SENSE OF HUMOR IN CHINA: THE ROLE OF INDIVIDUALISM, COLLECTIVISM, AND FACEWORK

Transcription

1 Psychologia, 2013, 56, SENSE OF HUMOR IN CHINA: THE ROLE OF INDIVIDUALISM, COLLECTIVISM, AND FACEWORK Guo-Hai CHEN 1), David WATKINS 2), and Rod A. MARTIN 3) 1) Guangdong University of Foreign Studies, China 2) The University of Hong Kong, China 3) The University of Western Ontario, Canada This paper aims to investigate the role of emic cultural values and facework in sense of humor for the first time in Asia. Specifically it explores the relationships between humor styles, individualism, collectivism, and facework in mainland China. Measures of these constructs were administered to 148 female and 124 male Chinese university students (mean age years, SD = 1.73). Results showed that uses of humor were generally related to dimensions of cultural values and facework. Specifically, the two potentially beneficial humor styles (affiliative and selfenhancing humor) were positively related to horizontal collectivism and saving other-face. The two presumably detrimental humor styles (aggressive and selfdefeating humor) were positively related to saving self-face. Cultural values and facework together could explain an average of 11.25% of the total variances for the four humor styles. Correlations between cultural values and humor styles in the present study were compared with those of previous research. Key words: individualism, collectivism, face, facework, humor, humor styles, China Previous studies have shown that there are individual and cultural differences in the appreciation, creation, attitudes to, and uses of humor (e.g., Kazarian & Martin, 2004, 2006; Martin, Puhlik-Doris, Larsen, Gray, & Weir, 2003; McGhee & Duffey, 1983; Saroglou & Scariot, 2002). Social activities such as interpersonal communication, globalization of business, and education have placed new demands on understanding these differences. The constructs of individualism, collectivism and facework have been widely used in cross-cultural psychology for understanding cultural differences in various individual and organizational behaviors (Bond, 1996; Bond & Smith, 1996; Earley & Erez, 1997; Gabrenya & Hwang, 1996; Green, Deschamps, & Páez, 2005; Hallahan, Lee, & Herzog, 1997; Hofstede, 1980; Lerner, 1996; Oyserman, Coon, & Kemmelmeier, 2002; Redding & Ng, 1982; Sivadas, Bruvold, & Nelson, 2008; Triandis, 1995; Wagner, 1995). In the present study, we examined the relationships between these constructs and humor styles in the Chinese context. Humor Styles Martin et al. (2003) developed a new 32-item measure of sense of humor (the Humor Styles Questionnaire, HSQ) to assess individual differences in four styles of humor, two of Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Guo-Hai Chen, School of Management, Guangdong University of Foreign Studies, Guangzhou, P. R. China ( mypeer2002@ hotmail.com). 57

2 58 CHEN, WATKINS, & MARTIN which are hypothesized to be potentially beneficial to well-being (affiliative and selfenhancing humor) and two potentially detrimental (self-defeating and aggressive humor). The four humor styles identified are: affiliative humor (uses of humor to enhance one s relationships with others in a self-accepting way), self-enhancing humor (uses of humor to amuse oneself and cope with stress in a tolerant way), aggressive humor (uses of humor at the expense and detriment of one s relationships with others), and self-defeating humor (uses of humor at the expense and detriment of the self to amuse others). The four humor styles were found and validated in a number of countries such as Canada, Belgium, China, Lebanon, the U.S. (Chen & Martin, 2007; Martin et al., 2003; Saroglou & Scariot, 2002; Taher, Kazarian, & Martin, 2008). Previous research has paid much attention to the development and cross-validation of the HSQ and the relationship between humor styles and mental health (cf. Martin, 2007). Several interesting findings on cultural differences in humor styles have also been found. Comparing the means of the four HSQ scales, Kazarian and Martin (2004) indicated lower reported use of affiliative humor in Lebanon than in both Canada and Belgium, lower selfenhancing humor in Lebanon than Canada, and lower aggressive humor in Lebanon than Belgium. Kalliny, Cruthirds, and Minor (2006) reported that Americans scored significantly higher than Arabs on self-enhancing and self-defeating humor. Chen and Martin (2007) found that Chinese had lower uses of all four humor styles, particularly aggressive humor, as compared to Canadians. Saroglou and Scariot (2002) reported that Belgians engaged in less self-enhancing humor and more aggressive humor than did Canadians. However, caution should be taken in drawing conclusions about individual and cultural differences in humor styles upon such empirical evidence due to problems of metric equivalence (Van de Vijver & Leung, 1997). If these findings can be replicated and generalized, the reasons for such differences still remain to be explored. In order to explain these individual and cultural differences in humor styles, Chen and Martin (2007) pointed out that future research should examine the relationships between humor and additional variables such as individualism, collectivism, and facework in different cultures. Although there may be a number of constructs such as power distance and socialization styles to explain humor style preference, we chose the constructs of individualism, collectivism, and facework since individualism and collectivism have already been found to be the variables to predict humor style preference in the previous studies (Kazarian & Martin, 2004, 2006) and facework is an important variable in Chinese daily life. Individualism and Collectivism The fundamental characteristic of collectivism is that people are bound together into tight groups of interdependent individuals, while the fundamental characteristic of individualism is that people are independent entities, distinct from their groups. Triandis (1995) took the view that individualism and collectivism are multidimensional constructs which needed to be better conceptualized by postulating a second dimension (horizontal versus vertical perspective) which is relatively independent of the individualismcollectivism dimension. The horizontal versus vertical distinction is made on the basis of

