Humor and Resiliency Article Review
UTNS 5144 Blog Post #2
Through our initial conversations with Naomi at Clowns Without Borders USA (CWB), we’ve discussed the importance of conveying the necessity of humor to wellbeing in a traumatic environment. Children and adolescents (as well as adults) in refugee camps and war-torn villages often don’t have the chance to embrace joy and laughter amidst their daily survival functions. We typically think of basic needs as food, water, and shelter, though we tend to categorize humor and joy as a higher order of existence, akin to Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs. Our work with CWB will look to formulate an outreach strategy that reframes (and thus legitimizes) humor and joy as a fundamental need, as outlined by the UN’s Rights of the Child.
The article “Humor and Resiliency: Towards a Process Model of Coping and Growth,” written by Nicholas A. Kuiper out of the University of Western Ontario in 2012, aggregates “anecdotal case report descriptions” and “rigorous studies” in order to “[acknowledge] both the adaptive and maladaptive aspects of humor…within a resiliency perspective.” By associating these concepts with a developmental framework (identified in the article as across the entire life-span), it can be readily applied to a child and adolescent context that is applicable to CWB’s goals.
Researchers in positive psychology “have found evidence that several of these character strengths are significant predictors of well-being and life satisfaction, including hope, zest, humor, gratitude, love and curiosity.” Even more strikingly is that these traits tend to grow, rather than diminish, after traumatic events. In settings of collective trauma, like emergency rooms or HIV treatment centers, humor can serve a dialectic role of “[helping] detach or distance the self and also foster group cohesion and social support.” Usage of “gallows humor,” though discussed in the article, is less pertinent to the irreverent goofiness cultivated by CWB. The article also recognizes that there is a wide range of possible traumas, from college preparation in a high-achieving academic setting to bombings and air raids. The latter is also more difficult to study with humor as an isolated variable in the context of broader geopolitical strife, a definite limit in the article’s usefulness.
In the Humor Styles Model, Kuiper outlines the four: “affiliative, self-enhancing, aggressive, and self-defeating humor.” The former two fall under generally adaptive and positive while the latter two fall under maladaptive and negative. By having a deeper understanding of types of humor in this framework, we can better help CWB convey their message. For instance, a clown gag that veers too far into slapstick comedy may encourage maladaptive aggression through teasing, rather than a gag that emphasizes cooperation through reconciliation.
Kuiper also differentiates humor’s role in either boosting positive mood or bolstering against negative mood. While the latter appears to be a more direct manifestation of resilience, the former “provides the psychological ‘lift’ and flexibility that allows the individual to engage in a broader range of life activities that are more inspiring, pleasant, and creative, thus building resilience to future negative or stressful events.” Whether that has the power, reduced or in full, to mitigate trauma in CWB’s setting remains empirically inconclusive but anecdotally hopeful. The following passage provides hope that further empirical research can bridge the gap to the anecdotal optimism observed by CWB and Kuiper:
Of encouragement for a humor and resiliency perspective is that more sophisticated and rigorous evaluative studies are now beginning to emerge. One example is recent work by Crawford and Caltabiano (2011) that tested whether effective humor skills can be taught to community volunteers randomly assigned to one of three different experimental groups (i.e., a humor training group, a social control group, and a non-intervention group). Using the broaden-and-build theoretical framework described previously, this longitudinal study found that humor skills could be enhanced across eight training sessions, so that individuals had more control over regulating daily positive affect, thus increasing emotional well-being. This pattern was evident in higher ratings of positive affect, self-efficacy, optimism, and control for the humor group alone; with these increases being maintained at a three month follow-up. Furthermore this group also displayed decreases in perceived stress levels, depression, and anxiety. Similar findings have been reported in a previous pilot study that trained humor skills use in a small group of clinically depressed individuals (Falkenberg, Buchkremer, Bartels, & Wild, 2011). This finding suggests that even those displaying psychopathology can benefit from both the down-regulating and up-regulating effects of effective humor use.
