4.0 Article

Development and validation of the child humor orientation scale short-form

Journal

HUMOR-INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF HUMOR RESEARCH
Volume 34, Issue 1, Pages 69-92

Publisher

DE GRUYTER MOUTON
DOI: 10.1515/humor-2020-0020

Keywords

assessment; children; humor; humor orientation; questionnaire; validation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The study found that children with high Humor Orientation exhibit better social competencies, emotion knowledge, quality of life, and lower trait anxiety. The CHO-10 scale was confirmed as a valid, reliable and economical measure of Child Humor Orientation.
Background: Studies on children's humor mainly focus on short-term effects of sense of humor and laughter. There is also evidence that children possess the predisposition to communicate humorously, labeled Humor Orientation (HO). All children possess some level of HO, but highly humor oriented children enact humor successfully and frequently, perceive situations more often as funny, and perform humorously across different interactions than low humor oriented children. The aim of this study was to develop and validate a short-form of the Child Humor Orientation Scale (Booth-Butterfield et al. 2011), a questionnaire assessing HO in children, and to analyze its relations to well-being. Methods: After forward-backward-translation procedure, the CHO-Scale was validated in a sample of parents of 296 pre-school children (3-6 years). The CHO-Scale was shortened to 10 items on the basis of factor loadings and content-related aspects. Results: Exploratory factor analysis of the CHO-10 revealed a two-factor solution. Reliability and Validity of the main score and the subscales are acceptable. Children with high HO show higher social competencies, emotion knowledge, quality of life, and lower trait anxiety. Discussion: The CHO-10 Scale is suitable as a valid, reliable and economic measure of Child Humor Orientation.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.0
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available