SARCASM IN RELATIONSHIPS: HURTFUL OR HUMOROUS?

Danielle Williams and Joslyn MesingDawn Blasko (Faculty Advisor)

Penn State Erie, The Behrend College

Presented at the Western Pennsylvania Undergraduate Psychology Conference Contact: mac5516@psu.edu

ABSTRACT

The current study investigated the role of relationship status on the perception of sarcasm. Participants were asked to read scenarios that involved a conversation between two people in a romantic relationship, friend relationship, or stranger relationship. Each scenario ended with a comment that could be understood sarcastically or literally, e.g., "You are a great driver". Reading times were recorded. Participants were asked to rate the scenarios on their degree of humor, sarcasm, and insult using a Likert scale that ranged from one to seven. Reading times showed that sarcastic comments took longer to process than literal comments, but this effect was strongest in the stranger condition. For all three relationship types, sarcastic comments were rated more insulting and more humorous.

CURRENT STUDY Investigates the effect of relationship status (stranger, friend, romantic) on the perception of sarcasm

Asked participants to rate the degree of sarcasm, insult and humor of the speaker on a scale ranging from 1 (low) to 7 (high)

Reading times were collected for the critical remark, that was identical in the sarcastic and literal condition.

INTRODUCTIONSarcasm is ambiguous and is usually used to convey a hidden criticismThis interpretation is different based upon the situation

For example consider the following:A husband and wife are in a car. The wife is driving to a

restaurant and makes a wrong turn. Her husband turns to her and says, “Honey you have a wonderful sense of direction.”

The wife would probably interpret this remark as humorous and playful.

A similar sarcastic comment said between two strangers (people on a blind date) would most likely be interpreted differently.

How is it different?Insulting?, Humorous?, Mean?

What variables influence this difference?Romantic relationship vs. Strangers

DISCUSSION

• Sarcastic remarks are rated as much more insulting, humorous, and sarcastic.

•There were no significant differences across relationship status on the ratings of humor or insult.

• It took longer to read sarcastic remarks vs. literal remarks in the stranger and friend than romantic relationships.

•The scenarios were very strong examples of sarcasm and the reading times suggesting that relationship does play a role in processing.

•Sarcastic remarks are perceived to be highly insulting. However, sarcasm was also shown to be humorous lending some support to Tinge hypothesis. However humor did not reduce the perception of insult as the theory predicts.

•Therefore, it is important to be cautious when using sarcasm, especially if you do not know the person well.

REFERENCESDews, S., & Winner, E. (1995). Muting the meaning: A social function of irony. Metaphor and Symbolic Activity, 10(1), 3-19.

Gibbs, R. W., (2000). Irony in talk among friends. Metaphor and Symbol, 15(1&2), 5-27.

Jorgensen, J., (1996). The functions of sarcastic irony in speech. Journal of Pragmatics, 26, 613-634.

Kreuz, R. J., & Glucksberg, S., (1989). How to be sarcastic: The echoic reminder theory of verbal irony. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 118(4), 374-

386.

Kuman-Nakamura, S., Glucksberg, S., & Brown, M., (1995). How about another piece of pie: The allusional pretense theory of discourse irony. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 124(1), 3-21.

THEORETICAL FRAMWORK

Allusional Pretense Theory (Kumon-Nakamura, Glucksberg, & Brown, 1995)

Irony allows the speaker to allude to an underlying intent, opinion, or belief

Tinge Hypothesis (Dews and Winner, 1995) Irony mutes (tinges) the intended meaning behind an indirect

remark.

Ironic criticism less critical

Ironic compliment less complimentary

Factors Influencing Sarcasm: (Gibbs, 2000; Jorgensen, 1996) Humor

Familiarity –will speed processing

Processing Non-Literal Language (Searle, 1979; Katz, Blasko & Kazmerski, 2004)

Reading times are a measure of on-line processing. With contextual support sarcasm can be read as fast as

literal language. Unless additional processing is needed.

METHODS

Romantic Friend Stranger1

2

3

4

5

6

7

Mean ratings of Sarcasm

SarcasticLiteral

Romantic Friend Stranger1

2

3

4

5

6

7

Humor ratings

Sarcastic

Literal

Romantic Friend Stranger1000

1200

1400

1600

1800

2000

2200

2400

Mean Reading Times of Remarks

SarcasticLiteral

Resp

onse

Tim

e in

ms.

.

Randomly Assigned to One List of Scenarios

Sarcastic Remark Literal Remark

Stranger Friend Romantic

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

We would like to acknowledge Dr. Dawn Blasko for all of her help and support during this project. We would like to give a special thanks to Dr. Dawn Blasko and Dr. Victoria Kazmerski for allowing us to use their stimuli. We would also like to extend a thank you to Dr. Robert W. Light, Associate Dean for Undergraduate Research for awarding us a grant in order to conduct this research project.

Participants:

• N = 101 (46 Males, 55 Females)

• Age Range = 18-53 (mean = 20.94)

• Relationship Status = 45 Yes, 56 No

Measures:

• Demographics Questionnaire

• Empathy Quotient Questionnaire

• Mini-Marker

• Example Scenario:• “Taylor was at a high school football

game. She wanted to go to the concession stand for a drink but didn't want to lose her front row seats. She asked Keith, the man next to her, to save her seat. Keith said it wouldn't be problem. Whenever Taylor returned her seat was gone. She said to Keith, ‘Thanks for saving my seat’.”

Stimuli:• E-Prime 2.0

• 12 Lists

• 48 Scenarios in each

• Scenarios varied upon:

• Relationship Type

• Stranger, Friend, Romantic

• Remark Status

• Sarcastic & Literal

FUTURE RESEARCH

• Future research should further investigate individual differences and how they relate to sarcasm from a speaker and listener perspective.

• Status differences such as boss vs worker would be an interesting factor to study as we believe it influences the use and perception of sarcasm.

• Investigating Individual differences such as age, length of the relationship, job status, and location of the country are important to study.

• It would be interesting to replicate the study by using video scenarios instead of written scenarios. Videos offer additional cues to mood and emotion and may make relationship differences very prominent.

RESULTS

Romantic Friend Stranger1

2

3

4

5

6

7 Insult Ratings

Sarcastic

Literal

RESEARCH QUESTIONS:

1. Will sarcastic remarks be rated more sarcastic, insulting and humorous in close or distance relationships?

2. Will it take participants longer to read and process sarcastic messages in close or distant relationships?

3. How do empathy and the big five personality traits correlate with sarcasm use.?

F (1,101) = 1179.602, p = 0.00F (1,101) =358.677, p = 0.00

F (1,101) = 4.34 p = .04F (1,101) = 2119.572, p = 0.00

7 =

Extr

emel

y In

sulti

ng1

= N

ot a

t all

Insu

lting

7 =

Extr

emel

y H

umor

ous

1 =

Not

at a

ll H

umor

ous

7 =

Extr

emel

y Sa

rcas

tic1

= N

ot a

t all

Sarc

astic