3 THE ROLE OF CULTURAL VALUES AND FACEWORK IN SENSE OF HUMOR 59 a person s acceptance of inequity. Those who expect equity between individuals within societal groups would be classified as horizontal, whereas those who accept inequity or hierarchy would be classified as vertical. This conceptual framework results in four culture-related dimensions: (a) horizontal individualism, in which people have an independent construal of self and view others as of relatively equal status; (b) vertical individualism, in which individuals see themselves as independent and different from others, and inequity is expected; (c) horizontal collectivism, in which individuals see themselves as interdependent members of a cultural group in which everyone is presumed to be equal; and (d) vertical collectivism in which individuals are interdependent but unequal, and accept that some group members have higher status than others. These four dimensions were found and validated in a number of countries and regions such as the U.S., Korea, Hong Kong, Mainland China, Singapore, Taiwan, Argentina, Brazil, Denmark, Germany, India, United Kingdom, Lebanon, New Zealand, Peru, Saudi Arabia (Chiou, 2001; Fischer et al., 2009; Singelis, Triandis, Bhawuk, & Gelfand, 1995; Sivadas, Bruvold, & Nelson, 2008; Soh & Leong, 2002; Triandis, Chen, & Chan, 1998; Triandis & Gelfand, 1998; Wang, Shi, & Huang, 2003). Although cultures as a whole may differ from each other on these four dimensions, there are also important differences between individuals within a given culture (Triandis, 2001). In most societies, women tend to be more collectivistic than men, while upperclass, urban, and younger samples tend to be more individualistic (Triandis, 1995). While traditional Chinese culture has long been regarded by some social scientists as collectivist, individualist elements do exist (Hui & Villareal, 1989). These cultural dimensions provide an interesting framework for exploring possible cultural differences in humor styles within a given culture. Four assumptions were made based on analyzing the definitions of the four cultural dimensions and humor styles. First, since horizontal collectivism is associated with a desire for harmony, sharing, and mutual happiness among members of the in-group, and affiliative humor involves the use of humor to promote integrity and group cohesiveness, we can assume a positive correlation between horizontal collectivism and affiliative humor. Second, since horizontal individualism emphasizes the uniqueness of the individual while accepting the equity of others, and self-enhancing humor involves the use of humor to maintain personal integrity (e.g., coping with stress, alleviating negative emotions) while showing tolerance of others, we can assume a positive correlation between horizontal individualism and self-enhancing humor. Third, since vertical individualism involves competitiveness and striving to win at the expense of others, while aggressive humor refers to the use of humor to enhance oneself by disparaging others, we can assume a positive correlation between vertical individualism and aggressive humor. Finally, since vertical collectivism involves sacrificing one s own interests for the sake of the group, while self-defeating humor refers to the use of humor to facilitate group cohesiveness at one s own expense (e.g., excessively self-disparaging humor for the amusement of others), we can assume a positive correlation between vertical collectivism and self-defeating humor. The relationships between humor styles and the four cultural value dimensions were examined by Kazarian and Martin (2004) with a sample of 401 Lebanese university

