Demonstrating the Faculties of Silliness in the Setting of Broad communications Parody.


93 views
Uploaded on:
Description
Displaying the Faculties of Silliness in the Connection of Broad communications Parody Kimberly A. Neuendorf, Ph.D. Institute of Correspondence Cleveland State College Suspicions taking into account past grant and our own past examinations The Faculties of Funniness Gratefulness are multidimensional
Transcripts
Slide 1

Displaying the Senses of Humor in the Context of Mass Media Comedy Kimberly A. Neuendorf, Ph.D. Institute of Communication Cleveland State University Neuendorf, ISHS \'07

Slide 2

Assumptions in light of past grant and our own past examinations The Senses of Humor Appreciation are multidimensional There are singular contrasts in SOH profiles These profiles can anticipate broad communications drama decision and reactions to interceded parody Neuendorf, ISHS \'07

Slide 3

Critical Variables Currently-Not-Appearing in this Model: 1. Medium (and, critically, associations of medium with other model segments) 2. Demographic attributes 3. Past encounters with substance components 4. Past encounters with source components 5. Distinguishing proof with characters/circumstances 6. Identity qualities 7. More elevated amount associations Model of Humor Response and Mirth Behavior (7/9/07) Perceived levels of different funniness sorts : - Incongruity - Disparagement - Social Humor - High Arousal (e.g., Shock) Humor - Etc. Data Acquisition Humor Response (Affective reaction; i.e., discovering a jolt amusing) Mirth Behavior (i.e., giggling, grinning) Perceived levels of boost presentation attributes : - Reality - Intentionality - Rarity (“Odds”) - Dry conveyance - Surprise - Etc. Relevant Cues (e.g., co-laughers, giggle track, desires of others, security) Individual Differences (e.g., proclivity to chuckle/customary “sense of humor” scales, saw social vicinity) Preference for jolt presentation qualities : - Reality - Intentionality - Rarity (“Odds”) - Dry conveyance - Surprise - Etc. Inclination for different cleverness sorts : - Incongruity - Disparagement - Social Humor - Shock Humor - Etc. Neuendorf, ISHS \'07

Slide 4

A study testing a large number of the model’s parts: Laugh Track ‘07 Experimental outline: 4 scenes of Andy Griffith Each in Laugh Track/No Laugh Track forms (8 conditions total)—serendipitous securing Subjects = 114 understudies at CSU, in gatherings of 2-5 Pre-test survey tapped various SOH measurements and other model components Posttest tapped reactions to the scene general and particular occurrences inside of the scene Subjects were videorecorded as they viewed the episode—behavioral reaction coding to take after Neuendorf, ISHS \'07

Slide 5

A study testing a considerable lot of the model’s segments: Laugh Track ‘07 Thanks to the CSU group Some preparatory discoveries: Neuendorf, ISHS \'07

Slide 6

Critical Variables Currently-Not-Appearing in this Model: 1. Medium (and, significantly, connections of medium with other model parts) 2. Demographic qualities 3. Past encounters with substance components 4. Past encounters with source components 5. Distinguishing proof with characters/circumstances 6. Identity attributes 7. More elevated amount associations Model of Humor Response and Mirth Behavior (7/9/07) Perceived levels of different silliness sorts : - Incongruity - Disparagement - Social Humor - High Arousal (e.g., Shock) Humor - Etc. Data Acquisition Humor Response (Affective reaction; i.e., discovering a jolt entertaining) Mirth Behavior (i.e., giggling, grinning) Perceived levels of boost presentation qualities : - Reality - Intentionality - Rarity (“Odds”) - Dry conveyance - Surprise - Etc. Logical Cues (e.g., co-laughers, giggle track, desires of others, security) Individual Differences (e.g., proclivity to chuckle/customary “sense of humor” scales, saw social vicinity) Preference for boost presentation qualities : - Reality - Intentionality - Rarity (“Odds”) - Dry conveyance - Surprise - Etc. Inclination for different diversion sorts : - Incongruity - Disparagement - Social Humor - Shock Humor - Etc. Neuendorf, ISHS \'07

Slide 7

Evidence from LT ‘07 Perceived sort of silliness in six key occurrences is NOT homogenous—perceived levels of diverse cleverness sorts matter Neuendorf, ISHS \'07

Slide 8

Evidence from LT ‘07 Mixed proof of communications between amusingness inclinations and diversion “found” on evaluations of the scenes: Neuendorf, ISHS \'07

Slide 9

LT ’07: Sample Interaction—Overall saw entertainment factor (0-10) of scene as an Interaction of Perceived droll and Preference for droll Interaction is ns Neuendorf, ISHS \'07

Slide 10

LT ’07: Sample Interaction—Overall scene happiness (0-10) as an Interaction of Perceived droll and Preference for droll Interaction is ns Neuendorf, ISHS \'07

