Humor Research Paper Final Draft

Running head: HUMOR 1
Humor: Perceived Usage and Attractiveness of Affiliative and Aggressive Styles
Erica Elsbernd, Austin McElroy, Louisa Pavlik, and Frank Fernandez
Loras College
HUMOR 2
Table of Contents
Abstract3
Introduction..4
Literature Review.5
Method...27
Analysis of the Results...31
Summary....80
Limitations of the Study.....82
Recommendations for Further Study.85
Conclusion.87
References..89
Appendices.99
Appendix A..100
Appendix B..104
Appendix C..149
Appendix D..151
Appendix E..153
Appendix F..155
Appendix G..159
Appendix H..169
HUMOR 3
Abstract
The perceived usage and perception of affiliative and aggressive humor styles were examined to
determine which type of humor students found attractive. Affiliative humor was found
attractive, while aggressive humor was found relatively unattractive by students. Students who
used affiliative humor were likely to find affiliative humor attractive. Students who used
aggressive humor were likely to find aggressive humor attractive. Together, these findings
suggest a similarity-attraction relationship between perceived humor usage and humor
attractiveness.
Keywords: perception, humor, affiliative, aggressive, similarity-attraction

HUMOR 4
Humor is a common way for individuals to connect with others (Graham, 1995). It
lowers anxiety and functions to connect people in conversation (Duran, 1983). Laughter alone
can signify safety (Grade, 2008). Humor has also been found as an important social function in
interpersonal relationships (Abel, 1998; Hall, 2013; Garde, 2008; Graham, 1995; Kaplan &
Boyd, 1965; Knight, 2013; & Ziv, 2010). Researchers have spent many years studying humor
and how individuals perceive different humor orientations and humor styles. Additionally,
Martin, Puhlik-Doris, Larsen, Gray, and Weir (2003) developed the Humor Style Questionnaire
(HSQ) to create a way for individuals to self-assess their humor usage by categorizing humor
into four categories.
This study measures two of the HSQ humor styles: Affiliative and aggressive. Affiliative
humor is viewed as a positive style while aggressive humor is considered a negative style (Cann,
Davis, & Zapata, 2009). This is due to the way that these two styles are used. Affiliative humor
is often used to improve relations between individuals, whereas aggressive humor is often used
to improve ones perception of his or herself at the expense others (Martin, et. al, 2003).
The purpose of this study is to further the understanding of humor in interpersonal
communication, in which the following research question is examined: To which type of humor
are students attracted? The hypothesis is as follows: Students are attracted to positive
humor. This study is grounded in components of the similarity and complementarity
components of attraction theory, which suggests that individuals find others attractive if they are
similar to themselves or if they are different from themselves (Byrne, 1971). This concept is also
examined. This research measures the extent to which individuals use positive and negative
humor styles (i.e., affiliative and aggressive) and to which extent individuals find these humor
styles attractive, and if individuals are attracted to the style of humor they themselves use.
HUMOR 5
Literature Review
HUMOR 6
Humor has taken various forms over the years and many scholars have debated its
meaning. Aristotle (trans., 2009) referred to the idea of humor as a subversion of the ugly
(para. 19). Many years later, Freud claimed humor was an unconscious production (as cited in
Newirth, 2006). Scholars also have viewed humor as an attack on another, with laughter as the
battle between the two sides (Fry, 2011).
Theoretical Conceptualizations of Humor
According to Graham (1995) there are more than 100 documented theories on humor.
However, researchers have typically referred to three broad perspectives when explaining how
humor emerges through human thought: relief, incongruity, and superiority (Berlyne, 1969; &
Fine, 1983).
Relief Theory
People laugh because they sense that stress has been reduced in one way or another
(Berlyne, 1972). The symptoms of humor can be applied to each theory, but they are most
relevant to relief theory, in which humor stems from the release felt when tension is removed
from the individual and humor then results from the release of nervous energy (Meyer, 2000,
p. 312). This theory is put to use by communicators when attempting to ease the pressure of a
situation, often at the beginning of a speech (Meyer, 2000). Using jokes to reduce tension in
situations points to a common application of relief theory of humor (Meyer, 2000).
Incongruity Theory
Incongruity theory stems from the idea that people laugh at phenomena that surprise
them, are unexpected, or odd in a non-threatening way (Deckers & Divine, 1981). Meyer (2000)
explained this theory:

HUMOR 7
An accepted pattern is violated, or a difference is noted close enough to the norm to be
non-threatening, but different enough from the norm to be remarkable. It is this
difference, neither too shocking nor too mundane, that provokes humor in the mind of the
receiver (p. 313).
Incongruity theory emphasizes ones cognition and ability to understand patterns of reality
before noticing any inconsistencies, which is necessary for the receiver before that person can
experience humor under this theory (Meyer, 2000).
Superiority Theory
Superiority theory comes from the idea that people laugh outwardly or inwardly at others,
because they feel a sense of triumph or power over others (Feinberg, 1978). Duncan (1982)
revealed that laughing at faulty behavior can reinforce unity among groups, as a feeling of
superiority over those who are being ridiculed can coexist with a feeling of belongingness. Two
important effects of superiority humor follow: Human society is kept in order as those who
disobey are censured by laughter, and people are made to feel part of a group by laughing at
some ridiculed others (Meyer, 2000, p. 315).
Although relief, incongruity, and superiority theory explain why individuals find humor
funny, these theories do not indicate if humor is a desirable trait or what roles of humor provides
in interpersonal relationships.
Humor as a Social Function
According to Graham, Papa, and Brooks (1992), it was not until 1942 that the work of
Obrdlik recognized that humor had a social function (p. 164). Davis and Farina (1970)
suggested that no research attention [had] been paid to the communication function of humor
(p. 175) and found that communication played a significant role in humor and its
HUMOR 8
appreciation. Graham and Rubin (1987) later found that humor could be used as a predictor of
relationship development. In a discussion of humors place in the field of communication,
Lynch (2002), wrote undoubtedly humor and laughing are essential parts of what it is to be
human (p. 423); jokes and humor, in general, play an important part in determining who we
are and how we think of ourselves, and as a result how we interact with others (p. 425).
Both the creation and reception of humor serve as an indirect means of communication
(Davis & Farina, 1970) and laughter is often considered the communication of approval (Fine,
1983, p. 173). Zivs (2010) work on the social function of humor included the quote from
American humorist Buchwald: I learned quickly that when I made others laugh, they liked
me. This lesson I will never forget (p. 12). As this quote suggested, is important for individuals
to feel included in a group, and humor allows for that inclusion to happen (Garde, 2008; Graham,
1995; & Ziv, 2010). Ziv (2010) explained this phenomenon: The laughter of the group
members is a behavioral expression of something shared, and it includes the new guy too. If he
can laugh at their humor, his chances of being accepted are much greater (p. 12). For example,
when the message (i.e., humor) is well received, then one is encouraged to interpret the
appreciation of the humor as acceptance and possibly a signal to continue the conversation
(Graham, 1995, p. 162). The elicitation of positive responses to humor such as laughter,
chuckling, and other forms of spontaneous behavior [can be] taken to mean pleasure, delight,
and/or surprise in the targeted receiver (S. Booth-Butterfield & Booth-Butterfield, 1991, p.
206). However, if the message is not well received, one may interpret the lack of appreciation as
a signal to end the conversation (Graham, 1995). As Graham (1995) suggested, a refusal to
share in humor would more than likely dampen an interpersonal interaction in much of the same
way as an unreturned greeting would suggest some sort of interpersonal difficulty (p. 162).
HUMOR 9
Therefore, to refuse to take a joke is, in effect, to refuse to accept a relationship
(Perinbanayagam, 1991, p. 130).
Functions of Humor in Interpersonal Communication
Humor in interpersonal communication has many uses. Because of the communicative
techniques humor facilitates, researchers have been striving to understand how the use of humor
affects a variety of relationships including student-teacher, manager-subordinate, romantic
partners, and close friends (Maki, Booth-Butterfield, & McMullen, 2012, p. 649). Although
research has shown the many uses of humor, two researchers have identified and explained
specific ways humor is used in interpersonal communication.
Meyers (2000) Four Functions of Humor Model
Meyer (2000) created a model that included four functions of humor, reflecting the idea
that humor can unite and divide communicators (as cited in Cann, Davis, & Zapata, 2009). This
model was patterned after the distinctions among the positive and negative social functions of
humor, suggested by researcher Martineau in 1972 (as cited in Cann, et al., 2009). Meyer (2000)
explained this model:
These functions can be viewed as falling along a continuum, starting with identification,
then clarification, enforcement, and, at the other extreme, differentiation. This continuum
illustrates the division of humors basic communication functions into strategies that
unify and those that divide (p. 318).
Identification. The identification function strengthens support between communicators
by connecting the speaker with their audience to increase the speakers credibility (Meyer,
2000). This function allows for the audience to feel superior in the way that they have a more
equal relationship to the speaker (Meyer, 2000).

HUMOR 10
Clarification. The clarification function allows communicators to condense their views
into short anecdotes or memorable phrases, resulting in the explanation of issues or positions
(Meyer, 2000). This function allows the communicator to clarify social norms and perceptions,
while simultaneously reducing tension and promoting positive feelings among others (Meyer,
2000).
Enforcement. The enforcement function allows for stress to be put on the violation of
norms, which requires alteration indicated by laughing at the person responsible for the
humorous gaff (Meyer, 2000). Teachers often use enforcement when correcting young students
who use a phrase incorrectly, as the humor stems from the lack of knowledge (Deckers &
Divine, 1981; & Meyer, 2000).
Differentiation. The final function is differentiation, which communicators often use to
contrast themselves from their opponents (Meyer, 2000). This is the harshest function of humor
in rhetoric, as it serves to make clear divisions and oppositions among people, opinions, and
groups (Meyer, 2000).
Halls (2013) Five Positive Functions of Humor
In addition to Meyer's (2000) four functions of humor, Hall (2013) identified and
explained five positive functions of humor in romantic relationships; however, other research has
suggested that these functions are present in other interpersonal relationships (Garde, 2008;
Graham 1995; Kaplan & Boyd, 1965; Knight, 2013; Sprowl, 1987; & Ziv, 2010). The positive
humor functions Hall (2013) studied included: to share enjoyment, express affection, cope with
stress, let go of conflict, and apologize (p. 274).

