Explorations of Prosocial Teasing
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Western University Scholarship@Western Electronic Thesis and Dissertation Repository 6-17-2013 12:00 AM Friendly Antagonism in Humorous Interactions: Explorations of Prosocial Teasing David J. Podnar The University of Western Ontario Supervisor Rod Martin The University of Western Ontario Graduate Program in Psychology A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the equirr ements for the degree in Doctor of Philosophy © David J. Podnar 2013 Follow this and additional works at: https://ir.lib.uwo.ca/etd Part of the Clinical Psychology Commons, Personality and Social Contexts Commons, and the Social Psychology Commons Recommended Citation Podnar, David J., "Friendly Antagonism in Humorous Interactions: Explorations of Prosocial Teasing" (2013). Electronic Thesis and Dissertation Repository. 1336. https://ir.lib.uwo.ca/etd/1336 This Dissertation/Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by Scholarship@Western. It has been accepted for inclusion in Electronic Thesis and Dissertation Repository by an authorized administrator of Scholarship@Western. For more information, please contact [email protected]. FRIENDLY ANTAGONISM IN HUMOROUS INTERACTIONS: EXPLORATIONS OF PROSOCIAL TEASING (Thesis format: Monograph) by David J. Podnar Graduate Program in Psychology A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy The School of Graduate and Postdoctoral Studies The University of Western Ontario London, Ontario, Canada © David J. Podnar 2013 ABSTRACT Despite research and theory noting the aggressive and destructive applications of teasing, few studies have investigated its positive uses. The present research explores the use of "prosocial teasing", a positively-intended form of teasing which relies on the playful use of seemingly negative remarks (e.g., "You’re an idiot"), which are incongruent with the established relationship, and aim to indirectly and ironically express positive relational messages to others (e.g., "I accept you"). The goals of the present research are to (1) present a theoretical model of prosocial teasing, (2) construct and validate a self-report measure of prosocial teasing behaviour [i.e., Prosocial Teasing Questionnaire (PTQ)], (3) determine which individual difference variables predict prosocial teasing, and (4) investigate the potential associations between prosocial teasing and interpersonal relationships. A total of 735 university students, across 3 separate samples, completed the PTQ along with questionnaires assessing variables related to humor, personality, psychological well-being, and interpersonal relationships. Friends and family members of participants (i.e., “informants”) were invited to complete an online questionnaire rating the participants’ teasing styles and the quality of their relationship with them. The PTQ yielded a coefficient alpha of .89 and demonstrated convergent validity through a number of positive correlations with humour (e.g., sarcasm, playfulness) and broad personality variables (e.g., extraversion). The results suggest that prosocial teasers tend to be narcissistic, interpersonally manipulative, emotionally callous, sensation-seeking, risk- taking, and controlling when resolving interpersonal conflict. The data also indicate that prosocial teasing may be used to indirectly communicate negative emotions and beliefs. Interpersonally, the findings suggest that prosocial teasing may be used as a ii compensatory strategy among those with a variety of interpersonal deficits and may be more adaptive for males. Finally, while self-reported prosocial teasing was positively associated with self-reported relationship quality, informant ratings of prosocial teasing and relationship satisfaction were negatively related. Possible explanations for these findings and its implications for prosocial teasing and future research are discussed. Overall, these findings also provide evidence for the validity of the PTQ to support its use as a tool to further understand the role of teasing in relationships. Keywords: teasing, humour, interpersonal relationships, individual differences, well- being, measures of humour iii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS First and foremost, I would like to gratefully acknowledge my advisor, Dr. Rod Martin, for his enthusiasm, thoughtfulness, good humour and constructive comments over the past several years. His support, motivation and confidence in me have been instrumental in the completion of this dissertation. I am delighted to have had him as my research advisor. We shared a lot of laughs over the years and, beyond our academic musings, I valued the many thoughts and reflections we shared about life. I would also like to thank my committee members Drs. Nicholas Kuiper