again exceeding means for females. Unexpectedly, signific ant gender differences w ere found w ith use of Affiliativ e humor as w ell (t (260) = 2.44, p < .05), Does Humor Benefit Health In Retirement? 137 w ith means for males higher than means for females. No gender differences w ere found for the use of Self-enhancing humor. Gender differences w ere found in the amount of retirement stress reported (t (259) = -2.60, p < .01), w ith females reporting more distal stress than males. There w ere no gender differences found w ith Hassles I ntensity. Comparing males and females along the health outcomes, tw o significant differences w ere found. A significant difference w as found in reported health on the Pain outcome (t (262) = 2.46, p < .05), w ith males reporting more optimal health along this measure than females. A significant difference w as also found for Emotional Wellbeing (t (262) = 2.05, p < .05), again w ith means for males exceeding means for females . Humor as a moderator by gender Regression analysis w as used to examine the stress moderating effect of humor and gender. Gender w as dummy coded and all scores w ere centered prior to testing the joint effect of three independent v ariables (hassles/stress, humor style, and gender) on the dependent v ariable (health outcome). I n all three-w ay interactions, humor style (Z) and gender (W ) w ere moderator v ariables of the relation betw een stress/hassles (X) and health outcome (Y). The signific ance lev el of XWZ w as set at p < .05. There w ere no significant three-w ay interactions that included Self-enhancing humor or Affiliativ e humor as moder ators. How ev er, several significant regressions w ere uncov ered w hen examining Self-defeating humor and gender as moderators and Aggressiv e humor and gender as moderators. With Self-defeating humor and gender as the moder ators, regressions rev ealed fiv e significant interactions. With Aggressiv e humor and gender as the moderators, three significant three -w ay interactions w ere rev ealed. For all eight significant regressions, male retirees follow ed the same trend reported in the aforementioned tw o-w ay regressions, such that Self- defeating and Aggressiv e humor only appeared maladaptiv e w hen stress w as low . How ev er, w hen stress w as high, higher Self-defeating and Aggressiv e humor scores w ere related to more optimal health outcomes, and thus appeared to hav e an adaptiv e quality for retirees. How ever, for female retirees, the opposite pattern emerged. W hen hassles/stress w ere low , humor lev els had no impact on health outcomes. How ev er, once hassles/stress w ere high, high Self-defeating and Aggressiv e humor scores w ere related to poorer health outcomes and appeared to be maladaptiv e (See Figure 5). Europe’s Journal of Psychology 138 70 75 80 85 90 95 100 105 Low Hassles High Hassles Hassles Intensity So c ia l F u n c tio n in g Low Self-defeating Humor Female High Self-defeating Humor Female Low Self-defeating Humor Male High Self-defeating Humor Male Figure 5. Regression lines predicting Social Functioning scores from Hassles I ntensity at v arying lev els of Self-defeating humor and gender By including gender as a moderator, the contextual nature of humor as a moderator is underscored. I t appears that not only the lev el of stress and hassles deter mines the adaptiv eness of a humor style, but gender as w ell. Discussion I n this study w e aimed to examine further the relationship betw een humor, stress and health in retirement. Analyses w ere aimed at understanding the moderating effect of humor on the relationship betw een stress and measures of health. Humor as a Moderator The plotted tw o-w ay interactions suggest that the ― adaptiv eness‖ of humor styles depends on the lev el (low or high) of stress or hassles one perceiv es. These results suggest that it may not be adequate to label a humor style as simply adaptiv e or maladaptiv e. I t w as found that Self-enhancing humor only appears to be truly adaptiv e in situations of high stress. I n low stress situations, how ev er, retirees w ith high Self-enhancing humor did not appear to differ from those reporting low Self - enhancing humor. I n this w ay, the adaptiv eness of the humor style appears to be contextual. Perhaps under sufficiently low stress there is no adv antage to be gained v ia Self Enhancing Humor, but under high stress the adaptiv e adv antage is rev ealed. Does Humor Benefit Health In Retirement? 