HUMOR 11
Share enjoyment. The first function allows for partners to share happiness and
cheerfulness with a partner (Hall, 2013). Bippus (2000) suggested that having fun, being funny,
and having openness to joking around are key functions to a healthy, romantic relationship.
Express affection. The second function, to express affection, was found by Bippus
(2000) to be integral in romantic bonding through the use of pet names, affectionate
communication, and other cute behaviors (as cited in Hall, 2013, p. 274). Sprowl (1987)
argued that humor was a valuable aid (p. 58) to enhance interpersonal relationships. The
sharing of humor can also promote unity among individuals in groups by establishing norms and
creating special bonds among members (Graham, et al., 1992).
Cope with stress. The third function, to cope with stress, is important because humor
has been seen as a buffer for symptoms of stress (Abel, 1998). Since the early days of humanity,
humor has removed the stress from life (Graham 1995, Garde, 2008, Kaplan & Boyd, 1965;
Knight, 2013; & Ziv, 2010). In addition, coping with stress through humor was found to be an
effective way for college students to handle the pressures of employment in addition to academic
work (M. Booth-Butterfield, Booth-Butterfield, & Wanzer, 2007; & Wanzer, M. Booth-
Butterfield, & Booth-Butterfield, 1995).
Let go of conflict. The fourth function, using humor to let go of conflict, has been
shown as positive in resolving challenges, especially through the use of affiliative humor (Kuiper
& Leite, 2010; Campbell, Martin, & Ward, 2008; Kaplan & Boyd, 1965; Maki et. al., 2012; &
Norrick & Spitz, 2008). Coping as a group in response to extreme situations outside a groups
control is sometimes referred to as gallows humor and can strengthen group solidarity
(Obrdlik, 1942). Some scholars hypothesized that early humans used humor as a way to connect
and convey that a situation was safe (Provine, 2001; & Ziv, 2010). For aboriginal tribes in
HUMOR 12
Australia, humor allowed individuals to connect by reducing the anxiety of being polite,
particularly by making insulting jokes at one and other (Grade, 2008).
Apologize. The fifth and final function is using humor to apologize. Ziv (1988)
suggested that messages that may be difficult to express can be more easily conveyed through
humor. According to Duran (1983), humor can sometimes diffuse anxiety, (p. 321) which
allows individuals to handle the discomforts of life (Duran, 1983). Humor is also closely linked
with emotional awareness (OConnell, 1969) and emotional maturity (Stump, 1939), and these
links may help individuals acknowledge their wrongdoings and apologize (OConnell, 1969,
Stump, 1939).
Humor Orientation
During the late 1980s S. Booth-Butterfield and Booth-Butterfield (1991) developed the
Humor Orientation scale (HO), which measures ones ability to produce humor and make others
laugh. S. Booth-Butterfield and Booth-Butterfield (1991) labeled the trait of humor enactment as
HO, which stands for humor orientation. Because the presence of humor in communication
varies from person to person, S. Booth-Butterfield and Booth-Butterfield (1991) identified
individual differences between people who were highly humorous and those who were
not. People with high HOs enact more humorous communicative behaviors such as language,
expressivity, and impersonation (M. Booth-Butterfield, et al., 2007; & Maki, et al.,
2012). Likewise, people with a high HO report using humor across a wide variety of situations,
work or social, formal or informal (M. Booth-Butterfield, et al., 2007, p. 302).
In addition, high HO students would rate their actual humor attempts as more effective
than would [students with] low HOs (M. Booth-Butterfield, et al., 2007, p. 306). This finding
was later supported by Maki, et al. (2012) who found that high HO individuals perceive
HUMOR 13
themselves as funny and often perceive their use of humor as appropriate (p. 650), which
explains why some people have a high HOthey produce humor often and with confidence.
People with higher HOs also have a higher relative need than people with low HOs to be
perceived positively (Wanzer, et al., 1995). As Masten (1986) suggested, a good sense of
humor is frequently associated with maturity, health, coping, and social competence, which is
why high HO individuals are viewed by others as funny and are often able to function more
efficiently in society (Wanzer, M. Booth-Butterfield & Booth-Butterfield, 1996).
Those with higher HOs are also better able to adapt to new people and circumstances
(Wanzer, et al., 1995). Wanzer, et al. (1996) furthered this idea and found that the ability to
enact humor in communication was linked to healthy social relationships in higher HO
individuals who had greater social attractiveness and lower feelings of isolation. Aune and
Wong (2002) found that individuals scoring higher on the HO scale reported being more playful,
which in turn was related to more positive emotion and relationship satisfaction.
Humor Orientation and Stress
In 2007, M. Booth-Butterfield, et al. measured the humor orientation, job satisfaction,
emotional expressivity and coping effectiveness of 186 undergraduate students through a
questionnaire method. The results of the study indicated that being emotionally expressive in
general is related to less effective coping with stress for college students in the workplace (M.
Booth-Butterfield, et al., 2007, p. 307); however, humor orientation was positively related to
coping efficacy (M. Booth-Butterfield, et al., 2007, p. 307). Individuals who used humor to
cope with stress also reported less stress (M. Booth Butterfield, et al., 2007). It is likely that a
person with a high HO experiences greater social support because of their conveyance of humor
in stressful situations, allowing for a decreased perception of stress in high HO individuals (M.
HUMOR 14
Booth-Butterfield, et al., 2007). Even highly stressful college work situations can be viewed in
a more positive light once a humorous coping strategy has been implemented (M. Booth-
Butterfield, et al., 2007, p. 312).
Because research points to humor as a healthy coping mechanism for college students,
researchers have encouraged colleges and universities to train students how to use humor as an
effective stress management tool (M. Booth-Butterfield, et al., 2007). According to M. Booth-
Butterfield, et al. (2007) there is support:
A growing body of research is demonstrating that the personality trait of enacting
humorous communication is positive in both interpersonal and career contexts, and that
high humor-oriented people dont simply wait to be distracted or to have their stress
relieved by others (p. 312).
In fact, the University of Northern Iowa counseling center hosted a workshop to help college
students use humor to manage stress (UNI Counseling Center, 2006).
Although the HO scale measures ones ability to produce humor and make others laugh,
it does not take into account what ones primary humor style is.
Humor Styles Questionnaire
In 2003, Martin, Puhlik-Doris, Larsen, Gray, and Weir (2003) developed the Humor
Styles Questionnaire (HSQ), which is considered the most widely embraced typology of
humor (Dunbar, Bippus, Allums, & King, 2012, p. 4). According to Martin, et al. (2003), the
HSQ is the first self-report measure to specifically assess ways in which people use humor that
are less desirable and potentially detrimental to psychological well-being (p. 70) and can be
used to determine the extent to which individuals use positive and negative humor (Martin, et al.,
2003, p. 72). Martin, et al. (2003) defined positive humor as relatively benign and benevolent
HUMOR 15
(i.e., tolerant and accepting of both self and others) (p. 52), and negative humor as potentially
detrimental or injurious, either to the self or to ones relationship with others (p. 52). The HSQ
divided humor into four different styles: affiliative (other-directed and benevolent), self-
enhancing (self-directed and benevolent), aggressive (other-directed and demeaning), and self-
defeating (self-directed and demeaning) (Cann, et al., 2009, Martin, et al., 2003).
Styles of Humor
Affiliative Humor
Affiliative humor is a positive humor style used to enhance ones relationship with
others (Martin, et al., 2003, p. 48). This style of humor is intended to elicit laughter and/or
other forms of amusement in targets (Miczo, Averbeck, & Mariani, 2009). As Martin, et al.
(2003) described:
The affiliative humor scale primarily relates to the tendency to joke around with others,
say witty things, tell amusing stories, laugh with others, and amuse others individuals
with high scores on this measure appear to be socially extroverted, cheerful, emotionally
stable, and concerned for others (p. 70-71).
Functions proposed for affiliative humor include the garnering of social support
(Lefcourt, 2001) and the provision of perspective on lifes problems (Hyers, 1996, p. 47). The
basic themes of this type of humor center on integration, equality, and inclusion (Miczo, et al.,
2009). Due to affiliative humors role in joke telling and interpersonal intimacy (Martin, et al.,
2003), partners with more affiliative styles of humor are more likely to make jokes for the sake
of enjoyment and being affectionate with their partner. Furthermore, Campbell, et al. (2008)
demonstrated that affiliative humor use was associated with greater conflict resolution in dating
couples. Affiliative humor tends to be unifying (Meyer, 2000) by generating positive effect in
HUMOR 16
targets and enhancing relationships. However, affiliative humor may involve gentle teasing or
playfully poking fun at others within ones own group, which could be seen as containing some
mildly aggressive elements (Martin, 2003, p. 53). Despite the aggressive elements found in
affiliative humor, this style compared to aggressive humor has been associated with positive
social desirability and considered more pleasant and considerate (Kuiper & Leite, 2010, p.
118). As Martin (2003) suggested, some individuals could distinguish between the aggressive
elements of this normally positive humor and more hostile and injurious forms of humor, which
may have affected their relationships with loved ones and those they were emotionally closest.
Self-Enhancing Humor
Similar to affiliative humor, self-enhancing humor is also a form of positive humor
(Martin, et al., 2003). However, unlike affiliative humor, self-enhancing humor is more
intrapersonal than interpersonal because self-enhancing humor is used to enhance the self
(Martin, et al., 2003, p. 48), not ones relationship with others.
Paulhus (1998) defined the term self-enhancement as the tendency to overestimate ones
positivity relative to a credible criterion (p. 1197), which applies to this humor style. For
example, an individual who is amused by incongruities of life may use self-enhancing humor to
take an affirming perspective (Martin, et al., 2003). In this way, this humor style can be
understood using relief and/or incongruity theory, as discussed earlier.
This style can be used to express affection and to cope. Hall (2013) suggested that self-
enhancing style of humor would be related to using humor to help cope with stress and let go of
conflict in a relationship. Freuds research found that self-enhancing humor can also be seen as a
healthy defense mechanism to avoid negative emotions and maintain a positive outlook on a
potentially aversive situation (as cited in Martin, 2003). Furthermore, Cann, Zapata, and Davis
HUMOR 17
(2011) found that possessing a self-enhancing sense of humor was also related to less conflict in
relationships.
Aggressive Humor
Despite humor normally being used to gain a positive reaction, Bippus (2003) claimed
there was also a dark side of humor that aimed to hurt, disparage, or control others, depending
on the context in which it was used. Miczo, et al. (2009) defined aggressive humor (which is
also referred to as hostile humor) as a disintegrative form of humor that serves to diminish
morale and to create distance in relational bonds (p. 445). As Martin, et al. (2003) explained:
The Aggressive humor scale includes items relating to sarcasm, teasing, use of humor to
criticize or manipulate others, and compulsive expressions of humor without regard for
the effects on others...This scale was positively related to measures of hostility and
aggression and negatively related to seriousness (p. 71).
Likewise, aggressive humor occurs when targets are humiliated, insulted, embarrassed, or
physically hurt as a result of the communicators humor (Dunbar, et al., 2012). In this way,
aggressive humor enhances the speaker, but at the expense of others (Martin, et al., 2003).
This humor style is often employed to mask hostile statements in humorous messages
(Graham, et al., 1992) and can be a means of control (Dunbar, et al., 2012). Furthermore, there
is also research showing that aggressive humor style is positively associated with social
dominance orientation (Bishop, Hill, & Yang, 2012, p. 79) and a significant positive
relationship between aggressive humor style and verbal aggressiveness (Bishop, et al., 2012, p.
78). When humor is domineering, belligerent, critical, or contemptuous in close relationships, it
can cause relational problems and evoke negative effect (Kuiper, Grimshaw, Leite, & Kirsh,
HUMOR 18
2004, p. 144). Unlike affiliative humor, the aggressive humor style has been associated with
negative social desirability (Kuiper, et al., 2004).
Infante, Riddle, Horvath, and Tumlin (1992) investigated reasons people used aggressive
messages during their interactions and found that sources did not necessarily see their messages
as hurtful. Specifically, verbally aggressive respondents indicated that in some cases they were
just attempting to be funny and elicit laughter. However, low verbal aggressive respondents
indicated the most hurtful kinds of messages were character attacks, competence attacks,
malediction, threats, nonverbal emblems and ridicule, all of which may be viewed as attempts at
humorous communication by the VA [verbally aggressive] source (Infante, et al., 1992, p. 119).
When these types of messages are used as humor, they may be perceived as personal
attacks because the target of the humor is the receiver, rather than the source. Research by
OConnell (1969) distinguished communicators who produced funny humor from those who
produced sarcastic humor (p. 184). Individuals who communicated humor via sarcasm were
considered nonconformists who used an active and verbally-hostile style of presentation;
however, these people were not popular or influential with peers (OConnell, 1969).
According to Infante, Chandler, and Rudd (1989), the verbally aggressive communicator
is unable to argue effectively and, therefore, must resort to verbally abusive messages to attack
anothers self-concept. On the other hand, there may be verbally aggressive individuals who are
skilled communicators and can deliver humorous messages in a clever and ambiguous manner
which allows them to get away with it (Wanzer, et al., 1996, p. 45). Freud (trans., 1960)
recognized humor as a socially appropriate means of expressing aggressive feelings when done
effectively. Hence, the direction of the relationship between humor orientation and verbal
aggressiveness is not clear (Wanzer, et al., 1996).

