MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410594964 · doi:10.1017/thg.2025.10010

Heritability of Humor Production Ability — A Twin Study

2025· article· en· W4410594964 on OpenAlexaff
Gil Greengross, Nancy L. Segal, Stephanie Zellers, Paul J. Silvia, Claire J. Steves, Jaakko Kaprio

Bibliographic record

VenueTwin Research and Human Genetics · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicHumor Studies and Applications
Canadian institutionsSt. Thomas Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCover (algebra)Volume (thermodynamics)EngineeringPhysicsMechanical engineeringThermodynamics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Sense of humor is a universal human trait, enjoyed daily across cultures. However, little is known about the factors that shape individual differences in humor, particularly what contributes to developing a great sense of humor. While previous studies have identified a significant genetic component for various humor attributes, such as humor appreciation and humor styles, no study has looked at the heritability of humor production ability. This study is the first to assess the genetic and environmental influences on humor production ability using a twin study design. Participants included 448 pairs of monozygotic twins and 196 pairs of dizygotic twins (median age 66 years, mostly female) from the Twins UK registry. Twins self-assessed their humor ability, rated the funniness of their co-twin, and completed an objective humor production task by composing funny captions for captionless cartoons. Additionally, they completed a short cognitive ability test and reported their overall health. Findings revealed that self-rated humor ability was influenced by both additive genetic and nonshared environmental factors. In contrast, objective humor production showed no evidence of additive genetic effects. Instead, all individual differences were shaped by shared and nonshared environmental influences, though a small genetic effect cannot be ruled out. These results suggest that humor production may be more complex and difficult to assess than other cognitive abilities. The study also presents intriguing implications for the evolutionary basis of humor.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.078
Threshold uncertainty score0.344

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.148
GPT teacher head0.497
Teacher spread0.349 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTwin Research and Human GeneticsSame topicHumor Studies and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207