Running Head: SELF STANDARDS, HUMOR & WELL-BEING Europe’s Journal of Psychology, 6(3), pp. 149-173 www.ejop.org The Impact of Humor in North American versus Middle East Cultures Nicholas A. Kuiper Univ ersity of Western Ontario Shahe S. Kazarian American Univ ersity of Beirut Jessica Sine Univ ersity of Western Ontario Margaret Bassil American Univ ersity of Beirut Abstract North American (Canadian) and Middle East (Lebanese) participants rated their reactions to four different humorous comments (self-enhancing, affiliative, self-defeating, and aggressive), presented by others in brief scenarios. Consistent with predictions generated from a humor styles model originally formulated in a North American context, all participants responded most negatively to aggressive humorous comments by indicating the saddest mood, the highest ratings of rejection, and the least desire to continue interacting with the person making the comments. Only the North American participants showed a distinctive positive reaction to the self-enhancing humorous comments by displaying the happiest mood, the least rejection, and the greatest desire to continue with the interaction. In contrast, the Middle East Lebanese participants did not differentiate in their responses between self-enhancing, affiliative and self-defeating humorous comments. These findings were considered in light of cultural distinctions in collectivistic versus individualistic self-construals. Here, it was suggested that the collectivistic self-construals that characterize Lebanese Middle East participants may hav e blurred the self versus other distinctions in the humor styles model, thus leading to significantly less humor differentiation in a Lebanese Middle East context. The implications of these findings for further cross-cultural work on humor and its impact in social interactions w as then considered. Keywords: Humor, Cross-cultural, Lebanese, Self-construals, Social Interactions, Cross- cultural, Canadian http://www.ejop.org/ Europe’s Journal of Psychology 150 Considerable research has now documented the existence of s ev eral different humor styles. For example, one humor model proposed by Martin, Puhlik -Doris, Larsen, Gray, and Weir (2003) has suggested that certain humor styles may be quite adaptiv e for the indiv idual, w hereas other styles may be more maladaptiv e. I n this approach, the tw o adaptiv e styles are affiliativ e and self-enhancing humor; w hereas the tw o maladaptiv e styles are aggressiv e and self-defeating humor. Affiliativ e humor inv olv es funny, non-hostile jokes, and spontaneous w itty banter to amuse others in a respectf ul w ay. I t is aimed at others and used in an adaptiv e manner to facilitate relationships and reduce interpersonal conflict. Aggressiv e humor, on the other hand, is intended to put others dow n by using sarcasm, teasing and ridicule. As such, the use of this maladaptiv e style may hurt or alienate others. I n contrast, self-enhancing humor is often used as an adaptiv e coping mechanism, allow ing the indiv idual to adopt a humorous outlook on life and maintain a realistic perspectiv e in stressful situations. Finally, self-defeating maladaptiv e humor inv olv es self- dispar agement and allow ing oneself to be the „butt‟ of the joke, in order to gain the approv al of others. The four humor styles in the Martin et al. (2003) humor model are assessed v ia the Humor Styles Questionnaire (HSQ). A number of studies now prov ide ev idence for the existence of these four styles across quite div erse cultures, including North American (Kuiper, Grimshaw , Leite & Kirsh, 2004: Martin et al., 2003), Western European (Saraglou & Sc ariot, 2002; Vernon, Martin, Scher mer & Mackie, 2008), Eastern (Chen & Martin, 2007), and Middle East societies (Kalliny, Cruthirds & Minor, 2006; Kazarian & Martin, 2004; 2006; Taher, Kazarian & Martin, 2008). I n addition, these research studies has generally supported the distinction betw een adaptiv e and maladaptiv e humor styles, as higher lev els of adaptiv e humor (either affiliativ e or self-enhancing) are usually associated w ith greater psychological w ell-being; w hereas higher lev els of maladaptiv e (e.g., self-defeating) humor are typic ally associated w ith increased depression and low er self-esteem. Moreov er, these associations w ith w ell-being hav e also show n some degree of cross-cultural consistency, w ith the same general patterns often emerging in North American, Eastern and Middle East cultures. Much less is know n, how ev er, about how the use of these humor styles may impact on another person in a typic al social interaction. This issue w as explored in the present set of studies by focusing on the responses made by indiv iduals that w ere the recipients of humorous comments pertaining to each of the four humor styles. I n this research, w e w ere interested in deter mining the extent to w hich eac h type of humorous comment (affiliativ e, self-enhancing, aggressiv e, and self-defeating) might hav e either a positiv e or negative impac t on the recipient‟s ov erall mood Cross-Cultural Humor Impact 151 (happy-sad). We w ere also interested in deter mining w hether the four types of humorous comments might hav e a differential effect on how much recipients felt accepted or rejected by the person making the comments; and the extent to w hich they w ould then w ant to continue inter acting w ith that person. I n addition to these perceptions that pertain more directly to social interactions, w e also assessed the degree to w hich the v arious types of humorous comments might hav e a much broader impact on recipients by altering their cognitiv e appraisals of a stressful ev ent they w ere dealing w ith. We examined cognitiv e appraisals, as prior research has show n that increased coping humor results in muc h greater flexibility w hen reassessing one‟s ow n stressful situations (Abel, 2002; Kuiper, Martin & Olinger, 1993; Kuiper, McKenzie & Belanger, 1995). As such, w e w ere interested in deter mining w hether similar re-appraisal effects might emerge after an indiv idual is exposed to v arious types of humorous comments made by others. Since relativ ely little cross-cultural research has inv estigated humor style effects from the perspectiv e of the recipient, our first study offered an initial examination of this issue by using a Canadian North American sample. The remaining tw o studies then tested the extent to w hich the findings obtained in the first study also emerged in a Lebanese society. This Middle East culture w as selected, as it is quite distinct from the indiv idualistic North American culture that gener ated the original humor styles model. This cross-cultural issue is important to examine, as recent w ork by Taher et al. (2008) has found that the fit of the humor styles model to a Middle East collectiv istic culture (Lebanese ) w as less w ell-defined than the fit typically found for indiv idualistic cultures (e.g., North American, Western European). Although all four humor styles w ere still ev ident in the Taher et al., Lebanese sample, these styles w ere less distinct from one another than usual differences noted in North American samples (see also Kazarian & Martin, 2004; 2006 for similar findings in further Lebanese samples). Further more, these inv estigators also found that the associations betw een the four humor styles and v arious indices of psychological w ell-being w ere less pronounced in the Lebanese samples, w hen compared to the same associations in more indiv idualistic c ultures. As such, Taher et al. (2008 ) hav e suggested that these findings are