HUMOR 19
Self-Defeating Humor
Self-defeating humor (also referred to as self-deprecating or self-disparaging) is a form of
negative humor in which the communicator makes disparaging remarks about himself or herself
(Graham, et al., 1992) to enhance [his or her] relationship with others (Martin, et al., 2003, p.
48). Individuals who employ self-defeating humor say funny things at their own expense to
make others laugh (Hall, 2013). By calling attention to personal flaws or showing oneself to be
unable to behave appropriately, the self-deprecator attempts to achieve solidarity and closeness
with others through humor (Sharkey, Park, & Kim, 2004). This action is done in order to be
perceived positively in social interactions and to facilitate social bonds (Sharkey, et al., 2004).
Although its use is intended to be affiliative in nature, this particular humor style has
been related to various negative interpersonal and intrapersonal concerns (Tucker, et al.,
2014). Self-defeating humor can entertain others and help one develop an individual sense of
humor, but it often leads to a negative perception by peers (Zillman & Stocking,
1976). Compared to the person who disparages others [via aggressive humor], the self-
disparager was perceived as less intelligent, less confident, and less witty (Zillman & Stocking,
1976, p. 455). Although self-defeating humor is perceived as less attractive to listeners, it may
help minimize deprecation from others (Graham, et al., 1992, p. 165).
Self-defeating humor has been positively associated with self-reported depression,
anxiety, symptoms of social anxiety, feelings of hostility, and general bad mood (Martin, et al.,
2003; & Tucker et al., 2014). Similarly, Martin, et al. (2003) demonstrated a negative
correlation between this humor style and self-esteem. This study also found that self-defeating
humor is related to interpersonal dysfunction, including a lack of social intimacy and satisfaction
(Martin, et al., 2003). Personality variables, such as sociotropy [excessive investment] and
HUMOR 20
autonomy, which increase susceptibility for depression and suicide, have also been linked to the
use of a self-defeating humor style (Frewen, Brinker, Martin, & Dozois, 2008, p. 181).
Martin, et al. (2003) admitted that these humor distinctions are matters of degree, not
simple dichotomies. It is also simplistic to believe that any use of humor is entirely benevolent
or destructive (Cann, et al., 2009). Depending on context, attempts to use affiliative humor may
increase tension (Bippus, 2000) and aggressive humor, if directed at targets outside of the current
social group, may reduce tension and strengthen the current relationships within the group
(Lynch, 2002). Despite these potential occurrences, the distinction of how humor is used
remains of interest (Cann, et al., 2009).
Humor Style and Gender
Ziv and Gadishs (1989) research on humor among married couples in Israel found a
relationship between marital satisfaction and the appreciation of humor in husbands, but not in
wives. The study indicated that it was important for men that their wives laughed at their jokes,
but this finding did not hold true with the wives, according to Ziv and Gadish (1989) because of
the sex role stereotypes in predominant in Western Culture (p. 766). Later research on this
concept indicated that men and women shared similar views of humor (Hay, 2002) and that there
has been an emphasis on humor in partner selection for both genders (M. Booth-Butterfield, et
al., 2007; & Lockyer & Pickering, 2001).
Hay (2002) researched the way mixed-sex and single sex groups interacted and what
style of humor they used. When conducting the study, Hay (2002) examined the qualitative data
for each groups conversations and divided those humor categories including: anecdotes, irony,
vulgarity, and insults. From the research, Hay (2002) found that some of the results supported
previous research that had suggested that men and women tend to use different types of
HUMOR 21
humour (p. 32); however, Hay (200) also found that neither gender limited itself to one humor,
nor did a certain style of humor define one gender. The biggest difference in humor styles
documented [were] . . . between mixed and single sex groups (Hay, 2002, p. 32). For example,
vulgarity and insults were often avoided in mixed sex groups, because those styles of humor
were usually viewed negatively (Hay, 2002; & Martin, et al., 2003). Using vulgarity and insult
styles also would have broken gender norms for how men and women were expected to act
around the opposite gender (Hay, 2002). As for single sex groups, women used insults more
than men, but only when around other women (Hay, 2002).
Cann, et al. (2009) researched negative and positive humor using both the HO scale and
the HSQ. Cann, et al. (2009) wanted to determine the variability of the HO and HSQ, and also
how the two measures of humor uses may be related to a more global perception of ones sense
of humor (p. 457). When looking into humor in romantic couples, Cann, et al. (2009) suggested
that, when you use humor to make fun of others, you see that as reflecting a humorous
orientation, but when others judge your attempts at humor, they do not as readily consider
aggressive humor to be indicative of a humorous orientation (p. 463). Cann, et al. (2009) made
the suggestion towards negative humor that, although individuals who use this style of humor
may get laughs, and they may believe that it reflects their possession of a humorous orientation,
some of those who are around them most often do not appear to value the humor (p. 464).
Dunbar, et al., (2012) studied aggressive humor to find if there was correlation between it
and different areas of relationships. Men tended to use aggressive humor when they perceived
themselves in power and women tended to use it when they found themselves unequal in power
(Dunbar, et al., 2012). Dunbar, et al. (2012) did not find any connection between relationship
satisfaction and the use of aggressive humor. However, Dunbar, et al. (2012) did find that both
HUMOR 22
sexes leaned towards the use of aggressive humor. This finding relates to other studies that
found similarity in humor style between genders (Hay, 2002). However, Dunbar, et al., (2012)
believed that this lack of correlation had occurred because of a limitation in research: More
satisfied couples were studied because they, were easy to recruit and were generally enthusiastic
participants (p. 22).
When using the HSQ to research whether humor styles had any impact on relationship
satisfaction, Hall (2013) found positive humor (i.e., affiliative and self-enhancing) increased
relationship satisfaction among males. According to the study, men often used self-enhancing
humor more than affiliative humor (Cann, et al., 2011; & Hall, 2013). This research reported
that it was important for men to perceive themselves as humorous within in a relationship, for the
sake of their own relationship satisfaction (Hall, 2013). This supports other research that
suggests that relationship satisfaction and humor is self-perceived (Cann, et al., 2011).
While research on men and womens usage and perception of humor is somewhat
inconclusive, two components of attraction theory may explain why.
Attraction Theory: Similarity and Complementarity Components
Byrne (1971) developed the attraction paradigm which focused on interpersonal
attraction related to attitudinal similarities and the general lack of attraction between those with
greater differences. Complementarity in attraction contrasts with similarity-attraction in that
individuals with different characteristics, such as dominance and submission, are attracted to one
another (Byrne, 1971). Even so, the example of dominance and submission pairing serves to
support the reinforcement people seek in relationships (Byrne, 1971). A large reason people are
attracted to one another is their perception of similarity to one another (Byrne 1997). Of the
HUMOR 23
research on interpersonal attraction, similarity-attraction and complementarity-attraction
relationships are the most relevant to humor and interpersonal attraction.
Similarity-attraction
Similarity-attraction relationships follows the line of thinking provided by Byrne (1971),
in which people are attracted to one another by detecting similarities which provides affirmation
for the shared attitudes and beliefs, relating to the need for reinforcement. Byrne (1971)
established that similarity in attitudes is a factor of attraction in interpersonal relationships. This
research is widely supported among researchers (Amodio & Showers, 2005; Byrne, 1997;
Cappella & Palmer, 1990; Graham, 1995; & Maki, et al., 2012). For example, people generally
consider themselves psychosocially closer to others who are like, positive attractive or perceived
as similar (Brein & Ryback, 1970, p. 24). In addition, researchers Cappella and Palmer (1990)
observed pairs of participants engage in conversation and found that the higher the pairs shared
similarity, the higher the attraction and satisfaction that pair felt toward one another. Likewise,
Amodio and Showers (2005) noted that a stronger liking toward another often leads to higher
conversational satisfaction.
Complementarity-attraction
Contrary to the similarity-attraction relationship is the principle of complementarity
(Maki, et al., 2012). Maki, et al. (2012) explained this relationship in the following statement:
There are two types of complementary needs in an interpersonal relationship: (a) one
partner is high in a personality trait and the other is low in the same trait and (b) one
partner is high in the trait and the other is high in a complementary trait (p. 652).
Complementarity-attraction suggests that individuals with opposite traits are attracted to one
another because their dissimilar traits balance out (Maki, et al., 2012). Yaughn and Nowicki
HUMOR 24
(1999) found that the complementarity theory of attraction was more applicable to close female
friendships than close male friendships.
Attraction Theory and Humor Orientation
The similarity-attraction relationship can be applied to traits in communication, including
humor (Byrne, 1971; & Daly & Diesel, 1992). The HO scale was integral to the research Maki,
et al. (2012) carried out on dyadic cohesion and satisfaction of humor in which a total of 151
dyads (81 romantic and 71 platonic) participated (Maki, et al., 2012, p. 152). The results of this
study demonstrated that dyads with a similar score on the HO scale were more satisfied in
comparison to dyads whose HO scores differed (Maki, et al., 2012). The larger the gap, the
larger the level of dissatisfaction for the dyad (Maki, et al., 2012). The appropriateness
perception of one of the partners in a dyad was higher for those whose partner had a high HO,
but this phenomenon was not found as the only mediating factor between humor and satisfaction
(Maki, et al., 2012). A significant number of dyads with one person ranking higher on the HO
scale and the other person ranking lower had high satisfaction levels (Maki, et al., 2012), which
indicates the possibility of complementarity in attraction theory.
Similarity-Attraction and Dyadic Cohesion
Dyadic cohesion is the attraction between two or more people in an interpersonal
relationship and relates to the amount of time a group of individuals spends together (Maki, et al.
2012). Humor can increase cohesion through adaptation, accommodation, and integration and
perceived commonality leads to greater time spent to more time spent together, or relational
cohesion (Maki, et al., 2012). Since individuals with high HOs enact humor more frequently, it
could be argued that dyads that have higher levels of HO have greater cohesion (Maki, et al.,
HUMOR 25
2012, p. 654). Partners in dyads who reported a high similarity in taste for jokes had also
reported a greater liking for their partners (Murdstein & Brust, 1985).
Attraction Theory and Uncertainty Reduction
In addition to humor reducing social distance, humor is often used to share information
about oneself to reduce uncertainty (Graham, 1995). As Graham (1995) explained:
All relationships are not in our best interest, and humor allows us to reduce uncertainty
about others so that we make better decisions concerning whom we choose to get close
to. For instance, if an acquaintance shows appreciation for sexist and racist jokes,
uncertainty about this individual is greatly reduced (p. 164).
Even if individuals learn something they do not like about their partner, romantic or platonic,
their negative judgement is considered a reduction in uncertainty (Graham, 1995). This
reduction in uncertainty has had a positive relational outcome and is reported with more
frequency by individuals who exhibit higher humor orientations (Graham, 1995). The example
of showing an appreciation for another persons jokes based upon ones own taste in humor
demonstrates the importance of similarity in humor style. Shared reactions to humorous
provocations and shared joke interpretations allow for reinforcement of attitudes (Graham,
1995). Thus, humor provides us with a vehicle for searching out similarities in others thereby
providing us with an additional means of making more satisfying relational choices (Graham,
1995, p. 166).
Maki, et al. (2012) argued that humor orientation should follow Byrnes (1971)
similarity-attraction relationship with like HO scores experiencing dyadic cohesion with like HO
score partners. Because complementarity suggests that individuals with complementary traits
HUMOR 26
find one another attractive, this theory would also suggest that individuals with opposite humor
styles would be attracted to one another because they balance each other out.
The narrative began with a basic definition of humor, its historically recorded uses in
communication and particular styles of negative and positive humor. Sub-topics of negative and
positive humor guided the research to create a comprehensive understanding of humor use and
effects on interpersonal relationships. This secondary research investigation confirmed that
humor can be used as a tool to relieve stress (Abel, 1998; Hall, 2013; Graham 1995, Garde,
2008, Kaplan & Boyd, 1965; Knight, 2013; & Ziv, 2010) and foster interpersonal relationships
when enacted in communication. The perceptions of humor in were more positive for positive
humor, affiliative and self-enhancing, while perceptions were negative for negative humor,
aggressive and self-defeating (Cann, Davis, & Zapata, 2009). The similarity-attraction and
complementarity-attraction components of attraction theory may serve as an explanation as to
why individuals favor positive and/or negative humor styles based on their usage of these humor
styles.
HUMOR 27
Method
HUMOR 28
Researchers began the process by identifying aspects of communication that would yield
useful information through research and testing. After much discussion, researchers decided to
further investigate humor as an aspect of interpersonal communication. The devised research
question read: To which type of humor are students most attracted? Researchers responded to
the research question in the literature review, with definitions and scholarly research on humor
enactment and perceptions. The information gathered then led the researchers to the following
hypothesis: Students are attracted to positive humor.
Because research suggested that humor was widely used in interpersonal communication,
the researchers decided to investigate which of humor styles were more widely used and to what
extent each humor style was perceived as attractive by students. Although research identified
four humor styles, the researchers limited their questionnaire to affiliative (other-directed,
positive humor) and aggressive humor (other-directed, negative humor) related questions to
ensure that the questionnaire was not too long so that participants were more likely to complete
the entire questionnaire to the best of their ability.
The questionnaire consisted of 21 questions, five of which measured affiliative humor
use, five of which measured aggressive humor use, four of which measured aggressive humor
perceptions, four of which measured aggressive humor perceptions, one which tested whether or
not respondents found jokes amusing, and there were two demographic questions (Appendix A).
All of these humor-related questions were based on the HSQ developed by Martin, et al., (2003)
to ensure that the questions reflected and measured affiliative and aggressive humor style use and
attractiveness.
An example that measured affiliative humor use is question 4: I joke around a lot with
my closest friends (Appendix A). An example that measured aggressive humor use is question
HUMOR 29
10: When saying funny things, I am usually not very concerned about how other people are
taking it (Appendix A). Question 14 is an example that measured perceived attractiveness to
aggressive: I find it attractive when someone teases someone who makes a mistake (Appendix
A). An example that measured whether a respondent was attracted to affiliative humor is
question 20: I find it attractive when someone is effortlessly humorous (Appendix A).
The researchers sampled a small, private Catholic college located in the Midwest using a
stratified random sampling method. Test sample selection was done through choosing a four-
digit number off of a random number table (Appendix C). The first two digits of that number
were used to choose the class to which the questionnaire were distributed. Two classes for each
cohort were selected from the complete fall 2016 schedule of the small, private Catholic college
located in the Midwest (Appendix B). The researchers coded the freshman classes with a
number ranging from 1-28. A two-digit number from the random number table determined class
selection. The same process was repeated for the sophomore, junior and senior cohorts.
Before distributing the questionnaire, the researchers emailed the professors of the eight
randomly selected courses, requesting permission (Appendix D). After receiving permission, the
researchers distributed the questionnaires on predetermined dates and assured student anonymity
and obtained consent once students signed the cover letter (Appendix E) that was stapled to the
top of each questionnaire. Once questionnaires were distributed, the students were instructed to
stay silent until each questionnaire was collected. Once data was collected, the researchers
stored the questionnaires in a securely locked room and separated the consent forms from the
completed questionnaires to ensure anonymity.
The researchers assigned a code word to each variable tested and to each questions
corresponding answers in the questionnaire (Appendix F). The researchers then entered the raw
HUMOR 30
data (Appendix G) into a program called Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS).
Question 1 was labeled as nominal data, question 2 as ordinal data, and all of the Likert Scale
questions were labeled as interval/scale data. Using SPSS, the researchers ran frequencies
understand the responses to each question.
The researchers analyzed the frequencies of each question to determine the perceived
usage and attractiveness of affiliative and aggressive humor. The means were also used to test
the hypothesis and answer the research question. To measure the statistical significance of the
numerical differences between men and womens responses to questions 3-21, the researchers
conducted an independent samples t-test using a standard significance level of 95% (p .05).
The researchers also ran a Pearson Product Moment Correlation to measure the
relationship between a respondents humor style use (i.e., affiliative or aggressive) and the level
of attraction reported for a peer whose humor is affiliative or aggressive. Researchers tested
similarity-attraction theory to see whether a student who reported using primarily affiliative
humor was more attracted to affiliative humor and whether a student who reported using
primarily aggressive humor was more attracted to aggressive humor. The researchers also tested
complementarity-attraction theory by measuring to see if a students own humor style (positive
or negative) was inversely related to the humor style to which they reported greater attraction.
For example, if a highly aggressive humor enactor reported the greater attraction for affiliative
humor, the complementarity-attraction theory would be supported.

HUMOR 31
Analysis of the Results

HUMOR 32
Figure 1: What is your year in school?
The cohorts randomly selected for the research study were split into: 39% seniors, 25%
juniors, 21% sophomores, and 15% freshmen.

HUMOR 33
Figure 2: What is your gender?
The respondents within the research sample were made up of 58% female and 42% male.
Although it is not shown, one respondent chose to not identify their gender.
HUMOR 34
Figure 3: I enjoy making people laugh.
The majority of the research sample agreed to some degree with the statement: I enjoy
making people laugh. 49% strongly agreed, while 47% only agreed. 3% were neutral to this
statement. Only 1% of respondents strongly disagreed with enjoying making people laugh. This
statement is associated with affiliative humor. This supports shows that the majority of students
use this aspect of affiliative humor.

HUMOR 35
Figure 4: I joke around a lot with my closest friends.
The majority of the research sample agreed that they joke around a lot with their closest
friends. 68% strongly agreed with the statement, while 29% simply agreed. Only 1% disagreed,
along with another 1% who strongly disagreed. Joking around with friends is associated with
affiliative humor, which indicates that the majority of respondents use this aspect of affiliative
humor.
HUMOR 36
Figure 5: I usually don't joke around much with other people.
The majority of the research sample showed disagreement with the statement: I dont
usually joke around much with other people. 48% disagreed, while 13% strongly disagreed.
27% were neutral to the statement. 11% agreed, with only 1% strongly disagreed. Joking
around with others is associated with affiliative humor, but this statement was reverse keyed on
the questionnaire, meaning that the more one disagreed with this statement, the more that
individual used this aspect of affiliative humor. This shows that the majority of these students
use this aspect of affiliative humor.

HUMOR 37
Figure 6: I don't have to work very hard at making other people laugh - I
seem to be a naturally humorous person.
The majority of the research sample agreed with the statement: I dont have to work
very hard at making other people laugh I seem to be a naturally humorous person. 47%
agreed, while 11% strongly agreed. 33% were neutral, which was more than the 10% who
disagreed with the statement. Being naturally humorous is related to affiliative humor,
continuing the trend of high affiliative humor usage among the sampled students.
HUMOR 38
Figure 7: I rarely make other people laugh by telling funny stories about
myself.
The majority of the research sample disagreed with the statement: I rarely make other
people laugh by telling funny stories about myself. 58% disagreed and 11% strongly disagreed.
18% were neutral to this statement. 11% agreed and only 3% strongly agreed. Note that this
statement was reverse-keyed. Being able to laugh at ones self is associated with affiliative
humor, which shows that the majority of respondents use this aspect of affiliative humor.
HUMOR 39
Figure 8: People are never offended by my sense of humor.
27% total reported that they either agreed or strongly agreed that people are not offended
by their sense of humor while a large 33% reported neutral and 40% disagreed or strongly
disagreed. This statement was associated with aggressive humor usage. The large portion of
those who reported neutral may have been reluctant to report that they do offend people with
their sense of humor or were simply unsure. This data indicates that about a quarter of the
respondents use this aspect of aggressive humor.

