Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 2011, 52, 502–507 DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-9450.2011.00898.

Personality and Social Psychology

Do humor styles matter in the relationship between personality and
subjective well-being?
VELJKO JOVANOVIC
University of Novi Sad, Serbia

Jovanovic, V. (2011). Do humor styles matter in the relationship between personality and subjective well-being? Scandinavian Journal of Psychology 52,
502–507.
The primary goal of this research was to examine the role of humor styles in the relationships between personality (extraversion and neuroticism) and two
components of subjective well-being: life satisfaction and affective well-being. The sample consisted of 225 young adults, with mean age 23.61 years.
Results indicated that the relationship between both extraversion and neuroticism and satisfaction with life could be partially explained by the mediating
role of self-enhancing humor. Additionally, affiliative humor proved to be a partial mediator of the relationship between neuroticism and affective well-
being. The findings of this research suggested that adaptive humor styles might be one of the mechanisms linking personality and subjective well-being.
Key words: Humor styles, extraversion, neuroticism, subjective well-being, mediation.
Veljko Jovanovic, Department of Psychology, University of Novi Sad, Dr Zorana Djindjica 2, 21000 Novi Sad, Serbia. Tel: +38121458948; fax:
+38121458948; e-mail: [email protected]

INTRODUCTION SWB through a various intervening processes, which mediate this

relationship.
Why are some people happier than others and which are the most Hence, one of the essential aims in this research area is investi-
important factors that contribute to happiness, are the key ques- gating the possible factors that link personality traits and SWB.
tions in the field of subjective well-being (SWB). SWB is defined
as a cognitive and affective evaluation of one’s life (Diener,
2000), and operationalized through two components: cognitive An overview of humor styles and its relationships to
and affective. Cognitive aspect of SWB includes subjective evalu- extraversion and neuroticism
ation of satisfaction with life, while affective relates to hedonic Traditional conceptions of humor define it in a uniform manner,
balance, that is, relative frequency of positive versus negative as a positive trait that has exclusively beneficial effects on individ-
emotions (Diener, Suh, Lucas & Smith, 1999; Schimmack, Schu- ual’s functioning. Recently, Martin and colleagues (Martin,
pp & Wagner, 2008). Puhlik-Doris, Larsen, Gray & Weir, 2003) disputed this view and
An important goal of research in this field is to determine postulated humor as a multidimensional construct that has both
the factors that contribute to individual differences in SWB adaptive and maladaptive components. Two adaptive forms of
(e.g. Diener et al., 1999; Myers & Diener, 1995; Tkach & humor (Affiliative and Self-enhancing) and two maladaptive
Lyubomirsky, 2006). Previous research has unambiguously forms (Aggressive and Self-defeating) have been distinguished.
demonstrated that personality traits, especially those comprising Affiliative humor includes tendency to amuse other people and to
a temperamental disposition to experience positive affect (extra- tell jokes in order to improve interpersonal relationships. Self-
version) and negative affect (neuroticism), represent the stron- enhancing humor is defined as a tendency to have a humorous
gest correlates of SWB (for a review see Steel, Schmidt & outlook on life, which serves as a coping mechanism and emotion
Shultz, 2008). For example, a strong positive relation between regulation strategy under adverse circumstances. Aggressive
extraversion and affective well-being (Diener & Lucas, 1999) humor includes frequent use of sarcasm, teasing, mocking, hurting
and a significant negative association between neuroticism and and making fun of others. Self-defeating humor involves attempts
life satisfaction (Heller, Watson & Ilies, 2004) are among the to amuse others at one’s own expense, using humor in a self-dis-
most robust findings in the field. paraging way and this type of humor is considered to have a role
Although a number of explanations about direct and indirect of defensive denial.
effects of personality on SWB have been provided (e.g. Heller Several studies have examined the relationships between humor
et al., 2004; McCrae & Costa, 1991; Steel et al., 2008), the mech- styles and personality traits (e.g. Veselka, Schermer, Martin,
anisms are still largely unknown (Lucas, 2008). Temperamental Cherkas, Spector & Vernon, 2010). For example, Martin et al.
models posit that personality traits (neuroticism and extraversion) (2003) have shown that extraversion has a positive association
have a direct influence on SWB, since these dispositions are lar- with affiliative (r = 0.47) and self-enhancing humor (r = 0.28).
gely a function of temperament encompassing individuals’ reac- Neuroticism was proved to be correlated with self-enhancing
tions to environmental rewards and punishments. Instrumental (r = )0.37), self-defeating (r = 0.35) and aggressive humor
models propose that personality dispositions indirectly impact (r = 0.21). Similar pattern of correlations was found in the studies

