|
By:
Robert Provine
Summary: Far from
mere reactions to jokes,
hoots and hollers are
serious business: They're
innate -- and important --
social tools.
Whether overheard in a
crowded restaurant,
punctuating the enthusiastic
chatter of friends, or as
the noisy guffaws on a TV
laugh track, laughter is a
fundamental part of everyday
life. It is so common that
we forget how strange -- and
important -- it is. Indeed,
laughter is a "speaking in
tongues" in which we're
moved not by religious
fervor but by an unconscious
response to social and
linguistic cues. Stripped of
its variation and nuance,
laughter is a regular series
of short vowel-like
syllables usually
transcribed as "ha-ha,"
"ho-ho" or "hee-hee." These
syllables are part of the
universal human vocabulary,
produced and recognized by
people of all cultures.
Given the universality of
the sound, our ignorance
about the purpose and
meaning of laughter is
remarkable. We somehow laugh
at just the right times,
without consciously knowing
why we do it. Most people
think of laughter as a
simple response to comedy,
or a cathartic mood-lifter.
Instead, after 10 years of
research on this
little-studied topic, I
concluded that laughter is
primarily a social
vocalization that binds
people together. It is a
hidden language that we all
speak. It is not a learned
group reaction but an
instinctive behavior
programmed by our genes.
Laughter bonds us through
humor and play.
Nothing to joke about
Despite its prominence in
daily life, there is little
research on how and why we
laugh. I thought it was high
time that we actually
observed laughing people and
described when they did it
and what it meant. Research
on laughter has led me out
of my windowless
laboratories into a more
exciting social world of
laughing gas, religious
revivals, acting classes,
tickle wars, baby
chimpanzees and a search for
the most ancient joke.
As a starting point, three
undergraduate students and I
observed 1,200 people
laughing spontaneously in
their natural environments,
from the student union to
city sidewalks. Whenever we
heard laughter, we noted the
gender of the speaker (the
person talking immediately
before laughter occurred)
and the audience (those
listening to the speaker),
whether the speaker or the
audience laughed, and what
the speaker said immediately
before the laughter.
While we usually think of
laughter as coming from an
audience after a wisecrack
from a single speaker,
contrary to expectation, the
speakers we observed laughed
almost 50% more than their
audiences. The study also
showed that banal comments
like, "Where have you been?"
or "It was nice meeting you,
too" -- hardly knee-slappers
-- are far more likely to
precede laughter than jokes.
Only 10% to 20% of the
laughter episodes we
witnessed followed anything
joke-like. Even the most
humorous of the 1,200
comments that preceded
laughter weren't necessarily
howlers: "You don't have to
drink, just buy us drinks!"
and "Was that before or
after I took my clothes
off?." being two of my
favorites. This suggests
that the critical stimulus
for laughter is another
person, not a joke.
Students in my classes
confirmed the social nature
of laughter by recording the
circumstances of their
laughter in diaries. After
excluding the vicarious
social effects of media
(television, radio, books,
etc.), its social nature was
striking: Laughter was 30
times more frequent in
social than solitary
situations. The students
were much more likely to
talk to themselves or even
smile when alone than to
laugh. However happy we may
feel, laughter is a signal
we send to others and it
virtually disappears when we
lack an audience.
Laughter is also extremely
difficult to control
consciously. Try asking a
friend to laugh, for
example. Most will announce,
"I can't laugh on command,"
or some similar statement.
Your friends' observations
are accurate -- their
efforts to laugh on command
will be forced or futile. It
will take them many seconds
to produce a laugh, if they
can do it at all. This
suggests that we cannot
deliberately activate the
brain's mechanisms for
affective expression.
Playfulness, being in a
group, and positive
emotional tone mark the
social settings of most
laughs.