139 Similarly, w hen examining the tw o-w ay interactions, Self-defeating humor appeared only maladaptiv e w hen daily hassles are low . How ev er, w hen daily hassles w ere high a higher Self-defeating score w as related to less Pain, and thus appeared to hav e an adaptiv e quality. This w as a consistent pattern w hen examining the Aggressiv e humor style as w ell. Thus, it seems that the extent to w hich Self -defeating and Aggressiv e humor are maladaptiv e is truly situational. The three-w ay interaction analyses rev ealed a dispositional v ariable that affects the adaptiv eness of a humor style—gender. Examination of the significant three-w ay interactions demonstrated a consistent pattern of div ergence betw een males and females across multiple health outcomes, underscoring the importance of examining gender w hen exploring adaptiv eness in the use of humor. Males follow ed the pattern rev ealed in the tw o-w ay interactions, such that a high Self-defeating or Aggressiv e humor score w as adaptiv e during high stress/hassles. Females, on the other hand, displayed the hypothesized pattern, such that a high Self-defeating or Aggressiv e humor score w as more maladaptiv e w hen stress/hassles w ere high. These results call attention to the importance of examining both contextual and person v ariables before labeling a humor style as ―adaptiv e‖ or ―maladaptiv e.‖ I t may be that something as basic as gender might indic ate the extent to w hich a humor style serv es as an adaptiv e or maladaptiv e mechanism w hen dealing w ith stress and health in partic ular circumstances. Perhaps age is another such relev ant person v ariable. These findings hav e interesting implic ations for the HSQ (Martin et al., 2003). The HSQ is a constructiv e acknow ledgement that humor is not a unitary construct, but multi- faceted, including positiv e and adaptiv e, as w ell as negativ e and maladaptiv e styles. How ev er, the results of the present research imply that ev en the addition of positiv e and negativ e humor styles is not a sufficient acknow ledgement of humor’s complexity. I t appears that the adaptiv eness of the humor styles may not be an all - or-none phenomenon, but that adaptiv eness or maladaptiv eness of a giv en style may be a function of both contextual (e.g., high or low stress) and dispositional v ariables (e.g., gender). How ev er, it should be kept in mind that this sample of retirees is comprised of w ell-educated college graduates from the same undergraduate institution. Future research should attempt to collec t a more div erse sample to see if these results w ill be replicated. Moreov er, further understanding of the contextual nature of the adaptiv eness of humor styles may benefit from looking at different contexts. I n this study daily hassles and stress w ere examined, but it may Europe’s Journal of Psychology 140 be that differing lev els of self-esteem or anxiety also produce similar patterns that highlight the contextual nature of the humor styles. Examining these moderation effects not only rev ealed information about humor as a moderating v ariable, but intimates infor mation about the general nature of these humor styles as w ell. For instance, in examination of Figure 2, Affiliativ e humor appeared to be a more natural humor style in a low stress context. This humor style is consistently, and signific antly, positiv ely associated w ith cheerfulness, psychological w ellbeing, and social intimacy (Martin et al., 2003), as w ell as har mony, sharing, and mutual happiness among in-group members (Kazarian & Martin, 2004). So w hile this humor style may be adaptiv e in terms of enhancing social supports and relationships, it does not appear to be as effectiv e in terms of directly coping w ith stress or health. Further inv estigation of situations that require adaptation, other than health, may further our understanding of the adaptiv eness of Affiliativ e humor. Taking a broader look at the moderating effects of the negativ e humor styles, it could be argued that the use of Self-defeating and Aggressiv e humor styles may just be an acknow ledgement of one’s circumstances under high stress or high hassles (see Figures 3 and 4). I n this w ay, the difference betw een high and low use of the negativ e humor styles during high stress situations may reflect a tendency to express or communicate feelings and aw areness of discomfort as opposed to a tendency to suffer in silence. I t may be that the communic ation of discomfort, although negativ e tow ards others (Aggressiv e humor ) or oneself (Self-defeating), may be cathartic because the indiv idual is simply expressing that there is a problem. I ndeed, activ ely suppressing one’s negativ e emotional experience has been related to the dev elopment of health problems (Pennebaker, 1992). Whereas Self-enhancing humor is adaptiv e because one is cognitively reappraising a stressful situation, the adaptiv eness of the negativ e styles may f unction in a different w ay—by merely acknow ledging or confronting a negativ e circumstance v ia humor. As alw ays, it is a concern w ith correlational