 2011 The Author.

Scandinavian Journal of Psychology  2011 The Scandinavian Psychological Associations. Published by Blackwell Publishing Ltd., 9600 Garsington
Road, Oxford OX4 2DQ, UK and 350 Main Street, Malden, MA 02148, USA. ISSN 0036-5564.
Scand J Psychol 52 (2011) Humor styles and well-being 503

conducted by Greengross & Miller (2008) and Vernon, Martin, frequent negative affect partially due to a greater use of maladap-
Schermer & Mackie (2008). tive humor styles (self-defeating and aggressive).

Humor styles and well-being Present study

Research using the Humor Style Questionnaire (Martin et al., The main objective of this study was to investigate the role of
2003), an instrument aimed at assessing these four types of humor styles in the relationship between personality (neuroticism
humor, have supported the distinction on positive and negative and extraversion) and subjective well-being (life satisfaction and
forms of humor. Previous research showed that maladaptive and affective well-being). We assume that conceptualization of
adaptive humor styles had opposite patterns of associations with humor as a personality dimension with both adaptive and mal-
various measures of mental health (Kuiper, Grimshaw, Leite & adaptive functions in everyday interactions, provides a plausible
Kirsh, 2004; Martin, 2007). Affiliative and self-enhancing humor framework for exploring the mechanisms linking personality and
were found to be positively correlated with indicators of positive SWB. There are a number of studies that have examined inde-
mental health, like psychological well-being, self-esteem, opti- pendent effects of personality traits and humor in predicting
mism (e.g. Kazarian & Martin, 2006; Martin et al., 2003), and SWB. However, to our knowledge, there was no research that
negatively correlated with measures of depression (e.g. Erickson examined humor styles as potential mediators in the relationship
& Feldstein, 2007; Hugelshofer, Kwon, Reff & Olson, 2006), between personality and SWB. The aim of this research was to
anxiety (e.g. Bilge & Saltuk, 2007), loneliness (e.g. Hampes, fill this gap and to test whether humor styles contribute to under-
2005), and global distress (Chen & Martin, 2007). standing complex relations between affective dispositions and
On the other hand, aggressive and self-defeating humor consis- SWB.
tently showed negative associations with indicators of positive
mental health, and positive correlations with measures of various
negative emotions and impaired psychosocial functioning (for a METHOD
review see Martin, 2007).
In order to establish potential mechanisms linking personality Participants and procedure
and well-being, several studies examined whether humor styles
The sample consisted of 225 (125 females, 100 males) young adults,
had mediated relationship between personality factors and mental
mostly undergraduate students in various departments of the University
health, mostly dysphoria. Humor styles (especially self-enhanc- of Novi Sad. The mean age of the participants was 23.61 years
ing) proved to be mediators of the relationship between vulnera- (SD = 3.83), with a range of 18–36 years. The measures were adminis-
bility factors (maladaptive schemas) and dysphoria (Dozois, tered in small groups to participants who agreed to complete the study
Martin & Bieling, 2009). Study conducted by Frewen, Brinken, on a voluntary basis.
Martin & Dozois (2008) suggested that humor styles could par-