Giggly girls, explained
Linguist Deborah Tannen
described gender differences
in speech in her
best-selling book, You Just
Don't Understand (Ballantine,
1991). The gender
differences in laughter may
be even greater. In our
1,200 case studies, my
fellow researchers and I
found that while both sexes
laugh a lot, females laugh
more. In cross-gender
conversations, females
laughed 126% more than their
male counterparts, meaning
that women tend to do the
most laughing while males
tend to do the most
laugh-getting. Men seem to
be the main instigators of
humor across cultures, which
begins in early childhood.
Think back to your high
school class clown -- most
likely he was a male. The
gender pattern of everyday
laughter also suggests why
there are more male than
female comedians. (Rodney
Dangerfield likely gets more
respect than he claims.)
Given the differences in
male and female laugh
patterns, is laughter a
factor in meeting, matching
and mating? I sought an
answer in the human
marketplace of newspaper
personal ads. In 3,745 ads
placed on April 28, 1996 in
eight papers from the
Baltimore Sun to the San
Diego Union-Tribune, females
were 62% more likely to
mention laughter in their
ads, and women were more
likely to seek out a "sense
of humor" while men were
more likely to offer it.
Clearly, women seek men who
make them laugh, and men are
eager to comply with this
request. When Karl Grammar
and Irenaus Eibl-Eibesfeldt
studied spontaneous
conversations between
mixed-sex pairs of young
German adults meeting for
the first time, they noted
that the more a woman
laughed aloud during these
encounters, the greater her
self-reported interest in
the man she was talking to.
In the same vein, men were
more interested in women who
laughed heartily in their
presence. The personal ads
and the German study
complement an observation
from my field studies: The
laughter of the female, not
the male, is the critical
index of a healthy
relationship. Guys can laugh
or not, but what matters is
that women get their yuks
in.
In many societies world wide
-- ranging from the Tamil of
Southern India to the
Tzeltal of Mexico --
laughter is self-effacing
behavior, and the women in
my study may have used it as
an unconscious vocal display
of compliance or solidarity
with a more socially
dominant group member. I
suspect, however, that the
gender patterns of laughter
are fluid and shift
subconsciously with social
circumstance. For example,
the workplace giggles of a
young female executive will
probably diminish as she
ascends the corporate
ladder, but she will remain
a barrel of laughs when
cavorting with old chums.
Consider your own workplace.
Have you ever encountered a
strong leader with a giggle?
Someone who laughs a lot,
and unconditionally, may be
a good team player, but
they'll seldom be a
president.
The laughter virus
As anyone who has ever
laughed at the sight of
someone doubled over can
attest, laughter is
contagious. Since our
laughter is under minimal
conscious control, it is
spontaneous and relatively
uncensored. Contagious
laughter is a compelling
display of Homo sapiens, a
social mammal. It strips
away our veneer of culture
and challenges the
hypothesis that we are in
full control of our
behavior. From these
synchronized vocal outbursts
come insights into the
neurological roots of human
social behavior and speech.
Consider the extraordinary
1962 outbreak of contagious
laughter in a girls'
boarding school in Tanzania.
The first symptoms appeared
on January 30, when three
girls got the giggles and
couldn't stop laughing. The
symptoms quickly spread to
95 students, forcing the
school to close on March 18.
The girls sent home from the
school were vectors for the
further spread of the
epidemic. Related outbreaks
occurred in other schools in
Central Africa and spread
like wildfire, ceasing
two-and-a-half years later
and afflicting nearly 1,000
people.
Before dismissing the
African outbreak as an
anomaly, consider our own
technologically triggered
mini-epidemics produced ,by
television laugh tracks.
Laugh tracks have
accompanied most television
sitcoms since September 9,
1950. At 7:00 that evening,
"The Hank McCune Show" used
the first laugh track to
compensate for being filmed
without a live audience. The
rest is history. Canned
laughter may sound
artificial, but it makes TV
viewers laugh as if they
were part o live theater
audience.
The irresistibility of
others' laughter has its
roots in the neurological
mechanism of laugh
detection. The fact that
laughter is contagious
raises the intriguing
possibility that humans have
an auditory laugh detector
-- a neural circuit in the
brain that responds
exclusively to laughter.
