‘H, I, J, K, L, M, N, O, PEE! Get it? Pee!’: Siblings’ shared humour in childhood
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Humour is a central feature of social interactions in childhood that has received little attention. In a sample of 86 7-year-old children (M age = 7.82 years, SD = 0.80), we investigated patterns and individual differences in spontaneous humour observed during free play with their older (M age = 9.55 years, SD = 0.88) or their younger sibling (M age = 5.87 years, SD = 0.96). We coded children's instances, categories, and responses to humour. We investigated the nature of children's humour on the dyadic and individual level. Humour was common, and siblings' production of humour was highly interdependent between play partners. Dyadic humour differed according to structural features of the sibling relationship (age, gender composition), and 7-year-old focal children's humour varied according to gender. This study contributes to knowledge regarding the dyadic nature of children's humour and individual patterns of humour beyond the preschool years. Statement of contribution What is already known on this subject? Humour is an integral part of children's close and intimate interactions. Children produce humour from an early age and increasingly produce more complex humour as they develop. Few studies examine children's humour with siblings and beyond the fourth year of life. What does this study add? Children's humour during free play with siblings was common and highly dyadic. Sibling dyads' humour differed according to age and gender composition. Seven-year-old boys produced more humour than girls.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.002 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".