Perception of humorists: a cross-cultural study of undergraduates in hong kong, hangzhou, and vancouver<sup>1</sup>
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Humor perception differs across cultures, and this paper examined the cultural differences of humor perception and nomination of humorists in 457 university students from Hong Kong, Hangzhou, and Vancouver. The “big humor/little humor” phenomenon explicates cross-cultural meanings and implications of humor expressions and functions. “Big humor” is a conception that humor is created by professionals, whereas the “little humor” view is that people possess humor as a personality trait. Participants were asked to nominate up to three humorists they know and to specify their reasons for nomination. They also self-evaluated on a scale of 1 to 10, the importance of humor and their own humor. Results showed that students from Vancouver nominated ordinary people more, valued humor more, and considered themselves more humorous than students in Hong Kong and Hangzhou.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it