(Contagious yawning may
involve a similar process in
the visual domain.) Once
triggered, the laugh
detector activates a laugh
generator, a neural circuit
that causes us in turn to
produce laughter.
Furthermore, laughter is not
randomly scattered through
speech. A speaker may say
"You are going
where?...ha-ha," but rarely,
"You are
going...ha-ha...where?" This
is evidence of "the
punctuation effect" -- the
tendency to laugh almost
exclusively at phrase breaks
in speech. This pattern
requires that speech has
priority over laughter.
The occurrence of speaker
laughter at the end of
phrases suggests that a
neurologically based process
governs the placement of
laughter in speech, and that
different brain regions are
involved in the expression
of cognitively oriented
speech and the more
emotion-laden vocalization
of laughter. During
conversation, speech trumps
-- that is, it inhibits --
laughter.
Mediocre medicine
Authorities from the Bible
to Reader's Digest remind us
that "laughter is the best
medicine." Print and
broadcast reporters produce
upbeat, often frothy stories
like "A Laugh a Day Keeps
the Doctor Away." A
best-selling Norman Cousins
book and a popular Robin
Williams film Patch Adams
amplified this message. But
left unsaid in such reports
is a jarring truth: Laughter
did not evolve to make us
feel good or improve our
health. Certainly, laughter
unites people, and social
support has been shown in
studies to improve mental
and physical health. Indeed,
the presumed health benefits
of laughter may be
coincidental consequences of
its primary goal: bringing
people together.
Laughter is an energetic
activity that raises our
heart rate and blood
pressure, but these
physiological effects are
incompletely documented and
their medicinal benefits are
even less certain. Lennart
Levi, of the Karolinska
Institute in Stockholm,
reported that comedy
activates the body's "fight
or flight" system,
increasing catecholamine
levels in urine, a measure
of activation and stress.
Lee Berk, DHSc, of the Loma
Linda School of Medicine,
countered with a widely
cited study that reported
that laughter reduced
catecholamines and other
hormonal measures of
sympathetic activation. This
reduction in stress and
associated hormones is the
mechanism through which
laughter is presumed to
enhance immune function.
Unfortunately, Berk's
studies show at best a
biological response to
comedy. His reports included
only five experimental
subjects, never stated
whether those subjects
actually laughed, and were
presented in only three
brief abstracts.
Does a sense of humor or a
lighthearted personality add
years to your life? Not
necessarily. A large-scale
study by Howard Friedman,
Ph.D., professor of
psychology at the University
of California at Riverside,
found optimism and sense of
humor in childhood to be
inversely related to
longevity. This may be
because people with
untempered optimism indulge
in risk-taking, thinking,
"I'll be okay."
Pain reduction is one of
laughter's promising
applications. Rosemary
Cogan, Ph.D., a professor of
psychology at Texas Tech
University, found that
subjects who laughed at a
Lily Tomlin video or
underwent a relaxation
procedure tolerated more
discomfort than other
subjects. Humor may help
temper intense pain. James
Rotton, Ph.D., of Florida
International University,
reported that orthopedic
surgery patients who watched
comedic videos requested
fewer aspirin and
tranquilizers than the group
that viewed dramas. Humor
may also help us cope with
stress. In a study by
Michelle Newman, Ph.D., an
assistant professor of
psychology at Penn State
University, subjects viewed
a film about three grisly
accidents and had to narrate
it either in a humorous or
serious style. Those who
used the humorous tone had
the lowest negative affect
and tension.
A problem with these studies
is that none of them
separate the effects of
laughter from those of
humor. None allow for the
possibility that presumed
effects of laughter or humor
may come from the playful
settings associated with
these behaviors. And none
evaluate the uniqueness of
laughter by contrasting it
with other vocalizations
like shouting.
Rigorous proof that we can
reduce stress and pain
through laughter remains an
unrealized but reasonable
prospect. While we wait for
definitive evidence, it
can't hurt -- and it's
certainly enjoyable -- to
laugh. So, a guy walks into
a bar...
Article courtesy:
www.psychologytoday.com
|