No Laughing Matter: How Humor Styles Relate to Feelings of Loneliness and Not Mattering
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Loneliness and feeling that one does not matter are closely linked, but further investigation is needed to determine differentiating features. The relationship between not mattering to others (anti-mattering) and loneliness was explored by assessing how the two constructs correlated with an interpersonal dimension, specifically four humor styles (affiliative, self-enhancing, self-defeating, and aggressive). One hundred and fifty-eight women and 96 men completed a three-item loneliness scale, a new measure of anti-mattering, and a humor styles questionnaire. Confirmatory factor analysis results indicated that the new anti-mattering measure is a unidimensional scale. Loneliness and anti-mattering were strongly correlated, and each correlated in the same direction with approximately the same magnitude as the four humor styles. The discussion concludes that anti-mattering and loneliness are strongly linked, a finding which may be important in psychological treatment. Humor styles also play a role in psychological well-being and present a unique pathway to mental health.
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 | 0.001 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".