tially explain the mechanisms linking personality-vulnerability
Measures
factors (Sociotropy and Autonomy) and depressive symptoms.
Humor styles were assessed by means of the Serbian translation of the
Most of the research has been focused on the mediating effects
Humor Styles Questionnaire (HSQ; Martin et al., 2003). The HSQ is
of humor styles in the relations between personality traits and neg- a 32-item self-report instrument designed to measure four humor styles:
ative emotional states. Surprisingly, there is little or no research affiliative (e.g. ‘‘I enjoy making people laugh’’), self-enhancing (e.g. ‘‘If
that investigated the role of humor styles in the relationship I am alone and feel unhappy, I try to think of something funny, in order
between personality and subjective well-being. This study is to cheer up’’), aggressive (e.g. ‘‘When I do not like someone, I often use
humor or teasing to humiliate/downgrade him/her’’), and self-defeating
aimed to bridge this gap and to investigate whether humor styles
(e.g. ‘‘Letting others make fun of me is my way to keep my friends and
can help explaining the relationship between personality and family in the good mood’’). Each subscale comprises eight items, rated
SWB. on a seven-point Likert-type scale (1 = totally disagree to 7 = totally
We assume that the affiliative humor (due to its prosocial and agree). The HSQ has shown good reliability and validity in previous
positive interpersonal nature) could represent one of the mecha- studies (e.g. Chen & Martin, 2007; Martin et al., 2003). In the present
study, Cronbach’s alphas for the affiliative, self-enhancing, aggressive
nisms linking extraversion and SWB. Additionally, self-enhancing
and self-defeating humor subscales were 0.79, 0.74, 0.66 and 0.73,
humor is one possible strategy of upregulation of positive affect, respectively.
which could be especially prominent in persons with temperamen- The Big Five plus Two-Short Form (VP+2-SF; Smederevac, Mitrovic
tal disposition to experience positive emotions. & Colovic, 2010) was used to assess extraversion and neuroticism. The
Regarding association between neuroticism and subjective VP+2-SF has been derived from the research based on the structure of
the lexical personality descriptors in Serbian language. The VP+2-SF
well-being, we hypothesized that among individuals high on neu-
consists of 70 items, that measure the following personality dimensions:
roticism less use of self-enhancing humor could lead to more fre- Neuroticism, Extraversion, Openness to experience, Conscientiousness,
quent experience of negative emotions and hence lower subjective Aggressiveness, Positive Valence, and Negative Valence. For this partic-
well-being. Based on the previous research, self-enhancing humor ular research, we used only two of the VP+2-SF subscales: Neuroticism
is seen as being the most psychologically healthy and beneficial and Extraversion. Each subscale consists of 10 items, rated on a scale
from 1 (totally disagree) to 5 (totally agree). The VP+2 showed excellent
(Martin, 2007). This is no surprise since the most conceptions of
psychometric properties in a number of research in Serbian culture (Sme-
humor view it as an effective strategy for coping with stress and derevac et al., 2010). For the current sample, Cronbach’s alpha for the
improving well-being. Additionally, we assumed that vulnerable Neuroticism subscale was 0.86, and for Extraversion subscale Cronbach’s
individuals (persons high in neuroticism) may experience more alpha was 0.85.

