MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2051612592 · doi:10.1515/humor.2007.011

A comparison of humor styles, coping humor, and mental health between Chinese and Canadian university students

2007· article· en· W2051612592 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueHumor - International Journal of Humor Research · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicHumor Studies and Applications
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyCoping (psychology)Clinical psychologyMental healthChecklistChinese peopleChinaPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This research compares the structure and correlates of the Humor Styles Questionnaire (HSQ) and Coping Humor Scale (CHS) in the Chinese context with those of Canadian samples. Chinese translations of the HSQ, CHS, and Symptom Checklist 90 (SCL-90) were administered to 354 Chinese university students (M = 23.4 years of age, SD = 3.6). As in the original Canadian samples, four humor factors were found in the HSQ: Affliative, Self-enhancing, Aggressive, and Self-defeating humor, and one factor was found in the CHS. The HSQ and CHS scale reliabilities in the Chinese sample were generally acceptable. Chinese participants, as compared to Canadian norms, reported significantly lower scores on the HSQ subscales and CHS, particularly on Aggressive humor. No significant gender differences were found on the four HSQ subscales in the Chinese sample, whereas Canadian males reported more use of Aggressive and Self-defeating humor than did females. Although no gender difference was found on Coping humor in the Canadian samples, Chinese males had significantly higher scores on this scale than did females. In both the Chinese and Canadian samples, younger participants reported more use of Affliative and Aggressive humor than did older ones. Affliative, Self-enhancing, and Coping humor were negatively correlated, while Aggressive and Selfdefeating humor were positively correlated with the subscales and General Symptomatic Index of the SCL-90. Regression results indicated that mental health is more strongly related to Self-enhancing, Self-defeating, and Coping humor than Affliative and Aggressive humor. Overall, the findings support the theoretical structure and usefulness of the HSQ and CHS in the Chinese context.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.044
Threshold uncertainty score0.991

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.128
GPT teacher head0.543
Teacher spread0.415 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it