4 60 CHEN, WATKINS, & MARTIN students and Kazarian and Martin (2006) with 278 ethnic Armenians living in Lebanon. There were some similarities but also some differences in their findings on the relationship between humor styles and cultural value dimensions. Most of the correlations (eleven out of sixteen) between the four cultural value dimensions and four humor styles were of similar direction and magnitude across the two cultural groups. However, differences were found in the remaining five correlations, suggesting that associations between cultural value dimensions and humor styles may differ across cultures even within the same geographical region (Sidani & Gardner, 2000). Kazarian and Martin (2006) suggested that further research with other cultures is needed to reconcile the different patterns of correlations found in these two studies. They queried whether these patterns of relationships between humor styles, individualism, and collectivism could be replicated across more disparate cultures. One aim of the present study is to examine the four assumptions on the relationships between the four cultural value dimensions and humor styles in the Chinese context. Face and Facework Face is the image that people strive to maintain before others in pursuit of recognition and inclusion (Hallahan, Lee, & Herzog, 1997). Facework is communication designed to counteract face threats to self and others (Goffman, 1967), which was found to play significant roles in Chinese interpersonal communication (Gao, 1998). Several measures were developed to assess the constructs of face and facework (Cheung et al., 1996; Ting-Toomey et al., 1991; Ting-Toomey & Oetzel, 2001). In the Chinese Personality Assessment Inventory (CPAI; Cheung et al., 1996), a saving self-face scale was developed with 11 items, which depict the pattern of orientations in an interpersonal and hierarchical connection and social behaviors to enhance one s face and to avoid losing one s face (Cheung et al., 2001). Extending Cheung et al. s (1996, 2001) work, Fu (2004) developed a saving other-face subscale with 7 items to assess one s tendency to show concerns for the other person s stance, poise, pride, and face. Careful facework done to save self-face and to give face to another is deemed as an important and wise investment in social networking (Lee, 1998). Facework such as saving and giving face can promote cohesiveness among members (Fu, 2004; Lee, 1998). A factor analysis of the CPAI (Cheung et al., 1996) demonstrated that the saving selfface scale negatively correlated with emotional stability, practical mindedness, responsibility, optimism, internal locus of control, flexibility, and venturousness, while it had positive correlates with inferiority, external locus of control, and defensiveness. Fu, Watkins, and Hui (2004) reported that saving self-face had a weak positive correlation with anxiety while it had a weak negative correlation with self-esteem. In contrast, saving other-face had significant and positive correlations with inner peace of mind and interpersonal harmony, while it had a slightly negative correlation with saving self-face. Thus, saving self-face is presumably associated with negative values such as anxiety and defensiveness, while saving other-face is related to positive values such as self-esteem and harmony. Social desirability response set was not found to confound the above relationships for Chinese respondents.

5 THE ROLE OF CULTURAL VALUES AND FACEWORK IN SENSE OF HUMOR 61 Face and facework could be an important construct to explain individual and cultural differences in explaining humor style preference. Goffman (1967) noted that people are strongly motivated to avoid communications that are potentially face-threatening, putting themselves or others in a potentially awkward or embarrassing situation. Due to its ambiguity and potential for retraction, humor, like politeness, can be a useful tactic for protecting the face of oneself and others, thus playing an important role in facilitating social interactions (Cupach & Metts, 1994; Keltner, Young, Heerey, Oemig, & Monarch, 1998; Zajdman, 1995). Kane, Suls, and Tedeschi (1977) noted that people often use humor to save face when they experience some sort of failure, when they are about to be unmasked in some way, or when they have been caught in a lie or are found to have engaged in inappropriate behavior. By using humor to indicate that the proposed or past action was intended as a joke and was therefore not meant to be taken seriously, one can save face by decommitting oneself from the action (Martin, 2007). Although several scholars (e.g., Cupach & Metts, 1994; Keltner et al., 1998; Zajdman, 1995) have noticed that humor can reduce face threats in social interactions, the relationships between humor styles and facework have not been examined empirically in previous research. Based on the conceptualization of the constructs, four assumptions can be made between the face dimension (saving self-face and saving other-face) and humor styles. First, we can assume a negative correlation between saving self-face and affiliative humor, since uses of affiliative humor such as joking around may be a threat of losing one s face. Second, we can assume a positive correlation between saving self-face and aggressive humor, since people are likely to enhance one s face and avoid losing one s face by using humor at the expense of others. Third, we can assume a negative correlation between saving self-face and self-defeating humor, since saving self-face denotes using humor at the expense of the self and being detrimental to the self, which conceptually contradicts saving self-face. Finally, we can assume a positive correlation between saving other-face and affiliative humor, since uses of affiliative humor enhance interpersonal relationships and group cohesiveness and saving other-face suggests uses of humor in accepting ways. Another aim of the present study was to examine these four assumptions on the relationships between facework and humor styles. RESEARCH QUESTIONS AND HYPOTHESES The present study mainly addressed the following two questions: (a) What are the relationships among individualism, collectivism, facework, and humor styles for Chinese respondents? (b) To what extent can humor styles be predicted by individualism, collectivism, and facework? Regarding the above-mentioned relationships between the four cultural value dimensions and humor styles, we made four hypotheses. First, we hypothesized a positive and significant correlation between horizontal collectivism and affiliative humor (Hypothesis 1). Second, we hypothesized a positive and significant correlation between horizontal individualism and self-enhancing humor (Hypothesis 2). Third, we

