ESTILOS DEL SENTIDO DEL HUMOR. UN ESTUDIO TRANSCULTURAL EN POBLACIÓN ADULTA SEGÚN GÉNERO
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Durante el siglo pasado se realizaron numerosos intentos para evaluar el sentido del humor. Martin y colaboradores (2003) han teorizado acerca de cuatro estilos del humor: Afiliativo, Mejoramiento personal, Agresividad y Descalificacion personal y han creado varios instrumentos para medir las diferencias en cuanto al sentido del humor. En el presente trabajo se presentan los datos hallados a partir de la adaptacion del Humor Styles Questionnaire (HSQ) en la Universidad de Buenos Aires. En el estudio participaron 800 sujetos de entre 22 y 60 anos (media 38; desvio 10); 50% mujeres y 50% varones. Se analizan los diferentes estilos del humor teniendo en cuenta las diferencias halladas segun genero y los resultadossecomparanconlosobtenidosenunamuestracanadiense y otra libanesa. En las tres muestras los varones presentaron puntuaciones mas elevadas que las mujeres en los estilos Agresivo y Descalificacion Personal. Se hallaron diferencias entre las muestras en los estilos Afiliativo y Mejoramiento Personal. Palabras clave Sentido humor Psicologia Transcultural ABSTRACT THE HUMOR STYLES. A STUDY CROSS CULTURAL WITH ADULTS Throughout the 20th century there were numerous attempts to develop measures of a sense of humor. According to Rod Martin and his colleagues´ s approach (2003) were four styles: Afiliative, Self-enhangcing, Aggressive and Self-defeating scales. The present work presents data about measures of The Humor Styles Questionnaire (HSQ), which was adaptated and applied to an argentinian sample of 800 subjects (50% female; 50% male; mean age=38, SD=10). This adaptation will be useful for research on humor and psychological well-being by assessing forms of humor that may be deleterious to health as well as those that are beneficial. We studied the sex differences and compare these scores with the Canadian and Lebanon samples. Males scored higher tan females on Aggressive and Self-defeating humor in all samples. There are differences between samples on Affiliative and Selfenhanching humor. Key words Sense humor Cross-cultural Psychology
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".