 2011 The Author.

Scandinavian Journal of Psychology  2011 The Scandinavian Psychological Associations.
504 V. Jovanovic Scand J Psychol 52 (2011)

Table 1. Correlations, means and standard deviations among study variables

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

1. Affiliative –
2. Self-enhancing 0.29** –
3. Aggressive 0.10 0.01 –
4. Self-defeating 0.04 0.22** 0.21** –
5. Neuroticism )0.18** )0.21** 0.06 0.37** –
6. Extraversion 0.53** 0.27** )0.09 )0.08 )0.42** –
7. Life satisfaction 0.14* 0.26** 0.05 )0.13 )0.51** 0.33** –
8. Affective well-being 0.31** 0.28** )0.19** )0.25** )0.71** 0.60** 0.48** –
M 46.40 36.75 25.66 27.47 21.32 40.54 24.13 15.65
SD 7.47 8.80 8.38 8.97 7.58 6.13 5.62 9.20

* p < 0.05; ** p < 0.01.

The Serbian translation of the Satisfaction with Life Scale (SWLS; able; and (4) the association between independent and dependent
Diener, Emmons, Larsen & Griffin, 1985) was used to assess cognitive variable is significantly reduced when controlling for the effect of
component of SWB. The responses to each of the five items (e.g. ‘‘In
the mediator. In mediation analyses (see Fig. 1), we treated per-
most ways my life is close to my ideal’’) range from 1 ‘‘strongly dis-
agree’’, to 7 ‘‘strongly agree’’. This scale has been widely used and has sonality traits (extraversion and neuroticism) as the independent
shown good psychometric properties (e.g. Pavot & Diener, 1993). Cron- variables. The dependent variable was subjective well-being, op-
bach’s alpha in the current sample was 0.78. erationalized through life satisfaction and affective well-being.
The Serbian Inventory of Affect based on the Positive and Negative Humor styles were postulated as mediator variables.
Affect Schedule-X (SIAB-PANAS; Novovic & Mihic, 2008) is a Serbian
Preliminary identification of relevant variables for mediation
translation and adaptation of the Positive and Negative Affect Schedule-
X (PANAS-X; Watson & Clark, 1994). The scale demonstrated excellent analyses was based on the correlation matrix (including variables
psychometric properties in previous research (Novovic, Mihic, Tovilovic that met criteria 1 and 2). Further examination was conducted
& Jovanovic, 2008). In the current research, we used the short form to using hierarchical regression analyses (criteria 3 and 4) and the
measure Positive affect (PA) and Negative affect (NA), with ten items Sobel test as the final step in assessing mediation.
each. Participants were asked to rate how they feel in general, using a
The correlation analysis (Table 1) revealed that significant cor-
five-point scale from 1 (never or almost never) to 5 (always or almost
always). relations were between: extraversion and adaptive humor styles
The affective component of SWB was operationalized as hedonic bal- (r = 0.53, p < 0.01 for affiliative, and r = 0.27, p < 0.01 for self-
ance, that is, the average of NA was subtracted from the average of PA enhancing humor), neuroticism and adaptive humor styles
(Schimmack et al., 2008). Chronbach’s alpha for affective well-being (r = )0.18, p < 0.01 for affiliative, and r = )0.21, p < 0.01 for
measure was 0.88.
self-enhancing humor), neuroticism and self-defeating humor
(r = 0.37, p < 0.01), adaptive humor styles and both satisfaction
RESULTS with life and affective well-being (affiliative: r = 0.14, p < 0.05
and r = 0.31, p < 0.01; self-enhancing: r = 0.26, p < 0.01 and
Correlations among study variables with means and standard devi-
r = 0.28, p < 0.01, respectively), and self-defeating humor and
ations are presented in Table 1. As shown, extraversion was posi-
affective well-being (r = )0.25, p < 0.01). Regarding the relation-
tively associated with adaptive humor styles (affiliative and self-
ship between personality and SWB, extraversion was significantly
enhancing humor) and cognitive and affective components of
correlated with both satisfaction with life (r = 0.33, p < 0.01) and
SWB. Neuroticism was negatively correlated with adaptive humor
affective well-being (r = 0.60, p < 0.01), and neuroticism had
styles and with both SWB indicators, and positively correlated
strong negative association with both satisfaction with life
with self-defeating humor.
Regarding relationships between SWB and humor styles, both
satisfaction with life and affective well-being were positively cor-
General mediation model
related with adaptive humor styles, but only affective well-being
had significant negative correlations with maladaptive humor
styles (aggressive and self-defeating).
Hierarchical regression analyses and the Sobel test were per- Humor styles
a b
formed to test the hypotheses about the mediating role of humor
styles in the relationships between personality traits (neuroticism c′
and extraversion) and subjective well-being (satisfaction with life Personality Subjective well-being
c
and affective well-being).
According to Baron & Kenny (1986), mediation occurs when Fig. 1. General mediation model. Note: a = effect of personality traits
the following criteria are met: (1) the independent variable is asso- (neuroticism and extraversion) on humor styles; b = effect of humor styles
on subjective well-being (satisfaction with life and affective well-being);
ciated with the dependent variable; (2) the independent variable is c = total effect of personality traits on subjective well-being when humor
associated with the mediator; (3) the mediator significantly affects styles are not included as mediators; c¢ = direct effect of personality traits
the dependent variable after controlling for the independent vari- on subjective well-being when humor styles are included as mediators.

 2011 The Author.

Scandinavian Journal of Psychology  2011 The Scandinavian Psychological Associations.
Scand J Psychol 52 (2011) Humor styles and well-being 505