6 62 CHEN, WATKINS, & MARTIN hypothesized a positive and significant correlation between vertical individualism and aggressive humor (Hypothesis 3). Finally, we hypothesized a positive and significant correlation between vertical collectivism and self-defeating humor (Hypothesis 4). We also made four hypotheses on the relationships between facework and humor styles. First, saving self-face would have a negative and significant correlation with affiliative humor (Hypothesis 5). Second, saving self-face would have a positive and significant correlation with aggressive humor (Hypothesis 6). Third, saving self-face would have a negative and significant correlation with self-defeating humor (Hypothesis 7). Finally, saving other-face would have a positive and significant correlation with affiliative humor (Hypothesis 8). METHOD Participants and Procedure All participants were undergraduate students at a southern China university. A total of 272 university students (148 females and 124 males; 90 first year students, 182 fourth year students) were asked by their course teachers to complete the test booklet prior to and during class sessions on a voluntary basis. Participants typically took 15 minutes to fill out the questionnaire. The participants ages ranged from 16 to 24 (mean years, standard deviation 1.73). Measures Participant demographics (including gender and age) and three scales formed the test booklet in this study. The scales were: The Chinese Humor Styles Questionnaire (CHSQ), The Chinese Individualism and Collectivism Scale (CICS), and The Facework Scale (FS). The Chinese Humor Styles Questionnaire (CHSQ; Chen, 2007, in submission; Chen & Martin, 2007). Chen and Martin (2007) found the four humor factors in the HSQ (Martin et al., 2003) with a sample of Chinese students, as in the original Canadian samples: affiliative, self-enhancing, aggressive, and selfdefeating humor. They also found several items in the HSQ did not fit into Chinese culture due to cultural differences. Chen (2007) dropped these inappropriate items and further developed this scale in the Chinese context. Currently, the CHSQ is a 25-item measure comprising 4 subscales assessing different styles of humor: an 8-item scale for affiliative humor (e.g., I enjoy making people laugh. ); a 5-item scale for selfenhancing humor (e.g., If I am feeling depressed, I can usually cheer myself up with humor. ); a 7-item scale for aggressive humor (e.g., If someone has a shortcoming, I will often tease him/her about it. ); a 5-item scale for self-defeating (e.g., I let people laugh at me or make fun at my expense more than I should. ). Respondents indicate the degree to which they agree with each item using a 7-point Likert scale ranging from 1 = strongly disagree to 7 = strongly agree. Details of the acceptable psychometric properties of the CHSQ have been reported by Chen (2007; in submission). The Chinese Individualism and Collectivism Scale (CICS; Wang et al., 2003). The CICS is a 15-item measure of horizontal and vertical individualism and collectivism. It comprises two 3-item scales: horizontal individualism (e.g., I would rather depend on myself than others. ) and vertical collectivism (e.g., Parents and children must stay together as much as possible. ); one 4-item scale: vertical individualism (e.g., Competition is the law of nature. ); one 5-item scale: horizontal collectivism (e.g., If a coworker gets a prize, I would feel proud. ). Respondents indicate their agreement with each item using a 9-point Likert scale ranging from 1 = strongly disagree to 9 = strongly agree. Wang et al. (2003) found that the internal consistencies (Cronbach alphas) were.80,.65,.78, and.64 for the horizontal individualism, vertical individualism, horizontal collectivism, and vertical collectivism subscales respectively. More details of the acceptable psychometric properties of the CICS have been reported by Wang et al. (2003). Although there may be more significant cross-cultural variation on this measure, there is less variation on this measure within a culture. Since the present study examined the designated relationships within Chinese culture, this measure can be used here.

7 THE ROLE OF CULTURAL VALUES AND FACEWORK IN SENSE OF HUMOR 63 The Facework Scale (FS; Cheung et al., 2001; Fu, 2004; Fu et al., 2004). The FS is an 18-item scale which contains two subscales: saving self-face scale with 11 items and saving other-face scale with 7 items. Saving self-face scale, which was derived from the Chinese Personality Assessment Inventory (CPAI), depicts the pattern of orientations in an interpersonal and hierarchical connection and social behaviors to enhance one s face and to avoid losing one s face (Cheung et al., 2001). A sample item is I pay a lot of attention to how others see me. Saving other-face scale was developed by Fu (2004) to assess one s tendency of concern for other s face. One sample item is Other people will feel a loss of face if I turn down their favour. Fu (2004) reported that the Cronbach alphas of responses by a sample of 336 Chinese university students to the two subscales were.68 and.54, respectively. Data Analysis First, descriptive statistics including means, standard deviations, and Cronbach alphas of all the variables of interest were reported. Gender differences among humor styles and cultural value dimensions were also reported for the reader s reference and verification. Second, intercorrelational and correlational analyses were conducted among the four humor styles and their predictor variables (namely the four cultural value dimensions and facework). Third, stepwise multiple regressions were conducted to examine to what extent the predictor variables (the four cultural value dimensions and facework) could predict the four humor styles by controlling for age and gender. Cross-cultural comparisons were not done since the constructs were measured by different scales in different cultures. RESULTS Descriptive Statistics and Correlates Among Cultural Value Dimensions Descriptive statistics including means, standard deviations, gender differences, and Cronbach alphas of all the variables of interest are showed in Table 1. The Cronbach alphas of affiliative, self-enhancing, aggressive, and self-defeating humor, horizontal individualism, vertical individualism, and horizontal collectivism for the present sample were all above.70, indicating acceptable reliability levels for research purposes (Nunnally & Bernstein, 1994). The Cronbach alphas of vertical collectivism, Saving self-face and Saving other-face for the present sample were.65,.66 and.59, respectively, suggesting the Cronbach alpha for the saving other-face is somewhat low. Significant gender differences were found in only three of the variables involved in this study (namely, affiliative humor, aggressive humor, and saving self-face). Females reported more use of affiliative humor and less use of aggressive humor than males, which is consistent with previous findings with Chinese samples (Chen & Martin, 2007). Females also reported lower levels of saving self-face compared to males. Since separate analyses by gender revealed that gender did not affect the directions and significance levels of correlational results between the four humor styles and their predictor variables, correlational results based on gender are not reported in this study. Correlates of Humor Styles and Predictor Variables Pearson correlation coefficients among the four humor styles and their predictor variables (individualism, collectivism, and facework) are shown in Table 2. As shown in this table, as expected, significant positive correlations were found between the two beneficial humor styles (affiliative and self-enhancing humor) and between the two detrimental humor styles (aggressive and self-defeating humor). This result is consistent