consistent w ith the proposal that there may be less differentiation among the four humor styles in collectiv istic cultures, as these cultures do not display the same indiv idualistic self-orientation underlying the original dev elopment of the humor styles model. These findings further suggest that the differential effects of the v arious humor styles on others may be less pronounced in collectiv e cultures. This issue w as examined in Studies 2 and 3, once w e complete d our exploration of the potential impact of humor styles in an indiv idualistic North Americ an Canadian sample. Europe’s Journal of Psychology 152 Study 1: The Impact of Humorous Comments in a North American Canadian Culture I n order to assess the responses to humorous comments made by ot hers, participants w ere presented w ith tw o brief scenarios, each describing a moderately challenging situation faced by the participant. One scenario w as academic , in w hich the participant w as described as hav ing done relativ ely poorly on an examination, and then going to meet w ith the teaching assistant (TA) to discuss the grade receiv ed. During this disc ussion, the TA responds w ith a humorous comment (either affiliativ e, self-enhancing, aggressiv e or self-defeating). Participants then rated how much this humorous comment impacted on their ow n mood (happy-sad), how much it made them feel accepted or rejected by the person making the humorous comment, and how muc h it made them w ant to continue interac ting w ith this person. At a broader lev el, participants also indic ated the degree to w hich the humorous comment made them feel more positiv e or negativ e about their ow n challenging situation (i.e., their low grade). I n turn, the second scenario inv olv ed meeting w ith a casual friend to discuss the participant ‟s recent breakup w ith a relativ ely long-ter m romantic partner. The c ausal friend then responds w ith a humorous comment (again pertaining to one of the four humor styles), follow ed by the same participant ratings as described abov e. The humor styles model (Martin et al., 2003; Martin, 2007) w as used to generate predictions for the expected pattern of findings. For the maladaptiv e humor styles, w e hypothesized that the aggressiv e humor style comments w ould hav e the most negativ e impact on the recipient, resulting in the saddest mood, the highest feelings of rejection, and the low est desire to continue the interaction. These predic tions stem from the deliberately hurtful nature of aggressiv e humor that is directed tow ards the recipient (Martin et al., 2003 ; Martin, 2007). These charac teristics of maladaptiv e humor w ould make the recipient w ant to w ithdraw from the situation, both emotionally and physic ally. At a broader lev el, these detrimental effects could then lead to an enhanced negativ e cognitiv e appraisal of the recipient‟s stressful ev ent (i.e., low grades, relationship breakup). I n contrast to the abov e pattern for aggressiv e humor, w e expected both of the adaptiv e humor comments to produce a significantly happier mood in the recipient, along w ith increased feelings of acceptance, and a greater desire to continue interacting. For affiliativ e humor, this pattern w ould reflect the basic facilitativ e nature of this humor style, w hich functions primarily to enhance social relationships (Martin, 2007). For the self-enhancing humorous comments, w e expected a positiv e Cross-Cultural Humor Impact 153 impac t because of the moderately stressful ev ents inv olv ed in our tw o scenarios. If recipients v iew the humorous self-enhancing comments by another person as an illustrativ e model of how to effectively cope w ith their ow n challenging ev ents (low grade/relationship breakup), then recipients may experience much more positiv e mood and feel much more accepted by either the TA or casual friend. I n turn, this modeling effect should greatly increase their desire to continue interacting w ith this indiv idual, and may also help them cognitiv ely re-appraise their ow n challenging ev ent to be much more positiv e. Predictions regarding the impact of self-defeating humor on recipients w ere less clear-cut. On the one hand, the humor styles model proposes that the function of self-defeating humor is to make the indiv idual feel more accepted by other persons they interact w ith (Martin, 2007). I n turn, this suggests that the use of self -defeating humor w ould be v iew ed by the recipients in a fav orable manner, resulting in the recipients hav ing a happier mood, greater feelings of acceptance, and an increased desire to continue interacting w ith the indiv idual using self -defeating humor. This could also lead to more positiv e cognitiv e appraisals and higher ratings of similarity to the recipient ‟s ow n response in the same type of situation. On the other hand, the explicit demeaning and ingratiating nature of self -defeating humor may result in a negativ e distancing response by recipients. This distancing reaction w ould be ev ident in less positiv e mood, greater feelings of rejection, and reduced desire to interact w ith the indiv idual using this adv erse humor style. Further more, this distancing effect may also impact more broadly by making the cognitiv e re- appr aisals of the stressful situations (low grade, relationship difficulties) much more negativ e. Method Participants A sample of 173 univ ersity students (139 females, 34 males) enrolled in introductory psychology courses at a large English-speaking North American (Canadian) univ ersity participated in this study, in partial fulfillment of course requirements. Their mean age w as 18.79 (SD = 1.68), w ith a range from 17 to 33. Materials Tw o different stressful ev ent descriptions w ere used. I n the academic scenario, participants read the follow ing: Europe’s Journal of Psychology 154 I magine that you are going to your TA‟s office to get your grade back from an exam you w rote tw o weeks ago. This is an important course for you, and you studied hard for the exam. You had expected that you w ould do w ell, but w hen you get your exam back, your grade is w ell below your usual av erage. You also find out that although you did pass the exam, your grade is below the class av erage. I n the interpersonal scenario the follow ing infor mation w as presented: I magine that you are in the univ ersity cafeteria hav ing a snack w ith a casual friend from one of your classes. You see this friend about once a w eek outside of class and spend some time disc ussing v arious perso nal ev ents. Today you tell your casual friend that the person you hav e been dating for the past year is now seriously considering breaking off the relationship. Directly beneath eac h scenario, eac h participant w as presented w ith a description of one of four possible humorous comments (affiliativ e, self-enhancing, aggressiv e, or self-defeating), made by either the TA (in the academic scenario) or the casual friend (in the interpersonal scenario), in response to the stressful ev ent described in the relev ant scenario. The four different types of humorous comments are presented below . Affiliative Humor Response: Your TA [c asual friend] responds by saying funny things that do not focus on your exam performance [dating relationship problems]. The TA [casual friend] prov ides some spontaneous w itty banter and then tells a few non-hostile jokes to amuse you, and help put you at ease. Your TA‟s [casual friend‟s] use of this tolerant humor indicates that your TA [c asual friend] is appropriately respectf ul of self and others, and does not take things ov erly seriously. Self -Enhancing Humor Response: Your TA [casual friend] responds by saying funny things about a time w hen they had performed poorly on an exam [had difficulties in a dating relationship]. The TA [casual friend] comments about how they used humor to help maintain a realistic perspectiv e w hen faced w ith this upsetting ev ent. Your TA‟s [c asual friend‟s] use of this coping humor indicates that your TA [casual friend] has a generally humorous, but still realistic outlook on life, and is frequently amused by the incongruities of ev eryday ev ents. Aggressive Humor Response: Your TA [c asual friend] responds by saying Cross-Cultural Humor Impact 155 funny things about your exam performance [dating relationship problems], but things that are sarcastic and critical of you. The TA [casual friend] prov ides humorous comments that ridicule your performance and ability. Your TA‟s [c asual friend‟s] use of this putdow n humor indicates that your TA [casual friend] often expresses humor w ithout consideration of its potential impac t to be hurtful and alienate others. Self -def eating Humor Response: Your TA [casual friend] responds by saying funny things about a time w hen they had performed poorly on an exam [had difficulties in a dating relationship]. The TA [casual friend] comments about how they made sev eral jokes about their ow n intellectual faults and academic w eaknesses [their ow n deficits in dating skills and interpersonal w eaknesses], in order to let others laugh at their expense. Your TA‟s [c asual friend‟s] use of this self-disparaging humor indicates that your TA [c asual friend] often allow s themselv es to be the “butt” of jokes, and w ill laugh along w hen ridiculed by others. I mmediately beneath the humorous response w ere sev eral questions that w ere each rated on a 5-point sc ale. The first asked how the humorous comment of the other indiv idual (TA or casual friend) made the recipient (i.e., participant) feel in this situation, ranging from happy (1) to sad (5). The next question asked how muc h this humorous comment w ould make the recipient feel either accepted (1) or rejected (5). Follow ing this, participants then indicated how much they w ould w ant to continue interacting w ith the TA or casual friend that used this type of humor, w ith responses ranging from (1) “ not at all” to (5) “ v ery much.” Finally, cognitiv e re - appr aisals of the stressful ev ent being discussed in the scenario (poor exam performance or dating problems) w ere assessed on a 5 point sc ale ranging from (1) “muc h more negativ e” to (5) “ much more positiv e.” Procedure Participants w ere tested in small groups of up to 15. After completing an infor med consent for m, each participant receiv ed a booklet. Four booklets w ere constructed, w hich corresponded to the four different types of humorous comments (self- enhancing, affiliativ e, self-defeating, and aggressiv e). Within a booklet, participants w ere presented w ith both scenarios (ac ademic and interpersonal), but for only one of the four types of humorous comments. The presentation order of scenarios w as v aried across booklets. Within each session, participants w ere randomly assigned to one of the four humorous comment conditions. Upon completion of the booklet, Europe’s Journal of Psychology 156 participants receiv ed a debriefing for m that offered further informatio n regarding the study. Results and Discussion Each rating w as analyzed using a 4 x 2 (Humorous Comments x Scenario) analysis of v ariance (ANOV A). For each analysis, the betw een-subjects factor w as humorous comments (self-enhancing, affiliativ e, self-defeating, and aggressiv e); w hereas the repeated measures f actor w as scenario (academic, interpersonal). All significant ANOVA effects w ere follow ed up, w hen required, w ith t-tests on the appropriate cell means. Happy-Sad Mood. A significant main effect w as found for humorous comments, F = 17.42, p < .001, w ith the means and standard dev iations for this North American Canadian sample show n in the top row of Table 1. As expected, recipients of aggressiv e humorous comments felt the saddest, compared to any o f the remaining humorous comments, all p‟s < .001. I n contrast, recipients of self-enhancing humorous comments displayed the happiest mood, compared to indiv iduals receiv ing either aggressiv e or self-defeating humorous comments, both p‟s < .001. Further more, these mood ratings for self-enhancing comments w ere ev en happier than the same ratings associated w ith the affiliativ e humorous comments, p < .05. The affiliativ e humorous comments, how ev er, did not show any difference in mood, w hen compared to the self-defeating humorous comments. Finally, the ANOVA rev ealed that the only remaining significant source of v ariance w as a main effect for scenario, F = 4.31, p < .05. Here, indiv iduals w ere less happy ov erall in the academic than interpersonal scenario (respectiv e means of 3.24 v ersus 3.05). Accepted-Rejected. The ANOVA for this measure rev ealed a significant main effect for humorous comments, F = 29.72, p < .001. As show n in Table 1, Canadian participants felt the most accepted after the self-enhancing humorous comment and felt the most rejected after the aggressiv e humorous comment, compared w ith any of the remaining comments, all p‟s < .001. As w as the case for the happy-sad mood rating reported directly abov e, no significant difference w as found be tw een the affiliativ e and self-defeating humorous comments for these ratings. Cross-Cultural Humor Impact 157 _________________________________________________________________________________ Table 1: Study 1 North Americ an Canadian Sample - Means and SDs Humorous Comments _______________________________________________________________ Self-Enhancing Affiliativ e Self-Defeating Aggressiv e Recipients‟ Ratings Happy – Sad Mood M 2.61 3.00 3.15 3.79 SD 0.93 0.97 1.01 1.17 Accepted-Rejected M 2.24 2.94 2.60 3.78 SD 0.85 1.09 0.95 1.02 Continue I nteraction M 3.81 3.03 3.34 1.90 SD 1.05 1.32 1.15 0.99 Cognitiv e Re-appraisal M 3.55 3.02 3.05 1.94 SD 0.74 0.76 0.88 0.83 Notes. n = 173 All ratings were made on 5 point scales. For Happy-Sad, higher numbers are sadder; For Accept-Reject, higher numbers are more rejected; For Continue Interaction, higher numbers are more desire to interact; For Cognitive Re-appraisal, higher numbers are much more positive. Desire to Continue Interaction. The ANOVA indic ated that only the main effect of humorous comments w as significant, F = 31.97, p < .001. As show n in Table 1, an aggressiv e humorous comment signific antly decreased the desire to continue the interaction, compared to each remaining type of humorous comment, all p‟s < .001. I n contrast, these North American participants felt the greatest desire to continue the interaction after receiv ing a self-enhancing humorous comment, compared to each of the remaining humorous comments, all p‟s < .01. Once again, there w as no significant difference betw een the affiliativ e and self-defeating humorous comments, indic ating equiv alent desire to continue interacting w ith the TA or casual friend. Cognitive Re-appraisals. The signific ant main effect of scenario, F = 4.95, p < .05, indicated that indiv iduals w ere generally more positiv e in their cognitiv e re - Europe’s Journal of Psychology 158 appr aisals of the interpersonal ev ent than the academic ev ent (respectiv e means of 2.96 v ersus 2.80). More import antly, the ANOVA also rev ealed a significant main effect for humorous comments, F = 47.44, p < .001. As show n in Table 1, North American participants re-appraised their