HUMOR 40
Figure 9: I joke in inappropriate situations.
44% reported that they disagree or strongly disagree with the statement, meaning they do
not joke in inappropriate situations. 28% total agreed that they do joke in inappropriate
situations, which is a behavior associated with aggressive humor. Again, a large portion, 29%,
reported neutral. This statement was associated with aggressive humor usage. The data suggests
that about a quarter of the students use this aspect of aggressive humor.
HUMOR 41
Figure 10: When saying funny things, I am usually not very concerned about
how other people are taking it.
58% either strongly disagreed or disagreed with the statement, indicating that they are
usually concerned with how other people perceive their sense of humor. The majority did not
report in agreement to this aggressive humor statement. 22% agreed with this aggressive humor
statement. This statement was associated with aggressive humor usage. The data suggests that
about a quarter of students use this aspect of aggressive humor.

HUMOR 42
Figure 11: I never participate in laughing at others.
62% agreed or strongly agreed with the statement: I never participate in laughing at
others, which is a behavior for affiliative humor use. 24% remained neutral while only 14%
reported to disagree with the statement which means that 14% reported a sign of aggressive
humor use.
HUMOR 43
Figure 12: If I don't like someone, I often use humor to put them down.
76% of respondents either strongly disagreed or disagreed with this statement, indicating
that they do not use aggressive humor in an instance in which they dislike someone. 12%
responded neutral and 12% agreed or strongly agreed, which is a sign of aggressive humor use.
HUMOR 44
Figure 13: I find jokes amusing.
This questionnaire item was used as a test question to determine if respondents found
jokes amusing, being that the terms joking around and joke were used in the questionnaire.
91% either agreed or strongly agreed with the statement while 7% responded neutral and 2%
disagreed or strongly disagreed. This data indicates that the majority of students found jokes
amusing.
HUMOR 45
Figure 14: I find it attractive when someone teases someone who makes a
mistake.
61% of students disagreed or strongly disagreed to being attracted to negative put-down
humor, indicating that they might perhaps be attracted to positive humor. 26% remained neutral,
which might indicate their reluctance to answer negatively or positively, or a misunderstanding
of the statement. 13% agreed that they do find it attractive when someone teases someone else
who makes a mistake. This data suggests that the majority of students do not find this aspect of
aggressive humor attractive, and that less than a quarter of students found this aspect of
aggressive humor attractive.

HUMOR 46
Figure 15: I find it attractive when people use humor as a way of criticizing
others.
The majority of the research sample find that they do not find it attractive when people
use humor to as a way to criticize others. 66% found that they disagree with this statement. 39%
percent only disagree, while 27% strongly disagree with the idea. 18% were neutral on this
statement. 16% agreed or strongly agreed that it is attractive to use humor as a way to criticize
others. This statement is associated with aggressive humor. Therefore, according to the data, a
majority of the sample disagreed with this aspect of aggressive humor being attractive. Again,
less than a quarter of students found this aspect of aggressive humor attractive.
HUMOR 47
Figure 16: I find it attractive when people do not worry about offending
others with their humor.
The majority of the research sample disagreed with the statement: I find it attractive
when people do not worry about offending others with their humor. 42% disagreed with it
while 23% strongly disagreed. The next largest group is those that were neutral, which was
20%. Less than a quarter of students agreed with the statement, in which 12% agreed and 3%
strongly agreed. This statement is associated with aggressive humor. This data indicates that the
majority of students did not find this aspect of aggressive humor attractive. However, about a
quarter of the students did find this aspect of aggressive humor attractive.
HUMOR 48
Figure 17: I find it attractive when someone does not participate in his or her
group's laughter.
For the above statement, the majority of students, 44.7%, were neutral on the
attractiveness of someone not participating in their groups laughter. The next largest response
was disagree with 40.7% and 6.7% strongly disagreed. 5.3% agreed with the statement and 2.7%
strongly agreed. This statement is related to aggressive humor and was reversed keyed. The
majority of the research sample were neutral on the attractiveness of laughter participation and
the next largest group disagreed. This data suggests than students a large portion of students find
this aspect of aggressive humor attractive.

HUMOR 49
Figure 18: I find it attractive when people tell funny stories about themselves.
The majority of the research sample agreed with the statement that they find it attractive
when someone tells humorous stories about themselves. 57% agreed with the statement and
28% strongly agreed. 11% were neutral on this statement. The remainder is the small number of
3% who disagreed and the 1% that strongly disagreed. Making jokes about oneself is an aspect
of affiliative humor. The majority of the research sample found this aspect of affiliative humor
attractive.
HUMOR 50
Figure 19: I find it attractive when people joke around with other people.
54% of the research sample agreed with the statement that they find people who joke
with other people attractive. 9% strongly agreed with the statement. 37% were neutral. There
was no respondents who disagreed in any way with the statement. The statement is associated
with affiliative humor. This data indicated that students find this aspect of affiliative humor
attractive.
HUMOR 51
Figure 20: I find it attractive when someone is effortlessly humorous.
The majority of the research sample agreed with the statement it is attractive when
someone is effortlessly humorous. 49% strongly agreed with statement and 43% agreed. 7%
were neutral. 1% disagreed with the statement. The statement is associated with affiliative
humor. A majority of the research sample agreed that they found that this aspect of affiliative
humor attractive.
HUMOR 52
Figure 21: I find it attractive when someone says witty things with friends.
40% agreed with the statement that they find it attractive when someone says witty
things. 47% agreed with the statement. These two answers make up the majority. 11% were
neutral on the statement. 1% disagreed and 1% strongly disagreed. This means that the majority
of the research sample agreed that they agreed the statement in some way. Being witty with
friends is an aspect associated with affiliative humor. The majority of the research sample
agreed that they found this aspect attractive, continuing the trend of having the majority of
students finding that affiliative humor attractive.

HUMOR 53
HUMOR 54
HUMOR 55
HUMOR 56
HUMOR 57
Figure 22: 11 out of the possible 20 correlations between FU variables and FA variables
were statistically significant. Although these correlations are not particularly strong, this finding
suggests a slight similarity-attraction relationship in affiliative humor style, in which students
who used aspects affiliative humor were also somewhat likely to find aspects of affiliative humor
attractive. The correlations between FU and FU variables were also significant, which suggests
that students who used one aspect of affiliative humor were likely to use another aspect of
affiliative humor. This relationship between FU and FU variables, was also found in FA and FA
variables, which suggests that students who found one aspect of affiliative humor attractive, they
were also likely to find another aspect attractive.
Figure 23: 13 out of the possible 20 correlations between GU variables and GA variables
were statistically significant. This finding suggests a slight to moderate similarity-attraction
relationship in aggressive humor, in which students who used aspects of aggressive humor were
somewhat likely to find aspects of aggressive humor attractive. The correlations between GU
and GU variables were significant, which suggests that students who used one aspect of
aggressive humor were likely to use another aspect of aggressive humor. This relationship
between GU and GU variables, was also found in GA and GA variables, which suggests that
students who perceive one aspect of aggressive humor attractive to a particular extent, were also
likely to perceive another aspect of aggressive humor attractive to about the same extent.
Figure 24: Two out of the possible 20 correlations between FU and GA variables were
statistically significant. This finding suggests that there is a chance relationship between some
FU and GA variables. This finding shows little support for complementarity-attraction
relationship between perceived use of affiliative humor and perceived attractiveness of
aggressive humor.
HUMOR 58
Figure 25: There were no statistically significant correlations between GU variables and
FA variables. This suggests that there is no relationship between ones perceived use of
aggressive humor and perceived attractiveness to affiliative humor. This finding does not
support a complementarity-attraction relationship between perceived aggressive humor use and
perceived affiliative humor attractiveness.

HUMOR 59
Figure 26: T-Test by gender and question 3: I enjoy making people laugh.
Group Statistics
Gender N Mean Std. Deviation Std. Error Mean
FUenjoy Male 63 4.5556 .53212 .06704
Female 86 4.3488 .68199 .07354
Independent Samples Test

Levene's Test for Equality of
Variances t-test for Equality of Means
F Sig. t df
FUenjoy Equal variances assumed 1.059 .305 2.000 147

Equal variances not assumed 2.077 146.382

t-test for Equality of Means
Std. Error
Sig. (2-tailed) Mean Difference Difference
FUenjoy Equal variances assumed .047 .20672 .10335
Equal variances not assumed .040 .20672 .09951

95% Confidence Interval of the

Difference
Lower Upper
FUenjoy Equal variances assumed .00248 .41096
Equal variances not assumed .01005 .40339
Males (M = 4.5556) were more likely than females (M = 4.3488) to strongly agree that
they enjoy making people laugh. This numerical difference was statistically significant (p =
.047). While men and women agreed that they enjoy making people laugh, this finding suggests
that men may use this aspect of affiliative humor to a greater extent than women.
HUMOR 60
Figure 27: T-Test by gender and question 4: I joke around a lot with my closest friends.
Group Statistics
FUfriends Male 63 4.7619 .42934 .05409
Female 86 4.5116 .82240 .08868

F Sig. t df
FUfriends Equal variances assumed 11.862 .001 2.204 147

Std. Error
FUfriends Equal variances assumed .029 .25028 .11355


Difference
Lower Upper
FUfriends Equal variances assumed .02588 .47467
they joke around a lot with their closest friends. This numerical difference was statistically
significant (p = .017). While men and women agreed that they joke around a lot with closest
friends, this finding suggests that men may use this aspect of affiliative humor to a greater extent
than women.
HUMOR 61
Figure 27: T-Test by gender and question 5: I usually don't joke around much with other
people.
Group Statistics
FUothers Male 63 2.1905 .83968 .10579
Female 86 2.5581 .90235 .09730

F Sig. t df
FUothers Equal variances assumed 1.845 .176 -2.530 147

Equal variances not assumed -2.558 138.811

Std. Error
FUothers Equal variances assumed .012 -.36766 .14535
Equal variances not assumed .012 -.36766 .14373


Difference
Lower Upper
FUothers Equal variances assumed -.65490 -.08042
Equal variances not assumed -.65185 -.08347
Males (M = 2.1905) were more likely than females (M = 2.5581) to disagree that they
usually dont joke around much with other people. This numerical difference was statistically
significant (p = .012). While men and women disagreed with the statement, this finding suggests
that men may use this aspect of affiliative humor to a greater extent than women.
HUMOR 62
Figure 28: T-Test by gender and question 6: I don't have to work very hard at making
other people laughI seem to be a naturally humorous person.
Group Statistics
FUeffort Male 63 3.7460 .82243 .10362
Female 86 3.4767 .77803 .08390

F Sig. t df
FUeffort Equal variances assumed .070 .791 2.037 147

Std. Error
FUeffort Equal variances assumed .043 .26929 .13218


Difference
Lower Upper
FUeffort Equal variances assumed .00807 .53051

they are naturally humorous. This numerical difference was statistically significant (p = .043).
While men and women agreed with this statement, this finding suggests that men use affiliative
humor to a greater extent than women.

HUMOR 63
Figure 29: T-Test by gender and question 7: I rarely make other people laugh by telling
funny stories about myself.
Group Statistics
FUstories Male 63 2.3810 .99074 .12482
Female 86 2.3488 .85085 .09175

F Sig. t df
FUstories Equal variances assumed 2.172 .143 .212 147
Equal variances not assumed .207 121.272

Std. Error
FUstories Equal variances assumed .832 .03212 .15132


Difference
Lower Upper
FUstories Equal variances assumed -.26693 .33116

Equal variances not assumed -.27457 .33880
Females (M = 2.3488) were slightly more likely than males (M = 2.3810) to disagree that
they rarely make other people laugh by telling funny stories about themselves. However, this
numerical difference was not statistically significant (p = .832). This finding suggests that men
and women use this aspect of affiliative humor to a low extent.

HUMOR 64
Figure 30: T-Test by gender and question 8: People are never offended by my sense of
humor.
Group Statistics
GUoffended Male 63 2.6984 1.08709 .13696
Female 86 2.9419 .89908 .09695

F Sig. t df
GUoffended Equal variances assumed 3.897 .050 -1.494 147


Std. Error
GUoffended Equal variances assumed .137 -.24345 .16298


Difference
Lower Upper
GUoffended Equal variances assumed -.56553 .07863
Males (M = 2.6984) were slightly more likely than females (M = 2.9419) to disagree that
people are never offended by their sense of humor. However, this numerical difference was not
statistically significant (p = .149). This finding suggests that men are just as likely as women to
believe that people are offended by their sense of humor, which means that men and women use
this aspect of aggressive humor to a low extent.