8 64 Table 1. CHEN, WATKINS, & MARTIN Descriptive Statistics and Correlates Among Cultural Value Dimensions (N = 272; 124 males and 148 females) Scale M SD α Male Female M SD M SD t p ah eh n.s. gh ** dh n.s. hi n.s. vi n.s. hc n.s. vc n.s. ssf * sof n.s. Note: * p <.05, ** p <.01, p <.001, n.s. means no significance; α = Cronbach alpha; ah = affiliative humor, eh = self-enhancing humor, gh = aggressive humor, dh = self-defeating humor; hi = horizontal individualism; vi = vertical individualism, hc = horizontal collectivism, vc = vertical collectivism; ssf = saving self-face, sof = saving other-face. Table 2. Correlates of Humor Scales and Predictor Variables (N =272) Scales ah eh gh dh hc hi vi vc ssf sof ah 1 eh.29 1 gh dh.13* hc.22**.28.13*.04 1 hi.06.19**.13* vi **.13*.14*.22** 1 vc ** ** 1 ssf.13*.13*.35.21** sof.20**.13* **.22**.18**.18**.27** 1 Note: * p <.05, ** p <.01, p <.001. ah = affiliative humor, eh = self-enhancing humor, gh = aggressive humor, dh = self-defeating humor; hi = horizontal individualism; vi = vertical individualism, hc = horizontal collectivism, vc = vertical collectivism; ssf = saving self-face, sof = saving other-face.

9 THE ROLE OF CULTURAL VALUES AND FACEWORK IN SENSE OF HUMOR 65 with previous findings (Chen & Martin, 2007; Martin et al., 2003). The intercorrelations among the four scales of the individualism and collectivism measure were all positive and significant, as was the correlation between the two facework scales. In addition, saving self-face was positively related to vertical individualism while saving other-face was positively related to all four dimensions of individualism and collectivism. Affiliative humor was positively and significantly correlated with horizontal collectivism (r =.22, p <.001) as predicted, confirming Hypothesis 1. Self-enhancing humor positively and significantly correlated with horizontal individualism (r =.19, p <.01), confirming Hypothesis 2. Aggressive humor was significantly related to vertical individualism (r =.16, p <.01), which confirmed Hypothesis 3. Unexpectedly, selfdefeating humor had no significant correlation with vertical collectivism (r =.01, p >.05), which did not confirm Hypothesis 4. Hypotheses 5, 6 and 8 were also supported. Specifically, saving self-face was negatively related to affiliative humor style (r =.13, p <.05), confirming Hypothesis 5. Saving self-face positively and very significantly correlated with aggressive humor (r =.35, p <.001), confirming Hypothesis 6. Meanwhile, saving other-face positively correlated with affiliative humor (r =.20, p <.01), confirming Hypothesis 8. Contrary to our prediction, saving self-face was positively and significantly related to self-defeating humor (r =.21, p <.01). Thus, Hypothesis 7 was not confirmed. Multiple Regression Analysis To determine the extent to which individualism, collectivism, and facework contribute to humor styles, stepwise regression analysis was conducted by controlling for age and gender. Cultural values (individualism and collectivism) and facework together could significantly explain 10.4% of the total variance for affiliative humor {F(2, 264) = 5.11, p <.001; best predictors: horizontal collectivism, β =.20, t = 3.1, p <.01 and saving other-face, β =.22, t = 3.4, p <.01}, 9.8% for self-enhancing humor {F(3, 266) = 7.24, p <.001; best predictor: horizontal collectivism, β =.26, t = 3.9, p <.001}, 19.9% for aggressive humor (F(3, 264) = 10.92, p <.001; best predictors: saving selfface, β =.36, t = 5.9, p <.001, and saving other-face, β =.18, t = 3.0, p <.01), and 6.2% for self-defeating humor (F(5, 265) = 3.51, p <.01; best predictor: saving self-face, β =.17, t = 2.7, p <.01), respectively in this sample. DISCUSSION This is the first empirical study on the relationships of humor to cultural value dimensions and facework with a Chinese sample. The two aims of the present study were achieved. The first aim was to examine Hypothesis 1 to 4 between the four cultural value dimensions and humor styles in the Chinese context. The results supported all the hypotheses except for Hypothesis 4. Eight out of 16 correlational results between humor styles and cultural value dimensions are significant (p <.05). Particularly, horizontal collectivism was positively and significantly related to the two beneficial humor styles