stressful ev ents (poor exam performance and relationship problems) more negativ ely after the TA or c asual friend responded w ith an aggressiv e humorous comment, compared to eac h of the remaining humorous comments, all p‟s < .001. Conv ersely, participants had the most positiv e cognitiv e re-appraisals of their stressful ev ents after receiv ing a self-enhancing humorous comment, compared to eac h of the other humorous comments, all p‟s < .001. Finally, there w as once again no difference betw een the affiliativ e and self - defeating humorous comments. I n other w ords, cognitiv e re -appraisals w ere equiv alent follow ing either of these tw o types of humorous comments. Summar y and Conclusions. The findings from Study 1 prov ided clear initial ev idence that humorous comments can hav e a pronounced impact on recipients, and that this impac t can v ary from v ery positiv e to quite negativ e. Consistent w ith predic tions generated from the humor styles model (Martin et al., 2003; Martin, 2007) w e found that for both types of situations (ac ademic and interpersonal) aggressiv e humorous comments hav e the most detrimental impact on recipients, resulting in the saddest mood, highest feelings of rejection, and the low est desire to continue interacting. These aggressiv e humorous comments also had a broad impac t on the recipient, as they lead to the most negativ e cognitiv e appraisals of the recipients‟ stressful ev ents (i.e., low grades and relationship breakups). I n further accord w ith the humor styles model, w e found that humorous comments pertaining to both adaptiv e humor styles (affiliativ e and self-enhancing) resulte d in a much happier mood, greater acceptance, and a greater w illingness to continue interac ting. These positiv e effects also extended to include much more positiv e cognitiv e appraisals of the stressful situations being disc ussed. I nterestingly, all of these effects w ere significantly more positiv e for the self-enhancing humorous condition, suggesting that these particular comments prov ided a strong modeling example for recipients to use w hen dealing w ith their ow n stressful circumstances. Finally, it sho uld be noted that the findings for the self-defeating humorous comments w ere less negativ e than those for aggressiv e comments, but w ere also less positiv e than those for self -enhancing comments. This pattern suggests that the impact of self -defeating humorous comments cannot be considered either highly maladaptiv e or adaptiv e, but rather leads to more ambiv alent v iews on the part of the recipient. Cross-Cultural Humor Impact 159 Study 2: The Impact of Humorous Comments in a Middle East Culture Using a North American Canadian sample, Study 1 findings clearly indicated that v arious types of humorous comments c an hav e a strong and differential impact on recipients. I t is not yet know n, how ev er, w hether these humor effects represent cultural univ ersals that are broadly ev ident across different cultures; or rather are culture-bound and specific to the same indiv idualistic c ulture that originally generated the humor styles model. To address this issue, w e conducted a second study using the same procedures as Study 1, but using a Lebanese group. This sample w as selected because of the strong collectiv ist underpinnings that mark this Middle East culture (Kazarian, 2005; Kazarian; in press). I n this culture, the self is generally construed as being interdependent, w ith an emphasis on conne ctedness w ith others, group cohesion, har mony, and cooperation (Dw airy, Achaoui, Abouserie & Farah, 2006). This collectiv ist focus is in distinct contrast to the independent, unique and autonomous self-construals that generally characterize indiv idualistic societies, such as those found in North America and Western Europe (Markus & Kitayama, 1991; Singelis, 1994). This distinction in self-construals betw een indiv idualistic and collectiv e cultures is important, as the conceptual dev elopment of the humor styles model deriv ed from self-construals that stressed independence and autonomy, rather than group cohesion and cooperation (Taher et al., 2008). Thus, in a collectiv e culture, the self versus other focus of the v arious humor styles (e.g., affiliativ e is other directed; self- enhancing is self-directed) becomes much more blurred and less distinct than in an indiv idualistic culture. As such, w e expected that the Lebanese participants in this study w ould not distinguish as clearly betw een the humor styles, thus show ing less differentiation betw een the v arious humorous comments in ter ms of their effects. Such a pattern w ould support the proposal that certain aspects of the humor styles model are more cultural-bound, as they are sensitiv e to cultural v ariations in self- construals. The opposing position, of course, is that the pattern of findings for our Lebanese participants w ould be identical to that obtained for the North American Canadian sample, thus supporting a cultural univ ersal interpretation. Method Participants Participants w ere 198 undergraduate students (114 females, 84 males) from the American Univ ersity of Beirut, a priv ate coeducational institution in w hich English is Europe’s Journal of Psychology 160 the language of instruction. I n terms of nationality, 69.7% of the sample w as Lebanese, 25.6% w ere Lebanese w ith dual nationality, and 4.6% w ere other (e.g., Palestinian born in Lebanon). The mean age of this sample w as 19.30, w ith a standard dev iation of 1.27 years. Materials and Procedure The same materials used in Study 1 w ere also used in this study. A minor change w as made to the last sentence for the interpersonal scenario. Here, the specific interpersonal stressful ev ent now being discussed w as changed from dating concerns to family difficulties, in order to better reflect the central social role of the family in Lebanese culture (Kazarian, 2005). As such, this sentence now read “Today you tell your casual friend that you are hav ing difficulties w ith your parents w ho seem very unhappy about your going out w ith friends and staying late at night.” All the remaining aspects of this study, including materials and procedure, w ere identical to Study 1. Thus, each participant read tw o scenarios (ac ademic and interpersonal), that w ere each follow ed by one of the four humorous types of comments. The order of scenarios w as again counterbalanced across participants. The questions and rating sc ales that follow ed the scenarios w ere identic al to Study 1, except for some very minor w ording changes to accommodate the different stressful ev ent now being discussed in the interpersonal scenario. All participants completed a consent form prior to receiv ing the materials for this study, and w ere giv en a debriefing for m at the end of the study. Results and Discussion A series of 4 x 2 ANOVAs (Humorous Comments x Scenario) w ere used to analyze the set of dependent measures for this study, w ith follow -up t-tests on appropriate cell means, w hen required. Happy-Sad Mood. The ANOVA rev ealed that main effect for humorous comments w as significant, F = 9.35, p < .01. The means and standard dev iations for this sole significant effect are show n in the top row of Table 2. Consistent w ith the North American Canadian sample in Study 1, the Lebanese participants in this study w ere saddest after receiv ing aggressiv e humorous comments, compared to any of the remaining types of humorous comments, all p‟s < .001. I n contrast to the North American sample, how ev er, there w ere no further significant differences in mood betw