Cultural Differences in How People Deal with Ridicule and Laughter: Differential Item Functioning between the Taiwanese Chinese and Canadian English Versions of the PhoPhiKat-45
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The PhoPhiKat-45 measures three dispositions toward ridicule and laughter, including gelotophobia (i.e., the fear of being laughed at), gelotophilia (i.e., the joy of being laughed at), and katagelasticism (i.e., the joy of laughing at others). Despite numerous cultural adaptations, there is a paucity of cross-cultural studies investigating measurement invariance of this measure. Undergraduate students from a Canadian university (N = 1467; 71.4% females) and 14 universities in Taiwan (N = 1274; 64.6% females) completed the English and Chinese PhoPhiKat-45 measures, respectively. Item response theory and differential item functioning analyses demonstrated that most items were well-distributed across the latent continuum. Five of 45 items were flagged for DIF, but all values had negligible effect sizes (McFadden’s pseudo R2 < 0.13). The Canadian sample was further subdivided into subsamples who identified as European White born in Canada (n = 567) and Chinese born in China, Hong Kong, or Taiwan (n = 180). In the subgroup analyses, no evidence of DIF was found. Findings support the utility of this measure across these languages and samples.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".