(r = )0.51, p < 0.01) and affective well-being (r = )0.71, tionships between extraversion and both affective well-being
p < 0.01). (b = 0.112, p < 0.05) and satisfaction with life (b = 0.161,
This initial analysis suggested including two adaptive humor p < 0.05). Self-enhancing humor emerged as a potential mediator
styles as potential mediators of the relationship between both also in the relationship between neuroticism and both SWB com-
extraversion and neuroticism and both SWB components. Addi- ponents (in predicting affective well-being b = 0.135, p < 0.01;
tionally, self-defeating humor emerged as a possible mediator and b = 0.160, p < 0.01 in predicting satisfaction with life). Addi-
between neuroticism and affective well-being. tionally, affiliative humor (b = 0.197, p < 0.01) emerged as a
Affiliative humor was ruled out as a potential mediator of the potential partial mediator of the association between neuroticism
relationship between extraversion and both components of subjec- and affective well-being.
tive well-being, due to a b weights which were close to zero, after At the final step in determining mediating role of humor styles,
controlling for extraversion. Based on the same criteria (after con- we performed a Sobel test. The Sobel test revealed that self-
trolling for neuroticism), affiliative humor was excluded in subse- enhancing humor partially mediated the relationship between
quent analyses in the relationship between neuroticism and extraversion and satisfaction with life (z = 2.06, p < 0.05) and the
satisfaction with life, and self-defeating humor in the relations relationship between neuroticism and life satisfaction (z = )1.99,
between neuroticism and affective well-being. p < 0.05). The association between neuroticism and affective
Hierarchical regression analyses (Tables 2 and 3) indicated that well-being was partially mediated through affiliative humor
self-enhancing humor was potential partial mediator of the rela- (z = )2.20, p < 0.05).

Table 2. Predicting affective well-being from personality and humor DISCUSSION

styles
The main aim of this research was to test hypotheses about medi-
Step R2 DR2 b sig ating roles of humor styles in the relationship between personality
and subjective well-being. Specifically, we investigated whether
Regression 1: Extraversion and self-enhancing humor as predictors distinctive humor styles may represent one of the mechanisms that
1 0.385 0.385 0.000***
Extraversion 0.621 0.000***
explain the robust associations between affective predispositions
2 0.397 0.012 0.047* (extraversion and neuroticism) and two components of SWB:
Extraversion 0.590 0.000*** affective well-being and satisfaction with life.
Self-enhancing humor 0.112 0.047* As expected, adaptive humor styles (affiliative and self-enhanc-
Regression 2: Neuroticism and affiliative humor as predictors ing) were positively correlated with both cognitive (satisfaction
1 0.487 0.487 0.000*** with life) and affective (affective well-being) components of
Neuroticism )0.698 SWB. Regarding maladaptive humor styles, both aggressive and
2 0.525 0.038 0.000*** self-defeating humor were negatively related to affective well-
Neuroticism )0.663 0.000***
Affiliative humor 0.197 0.000***
being, but unrelated to satisfaction with life. These results are in
accordance with previous research indicating that well-being indi-
Regression 2: Neuroticism and self-enhancing humor as predictors cators had stronger and more consistent relations with adaptive
1 0.484 0.484 0.000***
Neuroticism )0.695
humor styles than maladaptive humor styles (Martin, 2007).
2 0.501 0.017 0.008** None of the humor styles had a significant role in the relations
Neuroticism )0.667 0.000*** between extraversion and affective well-being. Although extraver-
Self-enhancing humor 0.135 0.008** sion had the strongest correlation with affiliative humor, results
suggested that this humor style could not explain greater subjec-
* p < 0.05; ** p < 0.01; *** p < 0.001.
tive well-being of individuals high on extraversion. This result
seems to be in keeping with results of studies that showed that
Table 3. Predicting satisfaction with life from personality and humor
styles relations between extraversion and positive affect cannot be
explained by greater engagement of extraverts in social situations
Step R2 DR2 b sig (Lucas, Le & Dyrenforth, 2008). Additionally, this result is con-
sistent with the findings that extraversion has a direct effect on the
Regression 1: Extraversion and self-enhancing humor as predictors
affective component of SWB (Schimmack, 2008; Schimmack et
1 0.134 0.134 0.000***
Extraversion 0.366 al., 2008), and in accordance with the models postulating extra-
2 0.158 0.024 0.016* version in terms of temperamental disposition, with a direct effect
Extraversion 0.323 0.000*** on experiencing positive affect (e.g. Watson & Clark, 1997).
Self-enhancing humor 0.161 0.016* The relationship between both extraversion and neuroticism
Regression 2: Neuroticism and self-enhancing humor as predictors and cognitive component of SWB (life satisfaction) could be par-
1 0.261 0.261 0.000*** tially explained by the mediating role of self-enhancing humor.
Neuroticism )0.511 Individuals high on extraversion tended to use self-enhancing
2 0.285 0.024 0.009**
humor more, which contributed to greater satisfaction with life.
Neuroticism )0.477 0.000***
Self-enhancing humor 0.160 0.009** On the other hand, high neuroticism was associated with the
decreased use of self-enhancing humor, which, in turn, led to a
* p < 0.05; ** p < 0.01; *** p < 0.001. lower satisfaction with life. The key question to be addressed is