een affiliativ e, self-enhancing, and self-defeating humorous comments. As such, this pattern clearly indic ates less differentiation among the humor styles Cross-Cultural Humor Impact 161 comments for these Lebanese participants, in ter ms of subsequent impact on mood. I n particular, self-enhancing, affiliativ e and self-defeating humorous comments all resulted in the same lev el of mood; w ith all three leading to significantly less sad mood than show n follow ing aggressiv e humor comments. ___________________________________________________________________________________ ___________ Table 2: Study 2 Lebanese Sample (English-speaking) - Means and SDs Humorous Comments ________________________________________________________ Self-Enhancing Affiliativ e Self-Defeating Aggressiv e Recipients‟ Ratings Happy – Sad Mood M 2.88 2.94 2.93 3.61 SD 0.60 0.82 0.63 0.74 Accepted-Rejected M 2.56 2.88 2.63 3.25 SD 0.52 0.76 0.62 0.92 Continue I nteraction M 3.66 3.01 3.22 2.13 SD 0.79 0.96 0.84 0.87 Cognitiv e Reappraisal M 3.37 2.92 3.25 2.37 SD 0.62 0.74 0.54 0.64 Notes. n = 198 All ratings were made on 5 point scales. For Happy -Sad, higher numbers are sadder; For Accept-Reject, higher numbers are more rejected; For Continue Interaction, higher numbers are more desire to interact; For Cognitive Re-appraisal, higher numbers are much more positive. Accepted-Rejected. The means and standard dev iations for this measure are also show n in Table 2, w ith the ANOVA rev ealing a signific ant main effect for humorous comments, F = 9.05, p < .01. Consistent w ith the North American sample, the Lebanese participants in this study felt the most rejected after the aggressiv e humorous comment, compared w ith any of the remaining comments, all p‟s < .01. Contrary to the North American sample, how ev er, the Lebanese participants did not feel significantly more accepted after self-enhancing comments. I nstead, all three remaining styles of humorous comments (affiliativ e, self-enhancing, and self- Europe’s Journal of Psychology 162 defeating) resulted in equiv alent ratings of being accepted-rejected. Once again, this pattern points to much less differentiation among these three humor style comments for these Middle East participants. Desire to Continue Interaction. The ANOVA indic ated that only the main effect of humorous comments w as significant, F = 27.05, p < .001. Table 2 show s that Lebanese participants felt the greatest desire to continue the interaction after receiv ing a self-enhancing humorous comment, compared to either the aggressiv e or affiliativ e humorous comments, both p‟s < .01. This finding w as v ery similar to that displayed for the North American sample. How ev er, the comparisons betw een both self-enhancing and self-defeating humorous comments, and aggressiv e and self- defeating humorous comments, w ere no longer significant for the Lebanese participants, highlighting signific antly less differentiation among these humor styles for this group. Cognitive Re-appraisals. Humorous comments w ere the only signific ant source of v ariance in this ANOV A, F = 24.10, p < .001. As show n in Table 2, Lebanese participants re-appr aised their stressful ev ents (poor exam perfor mance and family problems) more negativ ely after an aggressiv e humorous comment, compared to all three of the remaining humorous comments, all p‟s < .001. This pattern w as identic al to that displayed by the North Americ an participants in Study 1. Also congruent w ith the Canadian sample, Lebanese participants displayed the most positiv e cognitiv e re-appraisals after receiv ing a self-enhancing humorous comment, compared w ith either affiliativ e or aggressiv e humorous comments, all p‟s < .001. I n further accord w ith the North American sample, the current participants also did not display a signific ant difference in cognitiv e re-appraisals betw een an affiliativ e and self-defeating humorous comment. Ov erall, this pattern indicates that the Lebanese sample show ed the same degree of differentiation among the humor styles as the North American Canadian sample, in ter ms of impact o n cognitiv e re-appraisals. Summar y and Conclusions. The results for this Lebanese sample rev ealed both similarities and differences, w hen compared w ith the North American findings for Study 1. I n particular, both c ultures rated aggressiv e humorous comme nts as being the most negativ e of all, resulting in the saddest mood, the highest feelings of rejection, and the low est desire to continue interacting. Both cultures also show ed very similar patterns for the cognitiv e re-appraisals, w ith aggressiv e comments again resulting in the most negativ e appraisals. Ov erall, these findings suggest that the impac t of aggressiv e humor appears to be univ ersal and broad across these tw o cultures. Cross-Cultural Humor Impact 163 Contrary to the North American sample, how ev er, the Lebanese participants did not distinguish among self-enhancing, affiliativ e and self-defeating humorous comments w hen rating subsequent impact on happy-sad mood, feeling accepted-rejected, or w anting to continue the interaction. This pattern suggests that this Middle East culture does not differentiate among these particular humor styles w hen considering their impact, and is thus consistent w ith a North American culture-bound interpretation for these specific effects of humorous comments. Study 3: A Further Test of the Impact of Humorous Comments in a Middle East Lebanese Culture Thus far, the findings from Studies 1 and 2 suggest that some of the obtained effects for the humor style comments appear to be cultur al univ ersals, w hereas others appear to be culture-bound. How ev er, one possible concern in Study 2 is that w e used an English-speaking sample of Lebanese participants. Although the continued administration of all testing materials in English allow ed us to closely duplic ate the procedures used in Study 1, it did not allow us to examine the potential impact of humorous comments that are made and receiv ed in the nativ e Arabic language. Taher et al. (2008) hav e indicated that it is v ery important to do so, not only from the theoretical perspectiv e of distinct underlying self-construals (i.e., collectiv e v ersus indiv idualistic ), but also from a measurement perspectiv e. Accordingly, our third and final study w as conducted entirely in the Ar abic language, using a further Lebanese sample. I n this study, w e w ere once again interested in exploring the extent to w hich the humorous effects documented prev iously in Studies 1 and 2 could be v iew ed as being either cultural univ ersals, or being c ulture-bound to the indiv idualistic North American society that originally dev eloped the humor styles model. I n accord w ith the proposal that collectiv e self - construals may be ev en more ger mane in this Arabic-speaking sample (Taher et al., 2008), w e thus expected to see, at a minimum, the same lev el of culture -bound effects in Study 3 as observ ed in Study 2. Further more, it remained possible that these culture-bound effects w ould extend more broadly to include cognitiv e appr aisals. I f so, this w ould also highlight the importance of including nativ e language assessments in any research examining cultural similarities or differences. Europe’s Journal of Psychology 164 Method Participants Participants w ere 243 undergraduate students (120 females, 123 males) from the American Univ ersity of Beirut and the Lebanese Univ ersity, the largest state -run institution in w hich Arabic is the primary language of instruction. I n terms of nationality, 77.8% of the