10 66 CHEN, WATKINS, & MARTIN (affiliative and self-enhancing humor). Regression results also indicated that horizontal collectivism was the best predictor of affiliative and self-enhancing humor in the present sample. This finding suggests that Chinese individuals who see themselves as interdependent members of a group, in which everyone is presumed to be equal, tend to use humor with respect to others to enhance group cohesiveness and oneself. This finding also holds true for the Lebanese (see Kazarian & Martin, 2004). An interesting finding worth noting is that, consistent with our prediction, aggressive humor was found to be consistently and very significantly related to vertical individualism across the three different cultures (see Kazarian & Martin, 2004, 2006), suggesting that those who are competitive and strive to win at the expense of others, tend to use humor to enhance themselves by disparaging others. One possible explanation for this finding is that people who are high in vertical individualism see the world as competitive those who win do so at the expense of the losers and hold an aggressive attitude toward others. They tend to use humor in an aggressive manner as one way of putting others down and gaining advantage over others. This consistent finding may be employed to explain why Chinese reported lower scores on aggressive humor than Canadians due to their difference in vertical individualism (Chen & Martin, 2007; Singelis et al., 1995; Triandis, 1995; Triandis & Gelfand, 1998). However, Hypothesis 4 was not confirmed. This suggests that the relationship between vertical collectivism and self-defeating humor seems to be mixed or complicated in different cultures since the findings on this relationship were quite different or even opposite in the three disparate cultures (Kazarian & Martin, 2004, 2006). The inconsistent findings between cultures may be due to differences in religious beliefs and ethnic identity. For example, Armenian cultural and historical experiences such as genocide (Hovannisian, 1999) may have an important influence on their perceptions of selfdefeating humor which may include the use of black humor as a means of coping. In addition to the predicted association between self-enhancing humor and horizontal individualism, we found a positive correlation between this humor style and horizontal collectivism. A similar correlation has been found with Lebanese university students (Kazarian & Martin, 2004), but not with ethnic Armenians (Kazarian & Martin, 2006). This suggests that the use of humor to amuse oneself and cope with stress is mainly associated with the horizontal orientation, in which equality between members is assumed, regardless of whether individuals see themselves as independent or as interdependent members of a cultural group. Within the Chinese culture, the use of humor to cope with stress in a tolerant and accepting way seems to be compatible with both a collectivist and an individualist orientation, but it does seem to depend upon a sense of equality with others. The differences between Lebanese and Armenian cultures in whether self-enhancing humor is associated with horizontal individualism or horizontal collectivism may have to do with cultural differences such as religion (Sidani & Gardner, 2000). The second aim of the present study was to examine Hypothesis 5 to 8 on the relationships between facework and humor styles. All the hypotheses were confirmed except for Hypothesis 7. Given that facework plays a very important role in Chinese daily