 2011 The Author.

Scandinavian Journal of Psychology  2011 The Scandinavian Psychological Associations.
506 V. Jovanovic Scand J Psychol 52 (2011)

why greater use of self-enhancing humor is beneficial to extra- in interpersonal well-being processes, like relationship satisfaction
verts, and less use of self-enhancing humor is detrimental to indi- (Cann, Zapata & Davis, 2011).
viduals high on neuroticism. We assume that the importance of An important limitation of this study is the use of the cross-sec-
self-enhancing humor for life satisfaction may be due to its coping tional method, which prevents us from drawing causal inferences
nature, since coping styles have been shown to mediate the rela- among study variables. Employing a longitudinal design may pro-
tionship between personality and satisfaction (e.g. Watson & Hub- vide more precise insights into the mechanisms linking personal-
bard, 1996). Self-enhancing humor proved to be comparable to ity, humor and SWB.
coping humor (e.g. Kuiper et al., 2004 found a 0.60 correlation A further limitation is a limited generalizability of the research
between the two measures), as measured by means of Coping findings due to the student sample. It would be useful to replicate
Humor Scale (Martin & Lefcourt, 1983). Previous research this study in a sample of individuals with emotional problems and
showed that coping humor results in a more positive appraisal of to test interaction between personality and humor styles under
stressful situations (Abel, 2002; Kuiper, Martin & Olinger, 1993), conditions of stress.
which may lead to greater life satisfaction. Coping effects of self- Another limitation of the present study is its focus only on
enhancing could be especially prominent and salient in the case of extraversion and neuroticism. Future research should also explore
individuals with disposition to experience positive or negative the role of humor styles in the relationship between other person-
affect. In addition, previous research showed that self-enhancing ality traits (i.e. Openness to experience, Agreeableness and Con-
humor could support maintaining positive personality traits (like scientiousness) and SWB, due to a significant associations
hope and optimism), which proved to have positive effects on obtained in previous research between these personality traits and
well-being (Cann, Stilwell & Taku, 2010). both SWB (e.g. DeNeve & Cooper, 1998) and humor styles (e.g.
The present findings seem to be consistent with previous Martin et al., 2003; Vernon et al., 2008).
research suggesting that the relationship between affective dispo- Although analyses demonstrated a mediation role of adaptive
sitions and life satisfaction is not direct and that there are a num- humor styles, the observed effects were small, so further research
ber of potential mechanisms through which personality influences is clearly needed to confirm the findings of this study.
life satisfaction (e.g. Argyle & Lu, 1990; Heller et al., 2004). The
results of this study indicated that self-enhancing humor may be
one of those mechanisms. DISCLOSURE STATEMENT
Affiliative humor proved to be a partial mediator of the rela- There is no conflict of interest in this paper.
tionship between neuroticism and affective well-being. A greater
level of neuroticism was associated with a reduction in the use of
affiliative humor, which, in turn, led to lower affective well-being. REFERENCES
This finding suggested that individuals high in neuroticism could Abel, M. H. (2002). Humor, stress, and coping strategies. Humor: Inter-
be deprived of the benefits of affiliative humor, encompassed in national Journal of Humor Research, 15(4), 365–381.
Argyle, M. & Lu, L. (1990). The happiness of extraverts. Personality
facilitation of social relationships and interpersonal adjustment,
and Individual Differences, 11, 1011–1017.
and nurturing social support resources (Kuiper & McHale, 2009). Baron, R. M. & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable
Decreased use of affiliative humor could diminish resources for distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and
promoting positive emotion and coping with negative affect, espe- statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychol-
cially in individuals prone to experience negative emotions. Addi- ogy, 51, 1173–1182.
tionally, research showed that in vulnerable individuals (with Bilge, F. & Saltuk, S. (2007). Humor styles, subjective well-being, trait
anger, and anxiety among university students in Turkey. World
negative attributional styles), lower levels of affiliative humor Applied Sciences Journal, 2(5), 464–469.
were found to be related with an increase in depressive symptoms Cann, A., Stilwell, K. & Taku, K. (2010). Humor styles, positive person-
(Hugelshofer et al., 2006). ality and health. Europe’s Journal of Psychology, 3, 213–235.
This findings led us to agree with the conclusion of Kuiper & Cann, A., Zapata, C. L. & Davis, H. B. (2011). Humor style and rela-
McHale (2009) on the effect of affiliative humor, saying: ‘‘a tionship satisfaction in dating couples: Perceived versus self-reported
humor styles as predictors of satisfaction. Humor: International Jour-
reduction in its use can be detrimental to an individual’s well- nal of Humor Research, 24(1), 1–20.
being’’ (p. 372). Chen, G. H. & Martin, R. A. (2007). A comparison of humor styles,
The findings of this study have important implications for coping humor, and mental health between Chinese and Canadian uni-
future research. The fact that distinct humor styles are differen- versity students. Humor: International Journal of Humor Research,
20(3), 215–234.
tially related to cognitive and affective components of SWB sup-
DeNeve, K. M. & Cooper, H. (1998). The happy personality: A
ports the multidimensional nature of humor. In addition, this meta-analysis of 137 personality traits and subjective well-being.
research suggested that personality traits should be taken into con- Psychological Bulletin, 124(2), 197–229.
sideration when examining relations between humor styles and Diener, E. (2000). Subjective well-being: The science of happiness, and
SWB. Bearing in mind the multidimensional nature of both humor a proposal for a national index. American Psychologist, 55, 34–43.
and SWB would probably enable a more precise understanding of Diener, E. & Lucas, R. E. (1999). Personality and subjective well-being.
In D. Kahneman, E. Diener & N. Schwarz (Eds.), Well-being:
mechanisms linking humor and positive aspects of functioning in The foundations of hedonic psychology (pp. 213–229). New York:
the future research. It seems that self-directed humor styles (e.g. Russell-Sage.
self-enhancing) are more closely related to processes which are Diener, E., Emmons, R. A., Larsen, R. J. & Griffin, S. (1985). The
intrapersonal (e.g. subjective evaluation of life satisfaction), while Satisfaction with Life Scale. Journal of Personality Assessment, 49,
others-directed humor styles (e.g. aggressive) are more important 71–75.

