Childhood experiences of professional comedians: Peer and parent relationships and humor use
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
Abstract This study examines a commonly held belief, left over from psychoanalytic theories of humor as a coping mechanism, that relationships with parents strongly influence comedians' temperaments and career choices. Thirty one professional stand-up comedians and 400 students completed the Parental Bonding Instrument (PBI), which concerns recollected parental care and protectiveness, and a new self-report questionnaire that measures popularity and humor use among peers during adolescence. Results show that comedians' parents did not differ from students' parents in care or protectiveness, and comedians did not differ from students in adolescent popularity, but comedians did use more humor among adolescent peers (were more likely to be class clowns, make fun of others, laugh at themselves, and be the butt of jokes). The results suggest that stand-up comedians do not differ much from ordinary college students in their parental or adolescence peer relationships.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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