11 THE ROLE OF CULTURAL VALUES AND FACEWORK IN SENSE OF HUMOR 67 life, humor uses and humor styles seem to reflect important kinds of facework strategies. The correlations between humor styles and facework were generally as expected. In particular, affiliative humor was found to be positively and very significantly predicted by saving other-face, which suggests that those who show concerns for the other person s face, tend to use humor as indirect, cooperative and ritualistic facework strategies to enhance their relationships with others. Regression results showed that the facework scales were better predictors of the two detrimental humor styles (aggressive and selfdefeating humor) than were the four cultural value dimensions. The two presumably detrimental humor styles (aggressive and self-defeating humor) were positively and very significantly predicted by saving self-face. This suggests that those who show much concern for their own image, dignity, and poise, are likely to use more humor to put down others, and more self-disparaging form of humor as direct, competitive, and hostile facework strategies to reduce face threat and facilitate social interactions. However, the finding of a positive rather than a negative correlation between selfdefeating humor and saving self-face contradicts Hypothesis 7. Although one might assume initially that using humor to make fun of oneself is incompatible with saving selfface, this unexpected results suggest that the opposite is actually the case. Instead, the use of self-defeating humor may be a strategy for minimizing one s perceived weaknesses, failures, and low self-esteem in order to avoid losing one s face. Since the first rule when communicating with people from the Arab world is not to let them lose face (Merkin & Ramadan, 2010), Arabians also value face. The findings on the relationships between facework and humor styles with a sample of Chinese university students in the present study are likely to be generalized to the Armenian and Lebanese contexts. This is a topic for further cross-cultural research. To conclude, the four cultural value dimensions of individualism and collectivism, and facework can explain unique individual and cultural differences in humor styles in the present study. The results are generally consistent with the conception that people express their sense of humor in a certain way that reflects their personality traits, values, attitudes, beliefs, and so on. Thus, people who have a more collectivist orientation tend to express a style of humor towards other people that reflects this trait, whereas those with a more individualist orientation have another style of humor. There is also evidence here that different styles of humor may reflect different concerns about face. Therefore, humor may be seen as a mode of communication that is used for many different purposes, rather than something that is unidimensional (Martin, 2007). There are at least four limitations for the present study. First, since the present study only examined participants within the Chinese culture at the individual level of analysis, little on the cultural level of analysis could be done. Cross-cultural research on the basis of structural equivalence and same/equivalent measures is recommended to see whether these patterns of relationships between sense of humor and facework could be replicated across other cultures such as North American culture or different cultural groups within China. Second, the Cronbach alpha for the saving other-face scale is somewhat low (.59) in the present study. The number of items in the individualism and collectivism measure is also quite small, which may narrowly define the constructs as in the original scale of

12 68 CHEN, WATKINS, & MARTIN Singelis et al. (1995). It is recommended for future research to use better scales to measure saving other-face, individualism and collectivism. Third, the present study is based on self-report measures, which could lead to possible response biases, and future research might benefit from using other methodologies, such as peer report or observational ratings. Finally, due to the correlational nature of this study, the causal relationship between sense of humor and cultural traits -could not be determined; therefore we cannot say whether, for example, saving self-face -causes one to use aggressive humor, or whether the use of aggressive humor causes one to be higher on saving self-face. Further research should use experimental or longitudinal studies to address this issue. REFERENCES Bond, M. H The handbook of Chinese psychology. New York: Oxford University Press. Bond, M. H., & Smith, P. B Cross-cultural social and organizational psychology. Annual Review of Psychology, 47, Chen, G. H University teachers humor production in the classroom and student ratings of teaching effectiveness. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, The University of Hong Kong. Chen, G. H. in submission. The development of Chinese humor styles questionnaire. Manuscript submitted for publication. Chen, G. H., & Martin, R. A A comparison of humor styles, coping humor, and mental health between Chinese and Canadian university students. Humor: International Journal of Humor Research, 20, Cheung, F. M., Leung, K., Fan, R., Song, W. Z., Zhang, J. X., & Zhang, J. P Development of the Chinese Personality Assessment Inventory (CPAI). Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 27, Cheung, F. M., Leung, K., Zhang, J. X., Sun, H. F., Gan, Y. Q., Song, W. Z., et al Indigenous Chinese personality construct: Is the five factor model complete? Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 32, Chiou, J.-S Horizontal and vertical individualism and collectivism among college students in the United States, Taiwan, and Argentina. The Journal of Social Psychology, 141, Cupach, W. R., & Metts, S Facework. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Earley, P. C., & Erez, M The transplanted executive: Why you need to understand how workers in other countries see the world differently. New York: Oxford University Press. Fischer, R., Ferreira, M. C., Assmar, E., Redford, P., Harb, C., Glazer, S., et al Individualismcollectivism as descriptive norms: Development of a subjective norm approach to culture measurement. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 40, Fu, H Personality correlates of the disposition towards interpersonal forgiveness: A Chinese perspective. Ph.D. dissertation, The University of Hong Kong. Fu, H., Watkins, D., & Hui, E. K. P Personality correlates of the disposition towards interpersonal forgiveness: A Chinese perspective. International Journal of Psychology, 39, Gabrenya, W. K., & Hwang, K Chinese social interaction: Harmony and hierarchy on the good earth. In M. H. Bond (Ed.), The handbook of Chinese psychology (pp ). New York: Oxford University Press. Gao, G An initial analysis of the effects of face and concern for other in Chinese interpersonal communication. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 22, Goffman, E Interaction ritual: Essays on face-to-face behavior. New York: Pantheon. Green, E. G. T., Deschamps, J.-C., & Páez, D Variation of individualism and collectivism within and between 20 countries: A typical analysis. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 36, Hallahan, M., Lee, F., & Herzog, T It s not just whether you win or lose, it s also where you play the game: A naturalistic, cross-cultural examination of the positivity bias. Journal of Cross-Cultural