 2011 The Author.

Scandinavian Journal of Psychology  2011 The Scandinavian Psychological Associations.
Scand J Psychol 52 (2011) Humor styles and well-being 507

Diener, E., Suh, E. M., Lucas, R. E. & Smith, H. E. (1999). Subjective logical well-being: Development of the Humor Styles Questionnaire.
well-being: Three decades of progress. Psychological Bulletin, 125, Journal of Research in Personality, 37(1), 48–75.
276–302. McCrae, R. R. & Costa, P. T. Jr (1991). Adding liebe und arbeit: The
Dozois, D. J. A., Martin, R. A. & Bieling, P. J. (2009). Early maladap- full five-factor model and well-being. Personality and Social Psychol-
tive schemas and adaptive/maladaptive styles of humor. Cognitive ogy Bulletin, 17, 227–232.
Therapy and Research, 33(6), 585–596. Myers, D. G. & Diener, E. (1995). Who is happy? Psychological Sci-
Erickson, S. J. & Feldstein, S. W. (2007). Adolescent humor and its rela- ence, 6, 10–19.
tionship to coping, defense strategies, psychological distress, and well- Novovic, Z. & Mihic, Lj. (2008). Srpski inventar afekata baziran na
being. Child Psychiatry & Human Development, 37(3), 255–271. Positive and Negative Affect Schedule-X (SIAB-PANAS). Unpublished
Frewen, P. A., Brinker, J., Martin, R. A. & Dozois, D. J. A. (2008). manuscript. Novi Sad: University of Novi Sad.
Humor styles and personality-vulnerability to depression. Humor: Novovic, Z., Mihic, Lj., Tovilovic, S. & Jovanovic, V. (2008). Relations
International Journal of Humor Research, 21(2), 179–195. among positive and negative affect, dysphoria and anxiety. Psiholo-
Greengross, G. & Miller, G. F. (2008). Dissing oneself versus dissing gija, 41(4), 413–435.
rivals: Effects of status, personality, and sex on the short-term and Pavot, W. & Diener, E. (1993). Review of the Satisfaction with Life
long-term attractiveness of self-deprecating and other-deprecating Scale. Psychological Assessment, 5, 164–172.
humor. Evolutionary Psychology, 6(3), 393–408. Schimmack, U. (2008). The structure of subjective wellbeing. In M. Eid
Hampes, W. P. (2005). Correlations between humor styles and loneli- & R. J. Larsen (Eds.), The science of subjective well-being (pp. 97–
ness. Psychological Reports, 96(3), 747–750. 123). New York: Guilford Press.
Heller, D., Watson, D. & Ilies, R. (2004). The role of person versus situ- Schimmack, U., Schupp, J. & Wagner, G. G. (2008). The influence of
ation in life satisfaction: A critical examination. Psychological Bulle- environment and personality on the affective and cognitive compo-
tin, 130(4), 574–600. nent of subjective well-being. Social Indicators Research, 89, 41–60.
Hugelshofer, D. S., Kwon, P., Reff, R. C. & Olson, M. L. (2006). Smederevac, S., Mitrovic, D. & Colovic, P. (2010). Velikih pet plus dva:
Humour’s role in the relation between attributional style and dyspho- Primena i interpretacija (Big Five Plus Two: Manual for administra-
ria. European Journal of Personality, 20(4), 325–336. tion and interpretation). Beograd: Centar za primenjenu psihologiju.