data that causality cannot be demonstr ated, but if the relationship is causal, it may not be clear w hich v ariable is the cause and w hich is the effect. The present study proposes that c hanges in health outcomes in reaction to stress may be allev iated or exacerbated by the use of humor. This study is a partial replic ation of Nezu and colleagues (1988). Going beyond the correlational methodology used in the present study, Nezu et al. (1988) used a more rigorous prospectiv e design to test this relationship. They reported finding humor as a moderator betw een stressful ev ents and depressiv e symptoms (Nezu et al., 1988). Similarly, the present study found more significant results w ith mental health measures than the truly physic al ones. Does Humor Benefit Health In Retirement? 141 Interpreting Unexpected Correlations Correlations that hav e not been prev iously reported w ere rev ealed w ith this current sample. First, the Aggressiv e humor style had a significant positiv e correlation w ith Pain, contrary to expectations for a negativ e correlation w ith the health measures. On the other hand, Self-defeating humor, the other negativ e humor style, had an expected negativ e correlation w ith the health measures. The moderating effect of Aggressive humor supported the positiv e correlation. Reports of high use of Aggressiv e humor appeared to be more adaptiv e in periods of high stress in both the combined sample and among males. How ev er, this effect may not be entirely satisfying as an explanation. The Self-defeating humor style w as negativ ely correlated w ith Emotional Wellbeing, as expected, and among the combined sample and males, appeared to hav e the same adaptiv e quality in high stress/hassles as Aggressiv e humor. Although the unexpected positiv e correlation betw een Aggressiv e humor and Pain seems to be indic ativ e of a genuine moderating effect and not a mere anomaly, future research may clarify this finding. An unpredicted significant gender difference w ith use of Affiliativ e humor w as also rev ealed, as males reported more use of Affiliativ e humor than females. To our know ledge this has not been reported in prev ious studies using the HSQ. A brief inquiry into prev ious literature has rev ealed tw o common outcomes regarding gender differences on the HSQ. The most common finding is that males use the Self- defeating and Aggressiv e humor styles more than females, but no significant gender differences emerged w ith the Self-enhancing and Affiliativ e humor styles (Kazarian & Martin, 2004; Martin et al., 2003). Otherw ise, studies indicate that there are no gender differences across all four humor styles (Erickson & Feldstein; Martin & Lefcourt, 1983). I t is not entirely clear w hy in the current sample gender differences w ere found w ith respect to the Affiliativ e humor measure. I t is w orth mentioning that the studies mentioned abov e utilized mostly college-aged samples. I t may be that elderly males typically use more Affiliativ e humor, or this finding may be unique to this sample. Further research should be done to examine the use of humor among div erse elderly samples to clarify this unexpected outcome. Limitations and Future Directions One limitation of this study is that stress measures w ere collected at a single time point. The use of ecological momentary assessments (EMAs), in w hich participants Europe’s Journal of Psychology 142 are reminded throughout the day to record immediate experiences, may reveal more infor mation on proximal stress in particular. Prev ious studies hav e found that elderly indiv iduals do not report as many hassles as younger adults (Aldw in, Sutton, Chiara, & Spiro, 1996). Perhaps it may be more difficult for older indiv iduals to recall hassles retrospectiv ely. I t has also been suggested that the number of hassles decrease as the number of social roles decrease in old age (Aldw in et al., 20 07). Alternativ ely, hassles from other sources, such as diminishing abilities and loss of acquaintances may increase for the elderly. Likew ise, Gottlieb and Wolfe (2002) promote study designs that facilitate observ ation of coping as it unfolds ov er time. Again the use of EMAs could prompt real-time assessment of the use of humor as a coping strategy in conjunction w ith hassle and stress reports. A study utilizing EMA could then illuminate both real -time stress as w ell as the strategies used to cope w ith them. Finally, these results should only be generalized to a v ery w ell-educated, Caucasian, elderly retired population. The c urrent research pulled from an email listing of college graduates. More than 60% of this sample ac quired additional educ ation beyond a four-year college degree. I n addition, the retirees that comprised the current sample w ere all