4.4 Article

Just a Joke? Can Sexist Comedy Harm Women's Cognitive Performance?

期刊

出版社

EDUCATIONAL PUBLISHING FOUNDATION-AMERICAN PSYCHOLOGICAL ASSOC
DOI: 10.1037/aca0000369

关键词

social identity threat; humor; sexism; gender; test performance

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The potential harm of sexist jokes in comedy towards women has been a hot topic of public debate. This study examines the impact of sexist comedy on women's cognitive performance through four experiments, finding that women who watched sexist stand-up comedy clips performed worse on subsequent tasks. Additionally, the study explores the moderating role of self-reported humor and coping sense of humor but finds inconsistent results.
The potential of sexist jokes in comedy to harm women has been a matter of intense public debate. Psychological research on sexist comedy is scarce and inconclusive. Theory on social identity threat suggests that communicating devaluation and negative group stereotypes impairs the performance of members of a targeted group: Do women exposed to sexism in stand-up comedy score worse in subsequent cognitive tasks compared with women's performance after watching nonsexist comedy? In four experiments, we examined women's performance on numerical and figural intelligence subtests after watching sexist comedy as compared with nonsexist comedy. In Experiment 1 (n = 102) and Experiment 4 (n = 81), the test performance of women who watched sexist stand-up comedy clips suffered. Experiments 2 (n = 181) and 3 (n = 100) showed mixed evidence (see online supplemental materials). A mini meta-analysis reveals a small but significant negative overall effect (d = -.27). Self-reported perceived humor (state) and coping sense of humor (trait) did not consistently moderate the influence of sexist comedy. Insights gained from analyses of emotional responses, assessed both via self-reports and a facial coding software, were limited. We discuss implications for identity-threat theory and for using disparaging humor in comedy.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据