HUMOR 65
Figure 31: T-Test by gender and question 9: I joke in inappropriate situations.
Group Statistics
GUinappropriate Male 63 3.0000 1.09250 .13764
Female 86 2.6744 .91320 .09847

F Sig. t df
GUinappropriate Equal variances assumed .639 .426 1.978 147


Std. Error
GUinappropriate Equal variances assumed .050 .32558 .16464


Difference
Lower Upper
GUinappropriate Equal variances assumed .00022 .65094

Females (M = 2.6744) were more likely than males (M = 3.0000) to disagree that they
joke in inappropriate situations. This numerical difference was statistically significant (p = .050;
p .050). This finding suggests that men are more likely than women to joke in inappropriate
situations, and that men use this aspect of aggressive humor to a greater extent than women.
HUMOR 66
Figure 32: T-Test by gender and question 10: When saying funny things, I am usually not
very concerned about how other people are taking it.
Group Statistics
GUconcern Male 63 2.8095 1.11958 .14105
Female 86 2.4070 .89938 .09698

F Sig. t df
GUconcern Equal variances assumed 6.398 .012 2.432 147

Std. Error
GUconcern Equal variances assumed .016 .40255 .16553


Difference
Lower Upper
GUconcern Equal variances assumed .07541 .72968

Females (M = 2.4070) were more likely than males (M = 2.8095) to disagree with this
statement. This numerical difference was statistically significant (p = .020). This finding
suggests that women are more likely than men to be concerned about how other people are
taking their humor, which suggests men are more likely than women to use this aspect of
aggressive humor.
HUMOR 67
Figure 33: T-Test by gender and question 11: I never participate in laughing at others.
Group Statistics
GUparticipate Male 63 2.4921 .94822 .11947
Female 86 2.4651 .91649 .09883

F Sig. t df
GUparticipate Equal variances assumed .572 .451 .175 147

Std. Error
GUparticipate Equal variances assumed .862 .02695 .15423


Difference
Lower Upper
GUparticipate Equal variances assumed -.27784 .33173

Females (M = 2.4651) were slightly more than males (M = 2.4921) to disagree with this
statement. This numerical difference was not statistically significant (p = .862). This finding
suggests men and women participate in laughing at others to the same extent, which means that
men and women use this aspect of aggressive humor to a low extent.
HUMOR 68
Figure 34: T-Test by gender and question 11: If I don't like someone, I often use humor to
put them down.
Group Statistics
GUputdown Male 63 2.2222 1.09904 .13847
Female 86 2.1163 .81772 .08818

F Sig. t df
GUputdown Equal variances assumed 9.102 .003 .675 147

Std. Error
GUputdown Equal variances assumed .501 .10594 .15698


Difference
Lower Upper
GUputdown Equal variances assumed -.20429 .41618

Females (M = 2.1163) were slightly more than males (M = 2.2222) to disagree with this
statement. This numerical difference was not statistically significant (p = .520). This finding
suggests that to the same extent men and women do not use humor to put down others they dont
like, which suggests that men and women use this aspect of aggressive humor to a low extent.
HUMOR 69
Figure 35: T-Test by gender and question 13: I find jokes amusing.
Group Statistics
TESTjoke Male 63 4.5079 .56434 .07110
Female 86 4.2326 .77724 .08381

F Sig. t df
TESTjoke Equal variances assumed 1.414 .236 2.388 147


Std. Error
TESTjoke Equal variances assumed .018 .27538 .11533


Difference
Lower Upper
TESTjoke Equal variances assumed .04746 .50329
they find jokes amusing. This numerical difference was statistically significant (p = .018). This
finding suggests that men find jokes amusing to a greater extent than women.
HUMOR 70
Figure 36: T-Test by gender and question 14: I find it attractive when someone teases
someone who makes a mistake.
Group Statistics
GAtease Male 63 2.6190 1.03843 .13083
Female 86 2.0581 .97443 .10508

F Sig. t df
GAtease Equal variances assumed 1.415 .236 3.376 147

Std. Error
GAtease Equal variances assumed .001 .56091 .16615


Difference
Lower Upper
GAtease Equal variances assumed .23255 .88927

Females (M = 2.0581) were more likely than males (M = 2.6190) disagree with this
statement. This numerical difference was statistically significant (p = .001). While men and
women did not find it attractive when someone uses teases someone who makes a mistake, men
were more likely than women to remain neutral This finding suggests that women are less likely
than men to find this aspect of aggressive humor attractive.

HUMOR 71
Figure 37: T-Test by gender and question 15: I find it attractive when people use humor as
a way of criticizing others.
Group Statistics
GAcriticize Male 63 2.5714 1.05821 .13332
Female 86 1.9884 1.02319 .11033

F Sig. t df
GAcriticize Equal variances assumed 2.873 .092 3.387 147

Std. Error
GAcriticize Equal variances assumed .001 .58306 .17215


Difference
Lower Upper
GAcriticize Equal variances assumed .24284 .92327
Females (M = 1.9884) were more likely than males (M = 2.5714) to disagree with this
statement. This numerical difference was statistically significant (p = .001). This finding
suggests that while men and women do not find this aspect of aggressive humor attractive,
women are less likely than men to find this aspect of aggressive humor attractive.
HUMOR 72
Figure 38: T-Test by gender and question 16: I find it attractive when people do not worry
about offending others with their humor.
Group Statistics
GAoffend Male 63 2.7619 1.04286 .13139
Female 86 2.0000 .94558 .10196

F Sig. t df
GAoffend Equal variances assumed 4.952 .028 4.651 147

Std. Error
GAoffend Equal variances assumed .000 .76190 .16381


Difference
Lower Upper
GAoffend Equal variances assumed .43818 1.08563

Females (M = 2.0000) were more likely than males (M = 2.7619) to disagree that they
find it attractive when people do not worry about offending others with their humor. This
numerical difference was statistically significant (p = .000), which suggests that while women do
not find this aspect of aggressive humor attractive, men remain more neutral.
HUMOR 73
Figure 39: T-Test by gender and question 17: I find it attractive when someone does not
participate in his or her group's laughter.
Group Statistics
GAparticipate Male 63 2.6508 .90087 .11350
Female 86 2.5000 .73164 .07889

F Sig. t df
GAparticipate Equal variances assumed 1.421 .235 1.126 147

Std. Error
GAparticipate Equal variances assumed .262 .15079 .13389


Difference
Lower Upper
GAparticipate Equal variances assumed -.11380 .41538

Females (M = 2.5000) were slightly more likely than males (M = 2.6508) to disagree with
this statement. However, this numerical difference was not statistically significant (p = .262).
This finding suggests that men and women generally do not find this aspect of aggressive humor
attractive.
HUMOR 74
Figure 40: T-Test by gender and question 18: I find it attractive when people tell funny
stories about themselves.
Group Statistics
FAstories Male 63 4.0476 .70548 .08888
Female 86 4.0930 .84891 .09154

F Sig. t df
FAstories Equal variances assumed .434 .511 -.346 147
Equal variances not assumed -.356 144.609

Std. Error
FAstories Equal variances assumed .730 -.04540 .13127


Difference
Lower Upper
FAstories Equal variances assumed -.30483 .21402

Females (M = 4.0930) were slightly more likely than males (M = 4.0476) agree with this
statement. However, this numerical difference was not statistically significant (p = .730). This
finding suggests that men and women are just as likely to find this aspect of affiliative humor
attractive.
HUMOR 75
Figure 41: T-Test by gender and question 19: I find it attractive when people joke around
with other people.
Group Statistics
FAothers Male 63 4.2381 .64042 .08069
Female 86 4.3140 .59925 .06462

F Sig. t df
FAothers Equal variances assumed .012 .913 -.741 147
Equal variances not assumed -.734 128.484

Std. Error
FAothers Equal variances assumed .460 -.07586 .10231


Difference
Lower Upper
FAothers Equal variances assumed -.27805 .12633

Females (M = 4.3140) were slightly more likely than males (M = 4.2381) to agree with
this statement. However, this numerical difference was not statistically significant (p = .464).
This finding suggests that men and women are just as likely to find this aspect of affiliative
humor attractive.
HUMOR 76
Figure 42: T-Test by gender and question 20: I find it attractive when someone is
effortlessly humorous.
Group Statistics
FAeffort Male 63 4.2540 .71771 .09042
Female 86 4.5000 .58912 .06353

F Sig. t df
FAeffort Equal variances assumed .813 .369 -2.295 147

Std. Error
FAeffort Equal variances assumed .023 -.24603 .10721


Difference
Lower Upper
FAeffort Equal variances assumed -.45790 -.03416

Equal variances not assumed -.46488 -.02719
Females (M = 4.5000) were more likely than males (M = 4.2540) to strongly agree with
this statement. This numerical difference was statistically significant (p = .023). This finding
suggests that women find this aspect of affiliative humor attractive to a greater extent than men.
HUMOR 77
Figure 43: T-Test by gender and question 21: I find it attractive when someone says witty
things with friends.
Group Statistics
FAfriends Male 62 4.1290 .79926 .10151
Female 86 4.3023 .72062 .07771

F Sig. t df
FAfriends Equal variances assumed .018 .892 -1.379 146

Std. Error
FAfriends Equal variances assumed .170 -.17329 .12570


Difference
Lower Upper
FAfriends Equal variances assumed -.42172 .07513

Females (M = 4.3023) were more likely than males (M = 4.1290) agree that they find it
attractive when someone says witty things with friends. However, this numerical difference was
not statistically significant (p = .170). This finding suggests that women are just as likely as men
to find this aspect of affiliative humor attractive.

HUMOR 78
The research question read: To which type of humor are students attracted? The
hypothesis stated: Students are attracted to positive humor. The data in Figures 1-13 suggests
that the majority of students use affiliative humor, while about one-fourth of students use
aggressive humor. Figures 14-21 indicated that the majority of students find affiliative humor
attractive, and around one-fourth of students find aggressive humor attractive. Affiliative humor
is a form of positive, and affiliative humor was generally found attractive, so the hypothesis is
supported.
Based on the research findings, both men and women used affiliative humor. However,
on average men were more likely than women to perceive themselves as using affiliative humor.
Four out of the five statements (see Figures 26-29) associated with affiliative humor use were
statistically different between men and women, in which men used affiliative humor to a greater
extent than women.
When it came to aggressive humor, both men and women used this style, but to a much
lower extent than affiliative humor. In addition, only two out of the five statements (see Figures
30-35) associated with aggressive humor use were statistically different between men and
women. Men were slightly more likely than women to use aggressive humor, but to a lesser
extent compared to that of affiliative humor. Given that men were statistically more likely than
women to use both affiliative and aggressive humor styles, and the data was self-reported, this
finding supports previous research from Hall (2013) in which it is important for men to perceive
themselves as humorous.
Aggressive humor was found less attractive than affiliative humor by men and women.
This supports previous research by Kuiper (2004) that found a correlation between aggressive
humor and negative social desirability. However, men remained statistically more neutral than
HUMOR 79
women on three of the four aggressive humor attractiveness statements (see Figures 36-39). As
for affiliative humor there was only one of the four affiliative humor attractiveness statements
(see Figures 40-43) that was statistically different between men and women, in which women
agreed to a greater extent than men that they found it attractive when someone is effortlessly
humorous. This result means that the null hypothesis was proven wrong because students found
that affiliative humor was more attractive than aggressive humor.
The correlations supported a similarity-attraction relationship for humor. FU and FA
variables had stronger and more significant correlations than FU and GA variables. GU and GA
variables also had stronger and more significant correlations than GU and FA variables.
However, correlations between same humor usage (i.e. correlations between FU and FU
variables, and GU and GU variables; see Figures 22-23) as well as same humor attractiveness.
(i.e. correlations between FA and FA variables, and GA and GA variables; see Figures 22-23)
were often stronger and more significant than correlations between different variables (i.e.
correlations between FU and FA variables, and GU and GA variables; see Figures 24-25). This
finding suggests that if students found one aspect of a humor style attractive, they were likely to
find another aspect of the same humor style attractive. This finding was found in both affiliative
and aggressive humor, but more significant for affiliative humor attractiveness. This relationship
was also found in humor use of for each humor style. For example, students who more strongly
used one aspect of affiliative humor, were more likely to use another aspect of affiliative humor.
HUMOR 80
Summary
HUMOR 81
After conducting our research on 150 college students and analyzing the data collected
from the questionnaire, it can be concluded that the hypothesis: Students are attracted to
positive humor was supported. In regard to the research question: To which type of humor are
students attracted? students were attracted to positive humor to a higher degree than negative
humor. The support of this hypothesis can be explained using the support of the similarity-
attraction component of attraction theory, in which students were more attracted to the humor
styles that they used. This means sense because the majority of students used aspects of
affiliative humor, which explains why the majority of students found affiliative humor attractive,
in comparison to aggressive humor.

HUMOR 82
Limitations of the Study

HUMOR 83
The findings of this study were limited by the language used in the questionnaire.
Although the items on the questionnaire that were used in this study were based on the HSQ,
many of these questions related to affiliative humor were broad, which could have allowed them
to be interpreted as other humor styles, and not exclusively to affiliative humor. For example,
question 18: I find it attractive when people tell funny stories about themselves, has left
ambiguity for the teller of the funny story to enact self-deprecating humor, even though this
question was intended to measure affiliative humor. Self-deprecating, also known as self-
defeating humor, falls under the category of negative humor. Thus, it is unclear if question 18
actually measured affiliative (positive) or self-defeating (negative) humor. Similarly, question
21 stated: I find it attractive when someone says witty things with friends. Again, the language
of witty things could have been interpreted by respondents as aggressive comments, even
though this question was meant to measure affiliative humor.
While the questions designed to measure affiliative humor were broad, the questions
related to aggressive humor were narrowed. Because of the vague affiliative questions and
narrowed aggressive questions, the results might not have reflected an accurate representation of
perceived usage and attractiveness of affiliative and aggressive humor styles. This is due to the
style of HSQ, affiliative humor being the broadest sense of humor and aggressive being focused
on deconstructive some relationships in order to build up others.
In addition, the wording of the perceived attractiveness questions might have limited the
way that respondents answered the questions. The questions that measured perceived
attractiveness and both humor styles used the phrase, I find it attractive when which may
have led respondents to assume that those questions pertained to strictly romantic relationships.
HUMOR 84
However, that phrase was intended to refer to other interpersonal relationships, such as friends
and acquaintances.
There was also the limitation of the unequal proportion of cohorts sampled. 14.7% of the
sample were freshman, 21.3% were sophomores, 24.7% were juniors, 39.3% were of the sample
were seniors. There was large amount of seniors in the sample and not enough freshman to make
the sample a better representation of the small private college that the sample size came from.
Ideally the researchers needed the percentage of each group to be around 20-25%.
This study only measured the perceived usage and attractiveness of affiliative and
aggressive humor styles. However, affiliative and aggressive humor only account for two of the
four humor styles. This means that the perceived usage and attractiveness of affiliative humor
cannot be generalized to the positive style of self-enhancing humor. Likewise, the perceived
usage and attractiveness of aggressive humor cannot be generalized to the negative style of self-
defeating humor.
HUMOR 85
Recommendations for Further Study

HUMOR 86
Recommendations for the future research would be to undertake a longer research period
to break down the language used. The survey method can only give a small look into how
individuals use and perceive humor. An inductive research method is recommended for further
research to understand the styles of humor used and the effects of that humor. Conducting
interviews with a research sample to ask questions about perceptions of aggressive and affiliative
humor style to yield more detailed results.
Another recommendation would be to record conversations of individuals first meeting
with one another and categorize the humor used in order to better understand when individuals
use certain styles. Then, the individuals could be interview after to assess how the test subjects
felt about the styles of humor used. Using these inductive methods could allow for a better
understanding of how the humor is being used and how it is perceived.
As for a deductive approach, because of the broad and narrowed language associated with
affiliative and aggressive humor that was used in the questionnaire, it is recommended that
further research is conducted on the distinctions between affiliative, self-enhancing, aggressive,
and self-defeating humor styles. This will ensure that humor style questions measure exclusively
one humor style and that future studies related to those four humor styles are not skewed because
of broad questions.
Additionally, it is recommended that all four humor styles (i.e., affiliative, self-
enhancing, aggressive, and self-defeating) are examined in similar studies. This will create a
better understanding of the perceived usage and attractiveness of positive and negative humor.
HUMOR 87
Conclusion
HUMOR 88
Previous literature and research on humor styles and perceptions clearly demonstrates the
impact of humor on interpersonal communication. Researchers in this study sought to identify
which type of humor students were attracted. The hypothesis that the researchers posed
anticipated that students would be attracted to positive humor. The data indicated that affiliative
humor, a positive humor style, was generally perceived as attractive, which supported the
hypothesis. Aggressive humor, a negative humor style, was generally perceived as unattractive
by students. The data also suggested a slight similarity-attraction relationship in
humor. However, the study was limited to affiliative and aggressive humor, and the researchers
found that the language used to distinguish the two styles was either too broad or too
narrow. Because of this limitation, it is recommended that further research examines each of the
four HSQ humor styles.