Slide 11

Critical Variables Currently-Not-Appearing in this Model: 1. Medium (and, significantly, cooperations of medium with other model segments) 2. Demographic attributes 3. Past encounters with substance components 4. Past encounters with source components 5. ID with characters/circumstances 6. Identity qualities 7. Larger amount collaborations Model of Humor Response and Mirth Behavior (7/9/07) Perceived levels of different funniness sorts : - Incongruity - Disparagement - Social Humor - High Arousal (e.g., Shock) Humor - Etc. Data Acquisition Humor Response (Affective reaction; i.e., discovering a boost interesting) Mirth Behavior (i.e., giggling, grinning) Perceived levels of jolt presentation qualities : - Reality - Intentionality - Rarity (“Odds”) - Dry conveyance - Surprise - Etc. Relevant Cues (e.g., co-laughers, snicker track, desires of others, protection) Individual Differences (e.g., proclivity to chuckle/customary “sense of humor” scales, saw social vicinity) Preference for jolt presentation attributes : - Reality - Intentionality - Rarity (“Odds”) - Dry conveyance - Surprise - Etc. Inclination for different cleverness sorts : - Incongruity - Disparagement - Social Humor - Shock Humor - Etc. Neuendorf, ISHS \'07

Slide 12

Evidence from LT ‘07 Good fluctuation on measures demonstrates solid individual contrasts on inclinations for these presentation attributes, and view of their vicinity in the scenes Interactions not yet investigated Neuendorf, ISHS \'07

Slide 13

Critical Variables Currently-Not-Appearing in this Model: 1. Medium (and, imperatively, cooperations of medium with other model parts) 2. Demographic attributes 3. Past encounters with substance components 4. Past encounters with source components 5. ID with characters/circumstances 6. Identity attributes 7. Larger amount connections Model of Humor Response and Mirth Behavior (7/9/07) Perceived levels of different amusingness sorts : - Incongruity - Disparagement - Social Humor - High Arousal (e.g., Shock) Humor - Etc. Data Acquisition Humor Response (Affective reaction; i.e., discovering a boost entertaining) Mirth Behavior (i.e., giggling, grinning) Perceived levels of jolt presentation attributes : - Reality - Intentionality - Rarity (“Odds”) - Dry conveyance - Surprise - Etc. Logical Cues (e.g., co-laughers, chuckle track, desires of others, security) Individual Differences (e.g., proclivity to snicker/customary “sense of humor” scales, saw social vicinity) Preference for jolt presentation attributes : - Reality - Intentionality - Rarity (“Odds”) - Dry conveyance - Surprise - Etc. Inclination for different cleverness sorts : - Incongruity - Disparagement - Social Humor - Shock Humor - Etc. Neuendorf, ISHS \'07

Slide 14

Evidence from LT ‘07 Presence of giggle track? Subjects were differentially ready to gage: Neuendorf, ISHS \'07

Slide 15

LT ’07: Identification of Presence of Laugh Track Chi-square for right recognizable proof = 9.3, p=.01 Neuendorf, ISHS \'07

Slide 16

LT ’07: Preference for Laugh Tracks as identified with Condition and Identification of LT Main Effects: Condition ns ID of LT p=.068 Interaction: ns Neuendorf, ISHS \'07

Slide 17

Evidence from LT ‘07 Significant contrasts in silliness reaction to the 8 conditions: Neuendorf, ISHS \'07

Slide 18

LT ’07: Total saw interesting thing scores by condition Main impact for chuckle track: ns Main impact for scene: F(3,106)=5.32, p=.002 Interaction impact: F(3,106)=3.06, p=.031 Neuendorf, ISHS \'07

Slide 19

Evidence from LT ‘07 Differences in saw vicinity over the 8 conditions: Sig. contrasts for Social Presence/Active Interpersonal (see next diagram); comparable examples for Engagement Presence and for Time Presence No sig. contrasts for Social Presence/Parasocial, Social Presence/Passive Interpersonal, and Spatial Presence Neuendorf, ISHS \'07

Slide 20

LT ’07: Social Presence/Active Interpersonal by Condition Main impact for snicker track: ns Main impact for scene: ns Interaction impact: F(3,106)=4.49, p=.005 Neuendorf, ISHS \'07

Slide 21

Critical Variables Currently-Not-Appearing in this Model: 1. Medium (and, significantly, connections of medium with other model segments) 2. Demographic attributes 3. Past encounters with substance components 4. Past encounters with source components 5. Recognizable proof with characters/circumstances 6. Identity qualities 7. Larger amount associations Model of Humor Response and Mirth Behavior (7/9/07) Perceived levels of different funniness sorts : - Incongruity - Disparagement - Social Humor - High Arousal (e.g., Shock) Humor - Etc. Data Acquisition Humor Response (Affective reaction; i.e., discovering a boost interesting) Mirth Behavior (i.e., giggling, grinning) Perceived levels of jolt presentation qualities : - Reality - Intentionality - Rarity (“Odds”) - Dry conveyance - Surprise - Etc. Relevant Cues (e.g., co-laughers, chuckle track, desires of others, protection) Individual Differences (e.g., procliv

Recommended
View more...