comfortable enough w ith computers to complete a lengthy 45 minute online-surv ey. I t appears that this unique sample may not need to rely as much on humor w hen dealing w ith stress. Highly educated, w ealthy indiv iduals tend to be buffered from negativ e life experiences (Baltes & Lang, 1997) and may hav e a w ealth of other coping strategies to c hoose from. This is plausible, giv en that humor is an emotional coping strategy, w hich makes the best of a stress one cannot change. Future studies could examine these humor styles in relation to stress among other, more div erse samples. Giv en some prominent aspects of humor, there is sound justific ation for more extensiv e research effort w hich addresses some of the complexity of the roles and effects of humor in retirement. First, the f act that humor is a for m of emotional coping (Folk mann & Lazarus, 1988), may imply a critic al role as a coping response in retirement. Emotional coping consists of making the best of a situation in w hich problem solv ing to eliminate the stress is not an option, and in retirement many stressors, such as decreases in physic al abilities or loss of friends, are suc h sources of unav oidable stress. Consequently, a humorous perspectiv e may often be significantly helpful in minimizing the negativ e consequences of suc h losses. Additionally, the cognitiv e flexibility implicit in being able to readily sw itch from a telic or goal directed state of mind to a paratelic or playful state may be beneficial in itself (Apter, 1997). Further, the social nature and consequences of humor c an also Does Humor Benefit Health In Retirement? 143 hav e particular relev ance in retirement. Since social support is a prominent buffer against stress v ulnerability (Koeni g, Westlund, George, Hughes, Blazer, & Hybels, 1993), humor can be seen as one means of fostering and maintaining positiv e and supportiv e social relationships. These are just a few of the potential reasons w hy there may be particular v alue in dev oting extensiv e future research effort to a better understanding of roles of humor in the context of retirement. Finally, this line of research—inv estigating the stress and health buffering c apacity of different humor styles—w as also designed to set the groundw ork for more applied research designs in the future. For example, as adaptiv e consequences of differing humor styles are clarified in different contexts, future studies may test the feasibility of teaching coping humor to retirees for w hom it is low or to reinforce coping humor in indiv iduals w ho may use this style only in selec t instances. A prev ious study has show n that humor can be used to alter an emotional response in a therapeutic context (Ventis, Higbee, & Murdock, 2001). Ventis and colleagues found that humor can be effectiv ely used to desensitize phobias and reev aluate a fear. The findings of Ventis and colleagues may hav e implic ations for the dev elopment of retirement transition groups designed to help indiv iduals reassess affectiv e response using humo r. I f humor can be introduced to reduce fear, it may be that humor can also be introduced to help reliev e stress and help retirees reappraise daily life hassles as w ell. References Aldw in, C. M., Sutton, K. J., Chiara, G., & Spiro A. III. (1996). Age differences in stress, coping, and appraisal: Findings from the Normative Aging Study. Journals of Gerontology: Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences, Series B, 51, 179-188. Aiken, L. S., & West, S. G. (1991). Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interactions. New bury Park: Sage. Aldw in, C. M., Yancura, L. A., & Boeninger, D. K. (2007). Coping, health, and aging. In C. M. Aldw in, C. L. Park, & A. Spiro, III. (Eds.), Handbook of health psychology and aging (pp. 210-226). New York: Guilford. Anderson, C. A., & Arnoult, L. H. (1989). An examination of perceived control, humor, irrational beliefs, and positive stress as moderators of the relation between negative stress and health. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 10(2), 101-117. Apter, M. (1997). Reversal theory: What is it? The Psychologist, 10(3), 217-220. Europe’s Journal of Psychology 144 Arber, S., & Cooper, H. (1999). Gender differences in health in later life: The new paradox. Social Science & Medicine, 48, 61-76. Argyle, M. (1997). I s happiness a cause of health? Psychology and Health, 12, 769-781. Baltes, M. M., & Lang, F. R. (1997). Ev eryday functioning and successful aging: The impact of resources. Psychology & Aging, 12, 433-443. Beehr, T. A., & Adams, G. A. (2003). I ntroduction and overview of current research and thnking on retirement. I n G. A. Adams & T A. Beehr (Eds.), Retirement: Reasons, processes, and results (pp. 1-5). New York: Springer. Berk, R. A. (2001). The active ingredients in humor: Psychophysiological benefits and risks for older adults. Educational Gerontology, 27, 232-339. Boyle, G. J., & Joss-Reid, J. M. (2004). Relationship of humour to health: A psychometric inv estigation. British Journal of Health Psychology, 9, 51-66. Carver, C. S., Scheier, M. F., & Weintraub, J. K. (1989). Assessing coping strategies: A theoretically based approach. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 56(2), 267- 283. Celso, B. G., Ebener, D. J., & Burkhead, E. J. (2003). Humor coping, health status, and life satisfaction among older adults residing in assisted living facilities. Aging & Mental Health, 7(6), 438-445. Cohen, S., Janicki-Deverts, D., & Miller E. (2007). Psychological stress and disease. Journal of the American Medical Association, 298, 1685-1687. DeLongis, A., Coyne, J. C., Dakof, G., Folkman, S., & Lazarus, R. S. (1982). Relationship of daily hassles, uplifts, and major life events to health status. Health Psychology, 1, 119-136. DeLongis, A., Folkman, S., & Lazarus, R. S. (1988). The impact of daily stress on health and mood: Psychological and social resources as moderators. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54, 486-495. Edw ards, J. R., & Cooper, C. L. (1988). The impacts of positive psychological states on physical health: A review and theoretical framework. Social Science & Medicine, 27, 1447-1459. Does Humor Benefit Health In Retirement? 145 Erickson, S. J., & Feldstein, S. W. (2007). Adolescent humor and its relationship to coping, defense strategies, psychological distress, and well-being. Journal of Child Psychiatry and Human Development, 37, 255-271. Folkman, S., & Lazarus, R. S. (1988). Coping as a mediator of emotion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54(3), 466-475. Folkman, S., Lazarus, R. S., Pimley, S., & Nov acek, J. (1987). Age differences in stress and coping process. Psychology & Aging, 2, 171-184. Freeman, G. P., & Ventis, W. L. (2008, Nov ember). Gender differences in the use of humor as a coping mechanism on retirement stress and daily hassles. Poster session presented at The Gerontological Society of America’s 61st Annual Scientific Meeting, National Harbor, MD. Gottlieb, B. H., & Wolfe, J. (2002). Coping with family caregiving to persons with dementia: A critical review. Aging and Mental Health, 6, 325-342. Gunnar, M., & Quevedo, K. (2007). The neurobiology of stress and development. Annual Review of Psychology, 58, 145-73. Hays, R. D., Sherbourne, C. D., & Mazel, R. M. (1993). The RAND 36-I tem Health Survey 1.0. Health Economics, 2, 217-227. Hayslip, B. Jr., Beyerlein, M., & Nichols, J. A. (1997). Assessing anxiety about retirement: The Case of Academicians. International Journal of Aging and Human Development, 44(1), 15-36. Kanner, A. D., Coyne, J. C., Schaefer, C., & Lazarus, R. S. (1981). Comparison of two modes of stress measurement: Daily hassles and uplifts versus major life events. Journal of Behavioral Medicine, 4(1), 1-39. Kazarian, S. S., & Martin, R. M. (2004). Humour styles, personality, and well-being among Lebanese university students. European Journal of Personality, 18, 209-219. Kelly, M., & Barratt, G. (2007). Retirement: Phantasy and reality—Dying in the saddle or facing up to it? Psychodynamic Practice, 13(2), 197-202. Kessler, R. C., & McLeod, J. D. (1984). Sex differences in vulnerability to undesirable life events, American Sociological Review, 49, 620-631. Europe’s Journal of Psychology 146 Kirsh, G. A., & Kuiper, N. A. (2003). Positive and negative aspects of sense of humor: Associations with the constructs of individualism and relatedness. Humor: International Journal of Humor Research, 16(1), 33-62. Koenig, H., Westlund, R., George, L., Hughes, D., Blazer, D., & Hybels, C. (1993). Abbreviating the Duke Social Support Index for use in chronically ill elderly individuals . Psychosomatics: Journal of Consultation Liaison Psychiatry, 34(1), 61-69. Kuiper, N. A., Grimshaw , M., Leite, C., & Kirsh, G. (2004). Humor is not alw ays the best medicine: Specific components of sense of humor and psychological well-being. Humor: International Journal of Humor Research, 17(1), 135-168. Kuiper, N. A., Martin, R. A., & Olinger, L. J. (1993). Coping humour, stress, and cognitive appraisals. Canadian Journal of Behavioral Science, 25(1), 81-96. Lee, C. (2001). Experiences of family caregiving among older Australian women. Journal of Health Psychology, 6, 393-404. Lefcourt, H. M., Davidson, K., Shepherd, R., Phillips, M. Prkachin, K., & Mills, D. (1995). Perspective-taking humor: Accounting for stress moderation. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 14, 373-391. Marshall, V. W., Clarke, P. J., & Ballantyne, P. J. (2001). I nstability in the retirement transition: Effects on health and well-being in a Canadian study. Research on Aging, 23(4), 379-409. Martin, R. A. (2001). Humor, laughter, and physical health: Methodological issues and research findings. Psychological Bulletin, 127(4), 504-519. Martin, R. A. (2004). Sense of humor and physical health: Theoretical issues, recent findings, and future directions. Humor: International Journal of Humor Research, 17(1), 1- 19. Martin, R. A. (2007). Personality approaches to the sense of humor. In The psychology of humor: An integrative approach. Amsterdam, Netherlands: Elsevier. Martin, R. A., Kuiper, N. A., Olinger, L. J., & Dance, K. A. (1993). Humor, coping w ith stress, self-concept, and psychological well-being. Humor: International Journal of Humor Research, 6, 89-104. Martin, R. A., & Lefcourt, H. M. (1983). Sense of humor as a moderator of the relations between stressors and moods. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 45, 1313- 1324. Does Humor Benefit Health In Retirement? 147 Martin, R. A., Puhlik-Doris, P., Larsen, G., Gray, J., & Weir, K. (2003). I ndiv idual 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. Matud, M. P. (2004). Gender differences in stress and coping styles. Personality and Individual Differences, 37, 1401-1415. McDonough, P., & Walters, W. (2001). Gender and health: Reassessing patterns and explanations. Social Science & Medicine, 52, 547-559. Miller, G. E., Chen, E., & Zhou, E. S. (2007). I f it goes up, must it come dow n? Chronic stress and the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenocortical axis in humans. Psychological Bulletin, 133, 25-45. Nezu, A. M., Nezu, C. M., & Blissett, S. E. (1988). Sense of humor as a moderator of the relation between stressful events and psychological distress: A prospective analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54(3), 520-525. Orfila, F., Ferrer, M., Lamarca, R., Tebe, C., Domingo-Salv any, A., & Alonso, J. (2006). Gender differences in health-related quality of life among the elderly: The role of objective functional capacity and chronic condition. Social Science & Medicine, 63, 2367-2380. Pennebaker, J. W. (1992). I nhibition as the linchpin of health. In H. S. Friedman (Ed.), Hostility, coping, and health (pp. 127-139). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. Pinquart, M., & Schindler, I . S. (2007). Changes of life satisfaction in the transition to retirement: A latent-class approach. Psychology and Aging, 22(3), 442-455. Porterfield, A. L. (1987). Does sense of humor moderate the impact of life stress on psychological and physical well-being? Journal of Research in Personality, 21, 306-317. Row lison, R. T., & Felner, R. D. (!988). Major life events, hassles, and adaptation in adolescence: Confounding in the conceptualization and measurement of life stress and adjustment revisited. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 55, 432-444. Sapolsky, R. M. (2004). Organismal stress and telomeric aging: An unexpected connection. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 101, 17323-17324. Europe’s Journal of Psychology 148 Sharpley, C. F. (1997). Psychometric properties of the self-perceived stress in retirement scale. Psychological Reports, 81, 319-322. Thorson, J. A., & Powell, F. C. (1993). Dev elopment and v alidation of a multidimensional sense of humor. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 49, 13-23. Tümkaya, S. (2007). Burnout and humor relationship among university lecturers. Humor: International Journal of Humor Research, 20(1), 73-92. Ventis, W. L., Higbee, G., & Murdock, S. A. (2001). Using humor in systematic desensitization to reduce fear. Journal of General Psychology, 128(2), 241-253. Wang, M. (2007). Profiling retirees in the retirement transition and adjustment process: Examining the longitudinal change patterns of retirees’ psychological well-being. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92(2), 455-474. World Health Organization (WHO). (2000). Women, ageing and health. Fact sheet no. 252. About the authors: Gillian P. Freeman conducted the abov e research w hile completing her M.A. in psychology at The College of William & Mary. She is continuing her graduate education at the Univ ersity of Massachusetts Amherst in Dev elopmental P sychology, w ith a focus on aging, retirement, and humor. Address for correspondence: G. P. Freeman, Department of Psychology, Univ ersity of Massachusetts Amherst, Tobin Hall, 135 Hicks Way, Amherst, MA, 01003-9271, United States of America E-mail: gpfreema@psych.umass.edu W. Larry Ventis is a clinical psychologist and Professor at the College of William and Mary. His research on humor has dealt primarily w ith applic ations of humor. The current topic w as of particular interest as he is not so f ar from retirement himself.