HUMOR 89
References
Abel, M. H. (1998). Interaction of humor and gender in moderating relationships between stress
and outcomes. Journal of Psychology, 132, 267276. doi:10.1080=00223989809599166
Abel, M. H. (2002). Humor, stress, and coping strategies. Humor: International Journal of
Humor Studies, 15, 365-381. doi:10.515/humr.15.4.365
Adler, E. M., & Clark, R. (2003). How its done: An invitation to social research (2nd ed.).
Belmont, CA: Wadsworth/Thomson Publishers.
Amodio, D. M., & Showers, C. J. (2005). Similarity breeds liking revisited: The moderating
role of commitment. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 22, 817836.
doi:10.1177=0265407505058701
Aristotle. (trans. 2009). Poetics (S. H. Butcher, Trans.). Retrieved October 07, 2016, from
http://classics.mit.edu/Aristotle/poetics.1.1.html
Aune, K. S., & Wong, N. C. H. (2002). Antecedents and consequences of adult play in romantic
relationships. Personal Relationships, 9, 279286.
Berger, A. A. (1993). An anatomy of humor. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction.
Berlyne, D. E. (1972). Humor and its kin. In J. H. Goldstein & P. E. McGhee (Eds.), The
Psychology of Humor (pp. 43-60). New York: Academic Press.
Bippus, A. M. (2000). Making sense of humor in young romantic relationships: Understanding
partners perceptions. Humor, 13, 395417.
Bippus, A.M. (2003). Humor motives, qualities, and reactions in recalled conflict episodes.
Western Journal of Communication, 67, 413-426.

HUMOR 90
Bishop, S. C., Hill, P. S., & Yang, L. (2012). Use of aggressive humor: Aggressive humor
style, verbal aggressiveness and social dominance orientation. Ohio Communication
Journal, 5073-82.
Booth-Butterfield, M., Booth-Butterfield, S., & Wanzer, M. (2007). Funny students cope better:
Patterns of humor enactment and coping effectiveness. Communication Quarterly, 55(3),
299-315.
Booth-Butterfield, S., & Booth-Butterfield, M. (1991). Individual differences in the
communication of humorous messages. Southern Communication Journal, 56, 205218.
Brein, M., & Ryback, D. (1970). Stimulus, respondent, and response characteristics of social
distance and self-disclosure. Sociology and Social Research, 55, 17-28.
Byrne, D. (1971). The attraction paradigm. New York: Academic Press.
Byrne, D. (1997). An overview (and underview) of research and theory within the attraction
paradigm. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 14, 417-431.
doi:10.1177/0265407597143008
Cameron, D. (2000). Good to talk? In R. T. Craig & H. L. Muller (Eds.), Theorizing
communication: Readings across traditions, (pp. 405420). Los Angeles: Sage.
Campbell, L., Martin, R. A., & Ward, J. R. (2008). An observational study of humor use while
resolving conflict in dating couples. Personal Relationships, 15, 4155.
doi:10.1111=j.1475-6811.2007.00183.x
Cann, A., Zapata, C. L., & Davis, H. B. (2009). Positive and negative styles of humor in
communication: Evidence for the importance of considering both styles. Communication
Quarterly, 57(4), 452-468. doi:10.1080/01463370903313398

HUMOR 91
Cann, A., Zapata, C. L., & Davis, H. B. (2011). Humor style and relationship satisfaction in
dating couples: Perceived versus self-reported humor styles as predictors of satisfaction.
Humor, 24, 120. doi:10=1515=HUMR.2011.001
Cappella, J. N., & Palmer, M. T. (1990). Attitude similarity, relational history, and attraction:
The mediating effects of kinesic and vocal behaviors. Communication Monographs, 57,
161183. doi:10.1080=03637759009376194
Cheatwood, D. (1983). Sociability and the sociology of humor. Sociology and Social Research,
67, 324-338.
Daly, J. A., & Diesel, C. A. (1992). Measures of communication-related personality variables.
Communication Education, 41, 405414. doi:10.1080=03634529209378902
Davis, J. M., & Farina, A. (1970). Humor appreciation as social communication. Journal of
Personality & Social Psychology, 15(2), 175-178.
Deckers, L., & Devine, J. (1981). Humor by violating an existing expectancy. Journal of
Psychology, 108,107-110.
Dunbar, N. E., Bippus, A. M., Allums, A., & King, S. (2012). The Dark side of humor: The use
of aggressive humor in conflicts in close relationships. Conference Papers International
Communication Association, 1-36.
Duncan, W. F. (1982). Humor in management: Prospects for administrative practice and
research. Academy of Management Review, 7, 136-142.
Duran, R. L. (1983). Communicative adaptability: A measure of social communicative
competence. Communication Quarterly, 31(4), 320-326.
Feinberg, L. (1978). The secret of humor. Amsterdam: Rodopi.

HUMOR 92
Fine, G. A. (1983). Sociological approaches to the study of humor. In P. A. McGhee & J. H.
Goldstein (Eds.), Handbook of Humor Research, vol 1 (pp. 159-181). New York:
Springer-Verlag.
Freud, S. (trans., 1960). The complete psychological works of Sigmund Freud (Vol. 8) (J.
Strachey, Trans.). London: Hogarth Press the Institute of Psychoanalysis.
Frewen, P. A., Brinker, J., Martin, R. A., & Dozois, D. J. A. (2008). Humor styles and
personality-vulnerability to depression. Humor: International Journal of Humor
Research, 21(2), 179-195. doi:10.1515/HUMOR.2008.009
Fry, W. F. (2011). Sweet madness: A study of humor. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction.
Garde, M. (2008). The pragmatics of rude jokes with grandad: Joking relationships in
aboriginal Australia. Anthropological Forum, 18(3), 235-253.
doi:10.1080/00664670802429362
Graham, E. E. (1995). The involvement of sense of humor in the development of social
relationships. Communication Reports, 8(2), 158-169.
Graham, E. E., Papa, M. J., & Brooks, G. P. (1992). Functions of humor in conversation:
Conceptualization and measurement. Western Journal of Communication (includes
Communication Reports), 56(2), 161-183.
Graham, E. E. & Rubin, R. B, (1987, November). The involvement of humor in the
development of social relationships. Paper presented at the Speech Communication
Association, Boston, MA.
Hall, J. A. (2013). Humor in long-term romantic relationships: The association of general
humor styles and relationship-specific functions with relationship satisfaction. Western
Journal of Communication, 77(3), 272-292. doi:10.1080/10570314.2012.757796

HUMOR 93
Hampes, W. P. (1992). Relation between intimacy and humor. Psychological Reports, 71, 127-
130. doi:10.2466/pr0.1992.71.1.127
Hay, J. (2002). Male cheerleaders and wanton women: Humor among New Zealand friends. Te
Reo, 453-36.
Hyers, C. (1996). The spirituality of comedy: Comic heroism in a tragic world. New
Brunswick, NJ: Transaction.
Infante, D., Chandler, T., & Rudd, J. (1989). Test of an argumentative skill deficiency model of
interspousal violence. Communication Monographs, 56, 163-177
Infante, D., Riddle, B., Horvath, C, & Tumlin, S. (1992). Verbal aggressiveness: Messages and
reasons. Communication Quarterly, 40,116-126.
Kaplan, H. B., & Boyd, I. H. (1965). The social functions of humor on an open psychiatric
ward. Psychiatric Quarterly, 39, 502515. doi:10.1007=BF01569482
Knight, N. K. (2013). Evaluating experience in funny ways: How friends bond through
conversational hum. Text & Talk, 33(4/5), 553-574. doi:10.1515/text-2013-0025
Kuiper, N., Grimshaw, M., Leite, C., & Kirsh, G. (2004). Humor is not always the best
medicine: Specific components of sense of humor and psychological well-being.
Humor: International Journal of Humor Research, 17, 135-168.
doi:10.1515/humr.2004.002
Kuiper, N. A., & Leite, C. (2010). Personality impressions associated with four distinct humor
styles. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 51(2), 115-122.
doi:10.1111/j.1469450.2009.00734.x
Lefcourt, H. M. (2001). Humor: The psychology of living buoyantly. New York: Kluwer.
HUMOR 94
Lockyer, S., & Pickering, M. (2001). Dear shit-shovellers: Humour, censure and the discourse
of complaint. Discourse & Society, 12(5), 633-651.
Lockyer, S., & Pickering, M. (2009). Beyond a joke: The limits of humour.
London/Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Lull, P. (1940). The effectiveness of humor in persuasive speech. Speech Monographs, 7(1),
26.
Lynch, O. H. (2002). Humorous communication: Finding a place for humor in communication
research. Communication Theory (10503293), 12(4), 423.
Maki, S. M., Booth-Butterfield, M., & McMullen, A. (2012). Does our humor affect us?: An
examination of a dyad's humor orientation. Communication Quarterly, 60(5), 649-664.
Martin, R. A. (2003). Sense of humor. In S. J. Lopez & C. R. Snyder (Eds.), Positive
psychological assessment (pp. 313326). Washington, DC: APA.
Martin, R. A., & Lefcourt, H. M. (1984). Situational humor response questionnaire:
Quantitative measure of sense of humor. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
47, 145-155.
Martin, R. A., Puhlik-Doris, P., Larsen, G., Gray, J., & Weir, K. (2003). 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(1), 48-75.
doi:10.1016/s0092-6566(02)00534-2
Martineau, W. H. (1972). A model of the social functions of humor. In J. H. Goldstein & P. E.
McGhee (Eds.). The psychology of humor (p. 101125). New York: Academic.
Masten, A. (1986). Humor and competence in school age children. Child Development, 57, 461-
473.
HUMOR 95
Meyer, J. C. (2000). Humor as a double-edged sword: Four functions of humor in
communication. Communication Theory, 10, 310-331.
Miczo, N., Averbeck, J. M., & Mariani, T. (2009). Affiliative and aggressive humor, attachment
dimensions, and interaction goals. Communication Studies, 60(5), 443-459.
doi:10.1080/10510970903260301
Murdstein, B. I., & Brust, R. G. (1985). Humor and interpersonal attraction. Journal of
Personality Assessment, 49, 637-640. doi:10.1207/s15327752jpa4906_12
Newirth, J. (2006). Jokes and their Relation to the unconscious: Humor as a fundamental
emotional experience. Psychoanalytic Dialogues, 16(5), 557-571.
Norrick, N. R., & Spitz, A. (2008). Humor as a resource for mitigating conflict in interaction.
Journal of Pragmatics, 40(10), 1661-1686. doi:10.1016/j.pragma.2007.12.001
Obrdlik, A. J. (1942). Gallows humor: A sociological phenomenon. American Journal of
Sociology, 47, 709-716.
OConnell, W. E. (1969). The social aspects of wit and humor. Journal of Social Psychology,
79, 183.
Oring, E. (1992). Jokes and their relations. Lexington, KY: The University Press of Kentucky
Park, R. E. (1924). The concept of social distance. Journal of Applied Sociology, 8(5), 339-
344.
Paulhus, D. L. (1998). Interpersonal and intrapsychic adaptiveness of trait self enhancement: A
mixed blessing? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74(5), 1197-1208.
Perinbanayagam, R. S. (1991). Discursive acts. New York: Aldine De Gruyter.
Pittman, J. F., Price-Bonham, S., & McKenry, P. C. (1983). Marital cohesion: A path model.
Journal of Marriage and Family, 45, 521531.

HUMOR 96
Provine, R. R. (2001). Laughter: A scientific investigation. New York, NY: Penguin Books.
Rubin, R. B. (1994). Conversational appropriateness and effectiveness scales. In R. B. Rubin,
P. Palmgreen & H. E. Sypher (Eds.). Communication research measures (pp. 149153).
New York: Guilford Press.
Schermer, J. A., Martin, R. A., Martin, N. G., Lynskey, M., & Vernon, P. A. (2013). The
general factor of personality and humor styles. Personality and Individual Differences,
54(8), 890-893. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2012.12.026
Spitzberg, B. H., & Cupach, W. R. (1984). Interpersonal communication competence. Beverly
Hills, CA: Sage.
Stump, N. (1939). Sense of humor and its relationship to personality, scholastic aptitude,
emotional maturity, height and weight. Journal of General Psychology, 20, 25-32.
Radcliffe-Brown, A. (1940). On joking relationships. Africa: Journal of the International
African Institute, 13(3), 195-210. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/1156093
Raskin, V. (1985). Semantic mechanisms of humor. Boston: Reidel.
Sharkey, W. F., Park, H. S., & Kim, R. (2004). Intentional self-embarrassment.
Communication Studies, 55, 379399. doi:10.1080=10510970409388625
Sprowl, J. (1987). Humor theory and communication research. World Communication, 16, 47-
65.
Stocking, S, H., & Zillmann, D. (1976). Effects of humorous disparagement of self, friend, and
enemy. Psychological Reports, 39, 455 461.
Tucker, R. P., Wingate, L. R., Slish, M. L., O'Keefe, V. M., Cole, A. B., & Hollingsworth, D. W.
(2014). Rumination, suicidal ideation, and the mediating effect of self-defeating humor.
Europe's Journal of Psychology, 10(3), 492-504. doi:10.5964/ejop.v10i3.758

HUMOR 97
Ullian, J. A. (1976). Joking at work. Journal of Communication, 26, 129132.
UNI Counseling Center. (2006). Workshops. Retrieved on July 26, 2006, from
http://www/uni.edu/counseling//workshop.html
Vela, L. E., Booth-Butterfield, M., Wanzer, M. B., & Vallade, J. I. (2013). Relationships among
humor, coping, relationship stress, and satisfaction in dating relationships: Replication
and extension. Communication Research Reports, 30(1), 68-75.
doi:10.1080/08824096.2012.746224
Wanzer, M., Booth-Butterfield, M., & Booth-Butterfield, S. (1995). The funny people: A
source orientation to the communication of humor. Communication Quarterly, 43, 142-
154. doi:10.1080/01463379509369965
Wanzer, M. B., Booth-Butterfield, M., & Booth-Butterfield, S. (1996). Are funny people
popular?: An examination of humor orientation, loneliness, and social attraction.
Communication Quarterly, 44(1), 42-52.
Weinstein, N., Hodgins, H. S., & Ostvik-White, E. (2011). Humor as aggression: Effects of
motivation on hostility expressed in humor appreciation. Journal of Personality and
Social Psychology. doi:10.1037/a0022495
Yaughn, E., & Nowicki Jr., S. (1999). Close relationships and complementary interpersonal
styles among men and women. Journal of Social Psychology, 139(4), 473-478.
Zillmann, D. (1983). Disparagement humor. In P. E. McGhee & J, H. Goldstein (Eds,).
Handbook of humor research: Basic issues (Vol, 1, p. 85-108), New York: Springer-
Verlag.
Zillmann, D., & Stocking, H. S. (1976). Putdown humor. Journal of Communication, 26, 154-
163.
HUMOR 98
Ziv, A. (1984). Personality and sense of humor. New York: Spring Publishing.
Ziv, A. (1988). Humors role in married life. Humor, 1, 223230. doi:0.1080=00224545.
1989.9712084
Ziv, A. (2010). The social function of humor in interpersonal relationships. Society, 47(1), 11-
18. doi:10.1007/s12115-009-9283-9
Ziv, A., & Gadish, O. (1989). Humor and marital satisfaction. Journal of Social Psychology,
129(6), 759.
HUMOR 99
Appendices
HUMOR 100
Appendix A: Questionnaire
HUMOR 101
Instructions: Please read each question carefully. Circle the response that best reflects
your answer. You may only circle one option per question.
1. What is your year in school?
Freshman Sophomore Junior Senior Graduate Student
2. What is your gender?
Male Female
For questions 3-21, circle the response that best reflects the extent to which you agree or
disagree with each given statement. You may only circle one option per question.
3. I enjoy making people laugh.
Strongly Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly

Disagree Agree
4. I joke around a lot with my closest friends.