13 THE ROLE OF CULTURAL VALUES AND FACEWORK IN SENSE OF HUMOR 69 Psychology, 28, Hofstede, G Culture s consequences: International differences in work-related values. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage. Hovannisian, R. G. (Ed.) Remembrance and denial: The case of the Armenian Genocide. Detroit, MI: Wayne State University Press. Hui, C. H., & Villareal, M. J Individualism-collectivism and psychological needs: Their relationships in two cultures. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 20, Kalliny, M., Cruthirds, K. W., & Minor, M. S Differences between American, Egyptian and Lebanese humor styles: Implications for international management. International Journal of Cross Cultural Management, 6, Kane, T. R., Suls, J., & Tedeschi, J. T Humour as a tool of social interaction. In A. J. Chapman & H. C. Foot (Eds.), It s a funny thing, humour (pp ). Oxford, England: Pergamon Press. Kazarian, S. S., & Martin, R. A Humor styles, personality, and well-being among Lebanese university students. European Journal of Personality, 18, Kazarian, S. S., & Martin, R. A Humor styles, culture-related personality, well-being, and family adjustment among Armenians in Lebanon. Humor: International Journal of Humor Research, 19, Keltner, D., Young, R. C., Heerey, E. A., Oemig, C., & Monarch, N. D Teasing in hierarchical and intimate relations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75, Lee, S. H Facework in Chinese cross-cultural adaptation. Ph.D. thesis, The University of Texas at Arlington. Lerner, G. H Finding face in the preference structures of talk-in-interaction. Social Psychology Quarterly, 59, Martin, R. A The psychology of humor: An integrative approach. Burlington, MA: Elsevier Academic Press. Martin, R. A., Puhlik-Doris, P., Larsen, G., Gray, J., & Weir, K Individual differences in uses of humor and their relation to psychological well-being: Development of the humor styles questionnaire. Journal of Research in Personality, 37, McGhee, P. E., & Duffey, N. S Children s appreciation of humor victimizing different racial-ethnic groups: Racial-ethnic differences. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 14, Merkin, R., & Ramadan, R Facework in Syria and the United States: A cross-cultural comparison. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 34, Nunnally, J. C., & Bernstein, I. H Psychometric theory (3rd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill. Oyserman, D., Coon, H. M., & Kemmelmeier, M Rethinking individualism and collectivism: Evaluation of theoretical assumptions and meta-analyses. Psychological Bulletin, 128, Redding, S. G., & Ng, M The role of face in the organizational perceptions of Chinese managers. International Studies of Management & Organization, 13, Saroglou, V., & Scariot, C Humor styles questionnaire: Personality and educational correlates in Belgian high school and college students. European Journal of Personality, 16, Sidani, Y. M., & Gardner, W. L Work values among Lebanese workers. The Journal of Social Psychology, 140, Singelis, T. M., Triandis, H. C., Bhawuk, D. P. S., & Gelfand, M. J Horizontal and vertical individualism and collectivism: A theoretical and measurement refinement. Cross-Cultural Research, 29, Sivadas, E., Bruvold, N. T., & Nelson, M. R A reduced version of the horizontal and vertical individualism and collectivism scale: A four-country assessment. Journal of Business Research, 61, Soh, S., & Leong, F. T. L Validity of vertical and horizontal individualism and collectivism in Singapore: Relationships with values and interests. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 33, Taher, D., Kazarian, S. S., & Martin, R. A Validation of the Arabic humor styles questionnaire in a community sample of Lebanese in Lebanon. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 39, Ting-Toomey, S., Gao, G., Trubisky, P., Yang, Z., Kim, H. S., Lin, S.-L., et al Culture, face maintenance, and styles of handling interpersonal conflicts: A study in five cultures. International Journal of Conflict Management, 2,

14 70 CHEN, WATKINS, & MARTIN Ting-Toomey, S., & Oetzel, J. G Managing intercultural conflict effectively (pp ). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Triandis, H. C Individualism and collectivism. Boulder, CO: Westview Press. Triandis, H. C Individualism and collectivism: Past, present, and future. In D. Matsumoto (Ed.), The handbook of culture and psychology (pp ). New York: Oxford University Press. Triandis, H. C., Chen, X. P., & Chan, D. K.-S Scenarios for the measurement of collectivism and individualism. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 29, Triandis, H. C., & Gelfand, M. J Converging measurement of horizontal and vertical individualism and collectivism. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74, Van de Vijver, F., & Leung, K Methods and data analysis for cross-cultural research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Wagner, J. A., III Studies of individualism-collectivism: Effects on cooperation in groups. Academy of Management Journal, 38, Wang, Y. L., Shi, K., & Huang, X A confirmatory study on the structure of individualism and collectivism in China. Psychological Science, 26, Zajdman, A Humorous face-threatening acts: Humor as strategy. Journal of Pragmatics, 23, (Manuscript received 27 October, 2010; Revision accepted 9 March, 2013)