sample w as Lebanese, 13.7% w ere Lebanese w ith dual nationality, and 8.5% w ere other. The mean age of this sample w as 20.1, w ith a standard dev iation of 3.50 years. Materials and Procedure The materials and procedure used in Study 3 w ere identical to those used in Study 2, except that all of the questionnaires w ere now presented in Arabic, rather than in English. Results and Discussion A 4 x 2 ANOV A (Humorous Comments x Scenario) w as used to analyze each dependent measure in this study, w ith follow -up t-tests on appropriate cell means, w hen required. Happy-Sad Mood. The top row of Table 3 show s the happy-sad cell means and standard dev iations associated w ith the sole significant main effect of humorous comments, F = 17.38, p < .001. Consistent w ith both the Canadian and English- speaking Lebanese samples, the Arabic-speaking Lebanese participants in this study w ere also saddest after aggressiv e humorous comments, compared to e ac h of the other types of humorous comments, all p‟s < .001. I n accord w ith the English- speaking Lebanese sample, the Arabic-speaking Lebanese participants also did not show any significant differences in happy -sad mood betw een self-enhancing, affiliativ e, and self-defeating humorous comments. This pattern w as distinct from the Canadian group, in w hich self-enhancing comments resulted in significantly happier ratings than either affiliativ e or self-defeating humorous comments. As such, these findings highlight a reduced degree of differentiation for both of the Lebanese groups. I n particular, the Lebanese participants, regardless of w hether they w ere English or Arabic-speaking, did not distinguish betw een self-enhancing, affiliativ e or self-defeating humor. I t w as only aggressiv e humor that show ed a distinct impact on sad mood for these participants. Cross-Cultural Humor Impact 165 _______________________________________________________________________________ Table 3: Study 3 Lebanese Sample (Ar abic-speaking)- Means and SDs Humorous Comments _________________________________________________________ Self-Enhancing Affiliativ e Self-Defeating Aggressiv e Recipients‟ Ratings Happy – Sad Mood M 2.72 2.82 2.82 3.74 SD 0.92 0.85 0.84 0.79 Accepted-Rejected M 2.78 2.88 2.85 3.71 SD 0.86 0.96 0.86 0.95 Continue I nteraction M 3.72 3.18 3.23 1.92 SD 0.65 0.91 0.85 0.69 Cognitiv e Reappraisal M 3.32 3.00 3.95 2.58 SD 0.67 0.69 0.80 0.71 Notes. n = 243 All ratings were made on 5 point scales. For Happy -Sad, higher numbers are sadder; For Accept-Reject, higher numbers are more rejected; For Continue Interaction, higher numbers are more desire to interact; For Cognitive Re-appraisal, higher numbers are much more positive Accepted-Rejected. The ANOV A rev ealed a sole significant main effect for humorous comments, F = 12.97, p < .01. Consistent w ith the findings for both prior samples, Arabic-speaking Lebanese participants also felt the most rejected after the aggressiv e humorous comment, compared to any of the other humorous comments, all p‟s < .001 (see Table 3). Consistent w ith the English-speaking Lebanese sample, all three of the remaining types of humorous comments (affiliativ e , self-enhancing, and self-defeating) resulted in equiv alent lev els of feeling accepted-rejected. This pattern for both Lebanese samples is distinct from the North American Canadian sample, in w hich participants felt significantly more accepted after self -enhancing comments. Further more, it indicates no differentiation betw een self -enhancing, affiliativ e and self-defeating humor effects for all Lebanese participants (either English or Arabic -speaking). Europe’s Journal of Psychology 166 Desire to Continue Interaction. Only the main effect of humorous comments w as significant, F = 9.74, p < .01. The cell means and standard dev iations for this effect are show n in Table 3. Consistent w ith both the Canadian and English-speaking Lebanese samples, the least desire to continue the interaction w as after an aggressiv e humorous comment, compared w ith any of the other humorous comments, all p‟s < .01. Distinct from the English-speaking Lebanese participants, the participants in this study no longer differentiated betw een self -enhancing and affiliativ e humor. I n other w ords, the Arabic-speaking Lebanese group show ed ev en less differentiation than the English-speaking Lebanese group, as the former group did not distinguish betw een any of the three humor styles (self -enhancing, affiliativ e, self-defeating) w hen indic ating their desire to continue interacting. Cognitive Re-appraisals. The ANOVA rev ealed that there w ere no significant sources of v ariance for cognitiv e re-appraisals. Thus, contrary to the signific ant effects found in both Studies 1 and 2 for this measure, the present study found that Arabic - speaking Lebanese participants did not show any cognitiv e re -appraisal distinc tions across the four types of humorous comments. Thus, in marked contrast to the pattern displayed by both the Canadian and English-speaking Lebanese samples (i.e., more positiv e re-appraisals after self-enhancing comments and more negativ e re-appraisals af ter aggressiv e comments), the Ar abic-speaking Lebanese sample did not v ary their cognitiv e re-appraisals after different types of humorous comments. This pattern suggests that the Arabic-speaking Lebanese group did not differentiate among any of the four humor styles, in ter ms of their subsequent impact on cognitiv e re-appraisals. Summar y and Conclusions. The findings from this third study both reinforce and extend the conclusions draw n from the prev ious tw o studies. To begin, the effects of aggressiv e humorous comments w ere strikingly consistent across all three samples, suggesting a strong univ ersal component for the impact of these comments. I n particular, aggressiv e humorous comments hav e a consistent detrimental impact on others, inducing negativ e mood and rejection, follow ed by a desire to limit interactions. I n contrast, the effects of self-enhancing humorous comments are culture-bound to the North Americ an Canadian sample, as neither Lebanese group (English or Arabic speaking) distinguished these comments from either affiliativ e or self-defeating comments. Further more, it also appears that the impact of humor ous comments on cognitiv e re-appraisals is limited to both English-speaking samples, as the Arabic speaking Lebanese participants did not differentiate betw een any of the types of humorous comments w hen prov iding cognitiv e re-appraisals. Cross-Cultural Humor Impact 167 General Discussion The main purpose of the present research w as to investigate the extent to w hich the impac t of the four humor styles identified by Martin et al. (2003) may be similar or distinct across v arious cultures. I n order to do so, how ever, w e first had to deter mine w hether the humorous comments pertaining to eac h humor style ac tually did hav e an effect on recipients. This w as necessary, as the majority of research thus far has focused primarily on identifying the existence of the four humor styles across v ariou s cultures, and then deter mining how these humor styles may relate to other personality characteristics and psychologic al w ell-being (Chen & Martin, 2007; Kazarian & Martin, 2006; Kuiper, et al., 2004; Martin, et al., 2003; Martin, 2007; Saroglou & Sc ariot, 2002). I n contrast, extremely little research has explored the potential impact of using these humor styles on others, particularly from a cross - cultural perspectiv e. As such, our first study examined this issue in a North American indiv idualistic