Disagree Agree
5. I usually dont joke around much with other people.

Disagree Agree
6. I dont have to work very hard at making other people laughI seem to be a naturally
humorous person.

Disagree Agree
7. I rarely make other people laugh by telling funny stories about myself.

Disagree Agree
HUMOR 102
8. People are never offended by my sense of humor.

Disagree Agree
9. I joke in inappropriate situations.

Disagree Agree
10. When saying funny things, I am usually not very concerned about how other people are
taking it.

Disagree Agree
11. I never participate in laughing at others.

Disagree Agree
12. If I dont like someone, I often use humor to put them down.

Disagree Agree
13. I find jokes amusing.

Disagree Agree
14. I find it attractive when someone teases someone who makes a mistake.

Disagree Agree
HUMOR 103
15. I find it attractive when people use humor as a way of criticizing others.

Disagree Agree
16. I find it attractive when people do not worry about offending others with their humor.

Disagree Agree
17. I find it attractive when someone does not participate in his or her groups laughter.

Disagree Agree
18. I find it attractive when people tell funny stories about themselves.

Disagree Agree
19. I find it attractive when people joke around with other people.

Disagree Agree
20. I find it attractive when someone is effortlessly humorous.

Disagree Agree
21. I find it attractive when someone says witty things with friends.

Disagree Agree
Thank you!
HUMOR 104
Appendix B: Fall Schedule 2016

HUMOR 105
LORAS COLLEGE SCHEDULE - FALL 2016 LAST UPDATED: 11/29/16 12:00
MAX USED WTLST SYN DEPT CAT SEC TITLE CRED

TIME DAY BLDG ROOM INSTRUCTOR(S)
30 29 7259 L.ACC 227 01 Managerial Accounting 3.0

09:00-09:50 MWF KEAN 333 Sturm, K
Aug 29 - Dec 15

10:00-10:50 MWF KEAN 333 Sturm, K
Aug 29 - Dec 15

12:30-01:20pm MWF KEAN 333 Sturm, K
Aug 29 - Dec 15

08:00-09:20 TTH KEAN 334 Lammer, L
Aug 29 - Dec 15

09:30-10:50 TTH KEAN 334 Lammer, L
Aug 29 - Dec 15

12:30-01:50pm TTH KEAN 333 Lammer, L
Aug 29 - Dec 15
25 29 7265 L.ACC 331 01 Intermed Financial Acct I 3.0

10:00-10:50 MWF KEAN 334 Lammer, L
Aug 29 - Dec 15
NOT OPEN TO FIRST YEAR STUDENTS
28 26 7266 L.ACC 343 01 Cost Accounting 3.0

08:00-09:20 TTH KEAN 333 Sturm, K
Aug 29 - Dec 15
0 1 7928 L.ACC 394 03 Accounting Internship 1-12

ARR ARR ARR Lammer, L
Aug 29 - Dec 15
Instructor Signature Required
25 20 7267 L.ACC 455 01 Federal Income Tax I 3.0

08:00-09:20 TTH KEAN 305 Schleicher, D
Aug 29 - Dec 15
25 16 7268 L.ACC 468 01 Adv Financial Accounting 3.0

07:00-07:50 MWF KEAN 305 Schleicher, D
Aug 29 - Dec 15

ARR ARR ARR Sturm, K
HUMOR 106
Aug 29 - Dec 15

ARR ARR ARR Lammer, L
Aug 29 - Dec 15
0 7 7543 L.ARC 101 01 Transition to College 2.0

09:30-10:20 TTH WAHL 124 Gallagher, L
Aug 29 - Dec 15
24 22 5989 L.ATR 140 01 First Aid & Emergency Care 3.0

10:00-10:50 MWF ROHL 143 McDonald, M
Aug 29 - Dec 15
ONLY FIRST YEAR AND SOPHOMORES
15 12 5991 L.ATR 280 01 Athletic Training Clinical I 1.0

11:00-11:50 M ROHL 127 McDonald, M
Aug 29 - Dec 15
ATHLETIC TRAINING MAJORS ONLY
COURSE FEE: $40.00
20 13 5992 L.ATR 290 01 Eval of Athletic Injuries I 3.0

08:00-08:50 MWF GRAB 104 Newman, N
Aug 29 - Dec 15
15 10 5994 L.ATR 380 01 Athletic Training Clinical III 1.0

01:30-02:20pm W GRAB 104 McDonald, M
Aug 29 - Dec 15
COURSE FEE: $40.00
25 24 7414 L.ATR 481 01 Pathophysiology 3.0

09:30-10:50 TTH HENN 070 Newman, N
Aug 29 - Dec 15
15 9 7434 L.ATR 489 01 Athletic Train Clinical V 1.0

01:30-02:20pm M ROHL 127 McDonald, M
Aug 29 - Dec 15
COURSE FEE: $40.00
25 26 7324 L.BAN 210 01 Essentials of Analytics 3.0

12:30-01:50pm TTH KEAN 334 Graham, H
Aug 29 - Dec 15
25 21 7318 L.BAN 210 02 Essentials of Analytics 3.0

02:00-03:20pm TTH KEAN 334 Graham, H
Aug 29 - Dec 15
20 9 7464 L.BAN 295 01 Topics: Data Analytics Lab 2.0

06:00-09:00pm M KEAN 334 Lehman, D
HUMOR 107
Aug 29 - Dec 15
25 8 7317 L.BAN 330 01 Introduction to Data Science 3.0

02:30-03:20pm MWF HENN 270 Rissler, M
Aug 29 - Dec 15
25 10 7319 L.BAN 450 01 Marketing Analytics 3.0

06:00-09:00pm T KEAN 305 Marzofka, P
Aug 29 - Dec 15
JUNIORS & SENIORS ONLY
20 16 6775 L.BIO 115 01 Principles of Biology I 4.0

09:00-09:50 MWF SCIE 242 Schnee, F
Aug 29 - Dec 15
08:00-10:50 TH SCIE 049
COURSE FEE: $20.00

09:00-09:50 MWF SCIE 242 Schnee, F / Staff
Aug 29 - Dec 15
11:00-01:50pm TH SCIE 049
COURSE FEE: $20.00

09:00-09:50 MWF SCIE 242 Schnee, F / Staff
Aug 29 - Dec 15
02:00-04:50pm TH SCIE 049
COURSE FEE: $20.00
20 14 6778 L.BIO 116 01 Principles of Biology II 4.0

09:00-09:50 MWF SCIE 128 Shealer, D / Sinha, A
Aug 29 - Dec 15
08:00-10:50 T SCIE 054
COURSE FEE: $20.00
20 9 6779 L.BIO 116 02 Principles of Biology II 4.0

09:00-09:50 MWF SCIE 128 Shealer, D / Sinha, A
Aug 29 - Dec 15
02:00-04:50pm T SCIE 054
COURSE FEE: $20.00
16 14 6015 L.BIO 225 02 Human Anatomy & Physiology I 4.0

11:00-12:20pm TTH HENN 070 Thraen-Borowski, K
Aug 29 - Dec 15
08:00-09:50 T SCIE 019
COURSE FEE: $20.00
16 17 6016 L.BIO 225 03 Human Anatomy & Physiology I 4.0

11:00-12:20pm TTH HENN 070 Thraen-Borowski, K
Aug 29 - Dec 15
12:30-02:20pm T SCIE 019
COURSE FEE: $20.00
20 20 6780 L.BIO 240 01 Plant Biology 4.0

10:00-10:50 MWF SCIE 109 Sinha, A
HUMOR 108
Aug 29 - Dec 15
12:30-03:20pm TH SCIE 054
COURSE FEE: $20.00
18 18 7325 L.BIO 260 01 Human Anatomy & Physiology-AH 4.0

10:00-10:50 MWF SCIE 134 Davis, T
Aug 29 - Dec 15
09:00-10:50 T SCIE 134
NOT OPEN TO CROSS-REGISTRATION
COURSE FEE: $20.00
20 20 6743 L.BIO 273 01 Human Genetics-HV 3.0

01:30-02:20pm WF SCIE 049 Schnee, F
Aug 29 - Dec 15
01:30-03:20pm M SCIE 049
Clustered with 6742 L.PHI 317 01 Ethics &
New Genetics-HV
COURSE FEE: $20.00
12 11 6782 L.BIO 279 01 Exp Design/Biostat-AH 3.0

10:00-10:50 MWF SCIE 128 Shealer, D
Aug 29 - Dec 15
02:30-04:20pm M SCIE 019
COURSE FEE: $20.00

Aug 29 - Dec 15
02:30-04:20pm W SCIE 019
COURSE FEE: $20.00

Aug 29 - Dec 15
02:30-04:20pm TH SCIE 019
COURSE FEE: $20.00
25 14 6784 L.BIO 389 01 Junior Seminar 1.0

03:30-04:20pm M SCIE 208 Schnee, F
Aug 29 - Dec 15
BIO & BIO RESEARCH MAJORS ONLY
16 13 6785 L.BIO 420 01 Vertebrate Physiology 4.0

12:30-01:20pm MWF SCIE 128 Davis, T
Aug 29 - Dec 15
02:30-04:20pm T SCIE 134
COURSE FEE: $20.00
16 16 6786 L.BIO 420 02 Vertebrate Physiology 4.0

12:30-01:20pm MWF SCIE 128 Davis, T
Aug 29 - Dec 15
02:30-04:20pm W SCIE 134
COURSE FEE: $20.00
HUMOR 109
25 15 6787 L.BIO 488 01 Senior Seminar Portfolio-PJ 2.0

02:30-04:20pm F SCIE 208 Sinha, A
Aug 29 - Dec 15
28 26 5685 L.BUS 230 01 Prin of Management 3.0

02:30-03:50pm MW KEAN 334 Gambrall, D
Aug 29 - Dec 15

12:30-01:50pm TTH KEAN 011 Gambrall, D
Aug 29 - Dec 15

02:00-03:20pm TTH KEAN 011 Gambrall, D
Aug 29 - Dec 15
30 31 5687 L.BUS 240 01 Principles of Marketing 3.0

06:00-09:00pm T KEAN 333 Donovan, A
Aug 29 - Dec 15
25 25 5688 L.BUS 240 02 Principles of Marketing 3.0

10:00-10:50 MWF KEAN 303 Graham, H
Aug 29 - Dec 15
30 34 5690 L.BUS 250 01 Business Statistics 3.0

08:00-08:50 MWF KEAN 333 Sturm, K
Aug 29 - Dec 15
Cannot Register If Took L.Bus-255
25 27 5691 L.BUS 317 01 Business Law I 3.0

Aug 29 - Dec 15
30 33 5693 L.BUS 335 01 Human Resource Management 3.0

06:00-09:00pm M KEAN 333 Norton, A
Aug 29 - Dec 15
30 25 5694 L.BUS 343 01 Marketing Management 3.0

12:30-01:50pm TTH KEAN 009 Marzofka, P
Aug 29 - Dec 15
30 30 7327 L.BUS 349 01 Consumer Behavior 3.0

12:30-01:20pm MWF KEAN 334 Marzofka, P
Aug 29 - Dec 15
HUMOR 110
28 26 5697 L.BUS 350 01 Managerial Finance 3.0

08:00-08:50 MWF KEAN 334 Eller, E
Aug 29 - Dec 15

09:00-09:50 MWF KEAN 011 Breitbach, E
Aug 29 - Dec 15

10:00-10:50 MWF KEAN 305 Breitbach, E
Aug 29 - Dec 15
25 17 7328 L.BUS 353 01 Financial Institutions 3.0

01:30-02:20pm MWF KEAN 303 Breitbach, E
Aug 29 - Dec 15
25 26 7329 L.BUS 354 01 Personal Financial Planning 3.0

09:30-10:50 TTH KEAN 303 Breitbach, E
Aug 29 - Dec 15
25 11 5700 L.BUS 358 01 LIFE Portfolio Application I 3.0

12:30-01:50pm TTH KEAN 305 Eller, E
Aug 29 - Dec 15
25 26 5702 L.BUS 433 01 Global Leadership 3.0

06:00-09:00pm W KEAN 334 Graham, H
Aug 29 - Dec 15
25 22 5703 L.BUS 447 01 Marketing Research 3.0

09:00-09:50 MWF KEAN 303 Marzofka, P
Aug 29 - Dec 15
25 19 5704 L.BUS 451 01 Intermed Financial Management 3.0