and Tony Vernon for their suggestions and expertise. I am also appreciative of the many undergraduate students who assisted with the data collection process. Finally, I am grateful to all my family and friends for their strength, love and support throughout this process. I am especially appreciative of my parents who provided ongoing encouragement and acted as a sounding board when I got stuck in the writing process. After the countless hours of conversations, they are surely experts in prosocial teasing. iv TABLE OF CONTENTS Abstract ii Acknowledgments iv List of Tables ix List of Figures xi List of Appendices xii Chapter 1 – Introduction 1 Definition of Prosocial Teasing 2 Teasing in General 2 Prosocial Teasing 4 Previous Research on Prosocial Teasing 6 Prosocial Teasing as Ambiguous Communication 7 Prosocial Teasing as a Form of Humour: Reversal Theory 8 Synergy 8 Diminishment 9 Paratelic State of Mind 10 Emotional Arousal 11 Summary of Reversal Theory 12 Prosocial Teasing as Communication 12 The Social Functions of Prosocial Teasing 12 Indirect expressions of affection and closeness. 12 Reinforcement of relationships. 13 Maintaining “face”. 14 Social Mechanisms of Prosocial Teasing 15 Meta-signals. 15 Relationship quality. 16 Summary of the Prosocial Teasing Model 17 Prosocial Teasing as a Trait: Overview of the Current Research 18 Scale Development 18 Associations with other Trait Variables 22 The Dark Triad of personality. 22 Social dominance and the pursuit of social status among men. 23 Emotional ambivalence, indirect communication, and masculinity. 24 Homophobia and emotional expressiveness. 24 Prosocial teasers and conflict resolution. 25 Psychological well-being. 25 Associations with Interpersonal Relationship Variables 26 Interpersonal intimacy. 26 Relationship quality and satisfaction. 26 Interpersonal competence and social self-esteem. 27 Emotional intelligence and attachment orientation. 28 Perspective-taking and empathic concern. 29 Affiliative and aggressive humour styles. 29 Summary of predictions 30 v Predictions related to scale development. 30 Predictions related to associations with other trait variables. 31 Predictions related to interpersonal relationships. 31 Chapter 2 – Methodology 33 Participants 33 Informants 33 Procedure 35 Materials 35 Measures of humour-related variables 35 Participant humour measures. 35 Informant humour measures. 39 Measures of Social Desirability 40 Measures of Personality and Individual Differences 41 Measures of Interpersonal Variables 46 Measures of Psychological Well-being 50 Measures of Relationship Quality 52 Participant relationship measures. 52 Informant relationship measures. 53 Chapter 3 – Scale Development of the Prosocial Teasing Questionnaire (PTQ) 55 Initial Item Pool 55 Results 56 Scale Reliability 56 Exploratory Factor Analyses 60 Scale Refinement of the PTQ 67 Descriptive Statistics of the PTQ 70 Social Desirability 70 Associations with other Humour Variables 73 Associations with the Five-Factor Model of Personality 76 Discussion 76 PTQ-informant version (PTQ-I). 80 Social desirability. 81 Humour styles. 81 Sarcasm. 83 Playfulness. 83 The Five-Factor Model. 84 Conclusion 85 Chapter 4 – Personality, Individual Differences and Psychological Well-Being 87 Data Analysis Procedures 87 Results 88 Is Prosocial Teasing Related to Narcissism, Interpersonal Manipulation, Risk- taking and Sensation Seeking? 89 vi Do Males use Prosocial Teasing to Express Social Dominance and Social Status? 89 Is Prosocial Teasing a Means to Indirectly Communicate Positive Relational Messages for those who have Difficulty Expressing Emotions? 89 Are Stereotypically Masculine Males more likely to use Prosocial Teasing to Indirectly Communicate Positive Relational Messages? 92 Do Homophobic Individuals rely on Prosocial Teasing to Safely and Indirectly Express Positive Feelings to Same-sex Peers? 98 Is Prosocial Teasing Related to More Avoidant Styles of Resolving Interpersonal Conflict? 101 What is the Relationship between Prosocial Teasing and Psychological Well- being? 106 Discussion 106 The Dark Triad 106 Social Status and Dominance 110 Emotional Ambivalence and Indirectness 111 Traditional Masculinity and Emotional Ambivalence 112 Homophobia and Emotional Expressiveness 113 Psychological Well-Being 114 Chapter 5 – Interpersonal Relationships 117 Data Analysis Procedures 117 Results 118 Does Prosocial Teasing Predict Self-reported Relationship Quality and Perceived Interpersonal Intimacy? 118 Does Interpersonal Competence Moderate the Relationship between Prosocial Teasing and Relationship Quality? 120 Do Interpersonal Qualities such as Emotional Intelligence, Social Self-esteem, and Attachment Orientation Moderate the Relationship between Prosocial Teasing and Relationship Quality? 128 Do Perspective-taking and Empathic