c ult ure. The findings from this Canadian study prov ided strong initial support for the impact of humor styles on others, as certain humorous comments did hav e significant and differential effects on the recipients. Consistent w ith predictions generated from the humor styles model, w e found that aggressiv e humorous comments had a pow erful negativ e effect on recipients, resulting in the saddest mood, the greatest feelings of rejection, and the low est desire to continue the interaction. These comments also caused the recipients to cognitiv ely re-appraise their ow n stressful ev ent (i.e., poor exam perfor mance, relationship problems) in an ev en more negativ e manner. This pattern of findings is congruent w ith the humor styles model, since aggressiv e humor inv olv es ridiculing and alienating other people (Martin et al., 2003). As suc h, it w as expected that these aggressiv e humorous comments w ould hav e a harmful personal impact on how an indiv idual feels and reacts to v arious social interac tions (e.g., ac ademic, interpersonal). Conv ersely, and also as predicted, the self-enhancing humorous comments had precisely the opposite impact, resulting in the happiest mood, greatest feelings of acceptance, and the most desire to continue interacting. After receiv ing these humorous comments, recipients also reacted w ith the most positiv e change in the cognitiv e re-appraisals of their ow n stressful ev ents. As such, these findings from Study 1 offer strong initial support for the impact of humor on others, not only for constructs relating directly to social interac tions (e.g., one‟s ow n mood, feeling accepted or rejected, continuing the interaction); but also more broadly for constructs relating to cognitiv e re-appraisals of ongoing stressful ev ents. Europe’s Journal of Psychology 168 The extensiv e breadth of these humor effects in Study 1 is consistent w ith the often stated adage that humor c an function as a pow erful social interaction tool (Martin, 2007). Although prior w ork has demonstrated that greater coping humor is linked to more positiv e cognitiv e appraisals of one‟s own stressful events (Abel, 2002; Kuiper et al., 1993; Kuiper et al., 1995), the present w ork prov ides the first demonstration that humor use can also alter the cognitiv e re-appraisals that are made by others. Further more, the present w ork is the first demonstration that these other-referent effects of humor on cognitiv e re-appraisals c an be either positiv e or negativ e, depending upon the type of humorous comments being made (i.e., self -enhancing versus aggressiv e). As such, this pattern prov ides further strong empirical support for the adaptiv e v ersus maladaptiv e distinction in the Martin et al. (2003) humor styles model, as w ell as the perv asiv e pow er of humor use in an interpersonal context. I t is of further interest to note that in Study 1 neither self-defeating nor affiliativ e humorous comments had a v ery strong negativ e or positiv e impact on others, w hen compared to the more pronounced effects of aggressiv e and self -enhancing humorous comments. Although self-defeating humor has clearly doc umented detrimental effects on the w ell-being of the user (e.g., Kuiper et al., 2004), the present findings indicate that the use of this humor style does not inflict strong negativ e feelings in others, nor impede social relationships. Thus, self-defeating humor use does not appear to be as maladaptiv e as aggressiv e humor. I n fact, the present findings suggest that the use of self-defeating humor is tolerated to the same extent as the use of affiliativ e humorous comments, w ith both of these comments yielding greater acceptance on the part of others than aggressiv e humor. This pattern of findings suggests that the adaptiv e v ersus maladaptiv e distinctions in the humor styles model may sometimes ov erlap to a considerable degree, w ith further refinements of the model being required. Follow ing our initial look at the effects of humor w ithin a North American Canadian sample, w e then directed our attention tow ards cross-cultur al issues in the use of humor and its impact on recipients in a collectiv istic Middle East culture. I n this regard, Study 2 employed an English-speaking Lebanese sample; w hereas Study 3 employed an Ar abic-speaking Lebanese sample. The results from these tw o studies w ere then compared and contr asted w ith the findings from our initial Canadian sample, in order to deter mine w hich humor use findings may be c ultural univ ersals and w hich may be culture-bound. Across the three studies ev idence w as obtained for both. Cross-Cultural Humor Impact 169 To begin, the use of aggressiv e humorous comments appears to hav e culturally univ ersal effects on recipients, as the results for this particular humor style w ere highly consistent across all three studies. I n all cases, recipients of this type of humorous comments show ed the most detrimental effects, including the saddest mood, the highest degree of perceiv ed rejection, the least desire to continue the interac tion and the most negativ e change in cognitiv e re-appraisals for their ow n stressful ev ents. I t is clear from these findings that using aggressiv e humorous comments is highly detrimental to recipients, regardless of w hether the c ulture inv olv ed is indiv idualistic or collectiv istic; and regardless of w hether the use of humor is in the English language or in Arabic. Other findings, how ev er, point to humor use effects w hich are much more specific to the North American indiv idualistic culture from w hich the humor styles model originated. These c ulture-bound findings relate to the use of self-enhancing humorous comments, w hich primarily hav e a positiv e impac t for recipients in a North American c ulture. When turning to a more collectiv ist culture, these positiv e effects of using self-enhancing humorous comments dissipate. I n Study 2, for example, the English-speaking Lebanese recipients of self-enhancing humor no longer displayed a happier mood, or perceiv ed a higher degree of acceptance than recipients of either affiliativ e or self-defeating humorous comments. This same reduced differentiation w as also ev ident in the Arabic-speaking Lebanese sample of Study 3. Thus, as predicted by Taher et al.‟s (2008) notion of more blurred self -other distinctions for collectiv istic cultures, the findings from our studies point to significantly less differentiation among these three humor styles for both English and Arabic - speaking Lebanese participants, w hen compared to the North American Canadian participants. I nterestingly, sev eral additional findings indic ated that the Arabic -speaking sample show ed ev en less differentiation across the humor styles than the English-speaking Lebanese group. As one illustr ation, the Arabic-speaking participants did not differentiate betw een self-enhancing, affiliativ e, or self-defeating humorous comments, w hen indic ating their desire to continue interacting. Further more, this group did not distinguish betw een any of the four humor styles w hen making cognitiv e re-appraisals of their ow n stressful situations (i.e., low grade, poor relationship w ith parents), suggesting that the breadth of humor effect found earlier is not ev ident in this group. Thus, consistent w ith Taher et al. (2008), our pattern of findings clearly indicates that the differential effects of the humor styles on others are ev en more limited in a collectiv istic group tested in their ow n nativ e language (in this case, Arabic ), rather than in English. As suc h, these language -specific findings Europe’s Journal of Psychology 170 suggest that some degree of caution should be exercised regarding the conclusions draw n from cross-cultural research studies w hich do not inv olv e nativ e language participation. More generally, the present findings suggest that a great deal of care needs to be exercised w hen applying the Martin et al. (2003) humor styles model to c ultures that differ significantly from the North American indiv idualistic culture that originally informed the dev elopment of this model. Considerable additional research is required to more firmly delineate the boundary conditions that may be associated w ith the effects of this humor model, w hen applied cross-culturally. One av enue of research, for example, might inv estigate the e xtent to w hich similar collectiv istic effects for humor might be noted in a Chinese culture (Chen & Martin, 2007). I t w ould also be important for further research to mov e beyond the v ignette approach adopted in the present set of studies. Although humor findings based upon this procedure can be quite infor mativ e (e.g., Butzer & Kuiper, 2008), it is also important to examine humor effects using other research paradigms, including direct observ ation techniques (Campbell, Martin & Ward, 2008). This w ork should also mov e beyond the univ ersity student samples w e employed to include more community-based samples (Taher et al., 2008). Finally, it is also important that future cross-cultural w ork provides a direct assessment of the underlying self -construals that are thought to inter act w ith the impact of humor. Although past w ork has generally supported the notion that a Middle East culture is much more aligned w ith collectiv istic self-construals (Kazarian, 2005), it should be noted that recent cross - cultural research stresses the importance of measuring these construals more directly (Harb & Smith, 2008; Kolstad & Horpestad, 2009). For now , how ev er, our findings prov ide a starting point for exploring the extent to w hich these four humor styles may play a differential role in social interactions and interpersonal relationships across v arious cultures. Acknow ledgements. We w ould like to thank Yasmine Nassif for her inv olv ement in the Arabic translation of the scenarios used in this research and May Aw aida for her assistance in the data gathering process in Leb anon. References Abel, M. H. (2002). Humor, stress, and coping strategies. Humor: International Journal of Humor Research, 15, 365-381. Cross-Cultural Humor Impact 171 Butzer, B., & Kuiper, N. A. (2008). Humor use in romantic relationships: The effects of relationship satisfaction and pleasant versus conflict situations. Journal of Psychology: Interdisciplinary and Applied, 142, 245-260. Campbell, L., Martin, R.A., & Ward, J.R. (2008). An observational study of humor use during a conflict discussion. Personal Relationships, 15, 41–55. Chen, G-H., & Martin, R. A. (2007). A comparison of humor styles, coping humor, and mental health between Chinese and Canadian university students. Humor: International Journal of Humor Research, 20, 215-234. Dw airy, M., Achaoui, M., Abouserie, R., & Farah, R. (2006). Adolescent-family connectedness among Arabs: A second cross-regional research study. Journal of Cross- Cultural Psychology, 37, 248-261. Harb, C., & Smith, P. (2008). Self-construals across cultures: Beyond I ndependence- Interdependence. Journal of Cross-cultural Psychology, 39(2), 178-197. Kalliny, M., Cruthirds, K.W., & Minor, M.S. (2006). Differences between American, Egyptian and Lebanese Humor Styles: I mplications for international management. International Journal of Cross Cultural Management, 6, 121-134. Kazarian, S.S. (2005). Family functioning, cultural orientation, and psychological well- being among university students in Lebanon. Journal of Social Psychology, 145, 141-152. Kazarian, S. S. (in press). Humor in the collectivist Arab Middle East: The case of Lebanon. Humor: International Journal of Humor Research. Kazarian, S. & Martin, R. (2004). Humor styles, personality and well-being among Lebanese university students. European Journal of Personality, 18, 209-219. Kazarian, S.S., & Martin, R.A. (2006). Humor styles, culture-related personality, well-being, and family adjustment among Armenians in Lebanon. Humor: International Journal of Humor Research, 19, 405-423. Kolstad, A., & Horpestad, S. (2009). Self-construal in Chile and Norway: I mplications for cultural differences in individualism and collectivism. Journal of Cross-cultural Psychology, 40, 275-281. Kuiper, N.A., Grimshaw , M., Leite, C., & Kirsh, G. (2004). Humor is not always the best medicine: Specific components of sense of humor and psychological well-being. Europe’s Journal of Psychology 172 Humor: International Journal of Humor Research, 17, 1351-168. Kuiper, N. A., Martin, R. A., & Olinger, L. J. (1993). Coping humor, stress, and cognitive appraisals. Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science, 25, 81-96. Kuiper, N.A., McKenzie, S. D., & Belanger, K. A. (1995). Cognitiv e appraisals and individual differences in sense of humor: Motivational and affective implications. Personality and Individual Differences, 19, 359-372. Markus, H.R. & Kitayama, S. (1991). Culture and self: I mplications for cognition, emotion, and motiv ation. Psychological Review, 98, 224-253. Martin, R. A. (2007). The psychology of humor: An integrative approach. New York: Academic Press. 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, 48-75. Saroglou, V., & Scariot, C. (2002). Humor Styles Questionnaire: Personality and educational correlates in Belgian high school and college students. European Journal of Personality, 16, 43-54. Singelis, T.M. (1994). The measurement of independent and interdependent self - construals. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 20, 580-591. Taher, D., Kazarian, S.S., & Martin, R.A. (2008). Validation of the Arabic Humor Styles Questionnaire in a community sample of Lebanese in Lebanon. Journal of Cross-cultural Psychology, 39, 552-564. Vernon, P.A., Martin, R.A., Schermer, J.A., & Mackie, A. (2008). A behav ioral genetic inv estigation of humor styles and their correlations with the Big Five personality dimensions. Personality and Individual Differences, 44, 116-1125. About the aut hors: Nicholas A. Kuiper has been a professor in the Department of Psychology at the Univ ersity of Western Ontario, London, Ontario, Canada since 1978. He has just completed a 2nd ter m as the Director of the Clinic al Psychology Gr aduate Program at Western. Ov er the years he has published numerous research articles on humor, w ell-being, self-schemata and depression. Cross-Cultural Humor Impact 173 Address for correspondence: Address correspondence to: N. Kuiper, Department of Psychology, Westminster Hall, Univ ersity of Western Ontario, London, Ontario, Canada N6A 3K7 E-mail: kuiper@uw o.ca Shahe S. Kazarian has been a professor of clinic al psychology at the American Univ ersity of Beirut since 2001. His research interests focus on cultural clinical psychology, cultural health psychology, family functioning, and the psychology of humor. Jessica Sine conducted research on humor and interpersonal perceptions w ith Dr. Kuiper as part of her psychology degree at the Univ ersity of Western Ontario. Margaret Bassil completed her MA in Psychology at the Americ an Univ ersity of Beirut in June 2008. Her research interests inv olve father-child relationships, humor styles, and psychologic al w ell-being. She is currently an instructor at the American Univ ersity of Beirut. mailto:kuiper@uwo.ca