Kazarian, S. S. & Martin, R. A. (2006). Humor styles, culture-related person- Steel, P., Schmidt, J. & Shultz, J. (2008). Refining the relationship
ality, wellbeing, and family adjustment among Armenians in Lebanon. between personality and subjective well-being. Psychological Bulle-
Humor: International Journal of Humor Research, 19(4), 405–423. tin, 134(1), 138–161.
Kuiper, N. A. & McHale, N. (2009). Humor styles as mediators between Tkach, C. & Lyubomirsky, S. (2006). How do people pursue happiness?
self-evaluative standards and psychological well-being. Journal of Relating personality, happiness-increasing strategies, and well-being.
Personality, 143(4), 359–376. Journal of Happiness Studies, 7, 183–225.
Kuiper, N. A., Martin, R. A. & Olinger, L. J. (1993). Coping humour, Vernon, P. A., Martin, R. A., Schermer, J. A. & Mackie, A. (2008). A
stress, and cognitive appraisals. Canadian Journal of Behavioural behavioral genetic investigation of humor styles and their correlations
Science, 25, 81–96. with the big-5 personality dimensions. Personality and Individual
Kuiper, N., Grimshaw, M., Leite, C. & Kirsh, G. (2004). Humor is not Differences, 44(5), 1116–1125.
always the best medicine: Specific components of sense of humor Veselka, L., Schermer, J. A., Martin, R. A., Cherkas, L. F., Spector, T.
and psychological well-being. Humor: International Journal of D. & Vernon, P. A. (2010). A behavioral genetic study of relation-
Humor Research, 17(1), 135–168. ships between humor styles and the six HEXACO personality factors.
Lucas, R. E. (2008). Personality and subjective well-being. In R. J. Lar- Europe’s Journal of Psychology, 3, 9–33.
sen & M. Eid (Eds.), The science of subjective well-being (pp. 171– Watson, D. & Clark, L. A. (1994). The PANAS-X: Manual for the posi-
194). New York: Guilford Press. tive and negative affect schedule-expanded form. Iowa City: Univer-
Lucas, R. E., Le, K. & Dyrenforth, P. S. (2008). Explaining the extraver- sity of Iowa.
sion/positive affect relation: Sociability cannot account for extraverts’ Watson, D. & Clark, L. A. (1997). Extraversion and its positive emo-
greater happiness. Journal of Personality, 76, 385–414. tional core. In R. Hogan, J. Johnson & S. Briggs (Eds.), Handbook
Martin, R. A. (2007). The psychology of humor: An integrative of personality psychology (pp. 767–793). San Diego, CA: Academic
approach. Burlington, MA: Elsevier Academic Press. Press.
Martin, R. A. & Lefcourt, H. M. (1983). Sense of humor as a moderator Watson, D. & Hubbard, B. (1996). Adaptational style and dispositional
of the relation between stressors and moods. Journal of Personality structure: Coping in the context of the five-factor model. Journal of
and Social Psychology, 45, 1313–1324. Personality, 64, 737–774.
Martin, R. A., Puhlik-Doris, P., Larsen, G., Gray, J. & Weir, K. (2003).
Individual differences in uses of humor and their relation to psycho- Received 14 January 2011, accepted 21 March 2011

 2011 The Author.

Scandinavian Journal of Psychology  2011 The Scandinavian Psychological Associations.