09:30-10:50 TTH KEAN 333 Eller, E
Aug 29 - Dec 15
SENIORS ONLY
25 0 5705 L.BUS 458 01 LIFE Portfolio Application II 3.0

12:30-01:50pm TTH KEAN 305 Eller, E
Aug 29 - Dec 15
INSTRUCTOR PERMISSION REQUIRED
40 29 6106 L.CHE 111 01 General Chemistry I 4.0

10:00-10:50 MWF SCIE 208 Moser, A
Aug 29 - Dec 15
05:00-07:00pm M SCIE 128
HUMOR 111

12:30-01:20pm MWF SCIE 208 Moser, A
Aug 29 - Dec 15
05:00-07:00pm M SCIE 128

01:30-02:20pm MWF SCIE 208 Moser, A
Aug 29 - Dec 15
05:00-07:00pm M SCIE 128
24 20 6173 L.CHE 111L 01 Gen Chemistry I Lab 0.0

08:00-10:50 T SCIE 245 Speckhard, D
Aug 29 - Dec 15
MUST REGISTER FOR COREQUISITE: L.CHE-111
COURSE FEE: $20.00

12:30-03:20pm T SCIE 245 Maslowsky, E
Aug 29 - Dec 15
COURSE FEE: $20.00

08:00-10:50 TH SCIE 245 Edwards, C
Aug 29 - Dec 15
COURSE FEE: $20.00

01:30-04:20pm W SCIE 245 Speckhard, D
Aug 29 - Dec 15
COURSE FEE: $20.00

12:30-03:20pm TH SCIE 245 Moser, A
Aug 29 - Dec 15
COURSE FEE: $20.00
15 11 6181 L.CHE 225 01 Quantitative Analysis 4.0

01:30-02:20pm MWF SCIE 109 Edwards, C
Aug 29 - Dec 15
12:30-04:20pm T SCIE 203
COURSE FEE: $20.00
18 16 6856 L.CHE 234 01 Organic Chemistry II 4.0

08:00-08:50 MWF SCIE 109 Oostendorp, D
Aug 29 - Dec 15
08:00-10:50 T SCIE 109
COURSE FEE: $20.00
18 12 6857 L.CHE 234 02 Organic Chemistry II 4.0

08:00-08:50 MWF SCIE 109 Oostendorp, D
Aug 29 - Dec 15
12:30-03:20pm T SCIE 109
COURSE FEE: $20.00
HUMOR 112
24 24 6184 L.CHE 262 01 Globl Warming-Fact/Fiction-AH 4.0

08:00-08:50 MWF SCIE 252 Maslowsky, E
Aug 29 - Dec 15
08:00-09:50 TH SCIE 252
COURSE FEE: $20.00
24 22 7428 L.CHE 262 02 Globl Warming-Fact/Fiction-AH 4.0

10:00-10:50 MWF SCIE 252 Maslowsky, E
Aug 29 - Dec 15
12:30-02:20pm TH SCIE 252
COURSE FEE: $20.00
30 25 6188 L.CHE 335 01 Introductory Biochemistry 3.0

09:00-09:50 MWF SCIE 208 Speckhard, D
Aug 29 - Dec 15
MAY REGISTER FOR COREQUISITE: L.CHE-335L
COURSE FEE: $20.00
20 18 6938 L.CHE 335L 01 Biochemistry Lab 1.0

08:00-10:50 TH SCIE 125 Speckhard, D
Aug 29 - Dec 15
20 8 6196 L.CHE 389 01 Junior Seminar 1.0

02:30-03:20pm M SCIE 242 Edwards, C
Aug 29 - Dec 15
20 12 6797 L.CHE 489 01 Senior Seminar: Portfolio-PJ 1.0

03:30-04:20pm M SCIE 128 Oostendorp, D
Aug 29 - Dec 15
Chemistry and Biochemistry Majors
15 1 6204 L.CHE 491 01 Research 1.0

ARR ARR ARR Speckhard, D
Aug 29 - Dec 15
Instructor Permission Required
15 5 6211 L.CHE 491 02 Research 2.0

Aug 29 - Dec 15
15 0 6634 L.CHE 491 03 Research 3.0

Aug 29 - Dec 15
25 24 5706 L.CIT 110 01 Computing & Info Tech Basics 3.0

12:30-01:50pm TTH KEAN 303 Hitchcock, W
Aug 29 - Dec 15
Cannot Register If Took L.Cit-111
25 20 5707 L.CIT 110 02 Computing & Info Tech Basics 3.0

02:00-03:20pm TTH KEAN 303 Hitchcock, W
Aug 29 - Dec 15
Cannot Register If Took L.Cit-111
HUMOR 113
20 20 5709 L.CIT 115 01 Programming & Design Basics 4.0

12:30-01:20pm MTWTHF HENN 360 Rissler, M
Aug 29 - Dec 15
25 23 5710 L.CIT 217 01 Network Management 3.0

06:00-09:00pm T KEAN 303 Burken, D
Aug 29 - Dec 15
16 14 5712 L.CIT 219 01 Computer Organiz/Architecture 4.0

09:00-09:50 MWF SCIE 231 Neebel, D
Aug 29 - Dec 15
12:30-03:20pm TH SCIE 231
20 16 5713 L.CIT 225 01 Data Structures & Algorithms 4.0

08:00-08:50 MTWTHF HENN 250 Thompson, M
Aug 29 - Dec 15
27 19 7330 L.CIT 321 01 Data Analysis 3.0

09:30-10:50 TTH KEAN 305 Hitchcock, W
Aug 29 - Dec 15
25 11 5714 L.CIT 322 01 Web 1 Basic HTML Authoring 1.0

06:00-09:00pm W KEAN 303 Hitchcock, W
Aug 29 - Sep 30
MUST REGISTER FOR COREQUISITE: L.CIT-
323*L.CIT-324
25 10 5715 L.CIT 323 01 Web 2 Adv HTML Authoring 1.0

Oct 3 - Nov 4
322*L.CIT-324
25 10 5716 L.CIT 324 01 Web 3 Site Dev & Admin 1.0

Nov 7 - Dec 16
322*L.CIT-323
25 9 7332 L.CIT 325 01 Algorithm Design & Analysis 3.0

10:00-10:50 MWF SCIE 125 Thompson, M
Aug 29 - Dec 15
20 11 5718 L.CIT 485 01 Systems Engineering 3.0

09:30-10:50 TTH HENN 350 Thompson, M
Aug 29 - Dec 15
SENIORS ONLY
25 21 6816 L.COM 131 01 Intro Mass Communication 3.0

08:00-08:50 MWF HOFF 112 Myers, S
Aug 29 - Dec 15

10:00-10:50 MWF HOFF 111 Myers, S
Aug 29 - Dec 15
HUMOR 114

11:00-12:20pm TTH HOFF 411 Belanger, K
Aug 29 - Dec 15
22 22 5877 L.COM 158 01 Intro TV Production 3.0

12:30-02:20pm TTH HOFF 211 Schaefer, C
Aug 29 - Dec 15
COURSE FEE: $50.00
16 16 7413 L.COM 164 01 Digital Imaging 3.0

09:30-10:50 TTH HOFF 435 Myers, S
Aug 29 - Dec 15
COURSE FEE: $50.00
25 24 5879 L.COM 190 01 Communication Theory 3.0

08:00-09:20 TTH HOFF 411 Sullivan, M
Aug 29 - Dec 15
25 22 5883 L.COM 201 01 Prin of Public Relations 3.0

10:00-10:50 MWF HOFF 412 Harris, M
Aug 29 - Dec 15
20 20 5884 L.COM 202 01 Public Relations Writing 3.0

09:00-09:50 MWF HOFF 411 Harris, M
Aug 29 - Dec 15
30 30 5885 L.COM 225 01 Media Writing 3.0

10:00-10:50 MWF HOFF 311 Kohl, P
Aug 29 - Dec 15
MAY REGISTER FOR COREQUISITE: L.COM-131
25 30 7409 L.COM 255 01 Interpersonal Communicatn-IV 3.0

11:00-12:20pm TF HOFF 311 Sullivan, M
Aug 29 - Dec 15
Clustered with 6855 L.PHI 311 01 Business
Ethics-IV
22 20 7435 L.COM 257 01 Electronic Field Production 3.0

09:30-10:50 TTH HOFF 211 Schaefer, C
Aug 29 - Dec 15
COURSE FEE: $50.00
20 6 5887 L.COM 259 01 Mock Trials 1.0

03:30-04:20pm WF HOFF 411 Merkel, D
Aug 29 - Oct 14
22 1 7514 L.COM 259 02 Mock Trials 1.0

Oct 24 - Dec 15
16 16 5889 L.COM 264 01 Desktop Publishing 3.0

12:30-01:50pm TTH HOFF 435 Pisarik, P
Aug 29 - Dec 15
PR Majors Only
COURSE FEE: $50.00
HUMOR 115
25 20 5890 L.COM 280 01 News Analysis 3.0

02:30-03:50pm MW HOFF 412 Pisarik, P
Aug 29 - Dec 15
25 24 7410 L.COM 286 01 Identity/Comm in Rock&Roll-AI 3.0

02:30-03:50pm MW HOFF 136 Kohl, P
Aug 29 - Dec 15
14 3 5892 L.COM 293 01 Media Studies Practicum Staff 1.0

09:00-09:50 MWF HOFF 211 Schaefer, C
Aug 29 - Dec 15
04:00-06:30pm W HOFF 211
COURSE FEE: $25.00
20 20 5895 L.COM 351 01 Adv Public Relations Writing 3.0

10:00-10:50 MWF HOFF 411 Belanger, K
Aug 29 - Dec 15
10 1 5896 L.COM 359 01 Mock Trials 1.0

Aug 29 - Oct 14
22 0 7515 L.COM 359 02 Mock Trials 1.0

Oct 24 - Dec 15
20 15 5898 L.COM 380 01 Persuasion 3.0

09:00-09:50 MWF HOFF 412 Sullivan, M
Aug 29 - Dec 15
25 23 5900 L.COM 390 01 Media Criticism 3.0

12:30-01:50pm TTH HOFF 411 Kohl, P
Aug 29 - Dec 15
0 1 8020 L.COM 394 01 Internship 1-3

ARR ARR ARR Sullivan, M
Aug 29 - Dec 15
PRIOR APPROVAL OF CHAIRPERSON REQ
30 38 5902 L.COM 485 01 Communication Research 3.0

12:30-01:20pm MWF HOFF 512 Harris, M
Aug 29 - Dec 15
PR & MEDIA STUDIES MAJORS ONLY
SENIORS ONLY
15 0 5903 L.COM 492 01 Journalism Practicum 1.0

ARR ARR ARR Pisarik, P
Aug 29 - Dec 15
PRIOR APPROVAL OF INSTRUCTOR REQ
16 14 5904 L.COM 493 01 Media Studies Practicum II 1.0

09:00-09:50 MWF HOFF 211 Schaefer, C
Aug 29 - Dec 15
HUMOR 116
COURSE FEE: $25.00
25 19 5972 L.CRJ 120 01 Intro to Criminal Justice 3.0

09:00-09:50 MWF HENN 350 Bell, V
Aug 29 - Dec 15
25 20 5978 L.CRJ 120 02 Intro to Criminal Justice 3.0

06:00-07:20pm TTH HENN 250 Gau, M
Aug 29 - Dec 15
35 35 5980 L.CRJ 224 01 Criminal Law 3.0

06:00-09:00pm W HENN 070 Corken, C
Aug 29 - Dec 15
30 20 5987 L.CRJ 252 01 Criminology 3.0

09:00-09:50 MWF WAHL 101 Decker, L
Aug 29 - Dec 15
25 17 7334 L.CRJ 253 01 Corrections 3.0

10:00-10:50 MWF HENN 350 Bell, V
Aug 29 - Dec 15
25 25 7505 L.CRJ 280 01 CJ Ethical Considerations-AV 3.0

10:00-10:50 MWF HENN 480 Decker, L
Aug 29 - Dec 15
25 26 7506 L.CRJ 280 02 CJ Ethical Considerations-AV 3.0

02:30-03:20pm MWF HENN 350 Bell, V
Aug 29 - Dec 15
25 27 7335 L.CRJ 312 01 Crime Prevention 3.0

06:00-09:00pm M WAHL 101 Corken, C
Aug 29 - Dec 15
30 26 6012 L.CRJ 320 01 Juvenile Delinq & Justice 3.0

08:00-08:50 MWF HENN 480 Decker, L
Aug 29 - Dec 15
25 7 7412 L.CRJ 400 01 Women and Crime 3.0

05:00-08:00pm T HENN 350 Tentis, D
Aug 29 - Dec 15
10 1 6028 L.CRJ 490 03 Field Experience 3.0

08:00-08:50 T HENN 445 Decker, L
Aug 29 - Dec 15
CRIMINAL JUSTICE MAJORS ONLY
FLD INSTRUCTION COORD PERMISSION

08:00-08:50 T HENN 445 Decker, L
Aug 29 - Dec 15
HUMOR 117

08:00-08:50 T HENN 445 Decker, L
Aug 29 - Dec 15

08:00-08:50 T HENN 445 Decker, L
Aug 29 - Dec 15

08:00-08:50 T HENN 445 Decker, L
Aug 29 - Dec 15

08:00-08:50 T HENN 445 Decker, L
Aug 29 - Dec 15

08:00-08:50 T HENN 445 Decker, L
Aug 29 - Dec 15
15 15 6522 L.CTL 100 01 MOI: The Four Marks-FI 3.0

12:30-01:50pm TTH SMYT 102 Osheim, A
Aug 29 - Dec 15
INCOMING FY STUDENTS ONLY
CTL STUDENTS ONLY
21 21 6650 L.CTL 274 01 All for One-IV 3.0

01:30-02:20pm MWF KEAN 011 Lorenz, A
Aug 29 - Dec 15
CTL STUDENTS ONLY
Clustered with 6651 L.CTL 277 01
Belief/Unbelief & Good Lif-IV
21 21 6651 L.CTL 277 01 Belief/Unbelief & Good Lif-IV 3.0

11:00-12:20pm TTH KEAN 011 Wathier, D
Aug 29 - Dec 15
CTL STUDENTS ONLY
Clustered with 6650 L.CTL 274 01 All for
One-IV
18 15 6652 L.CTL 490 01 Leadership Sem for Soc Justice 2.0

06:00-08:00pm TH SMYT 102 C. Kuhl
Aug 29 - Oct 14
CTL STUDENTS ONLY
HUMOR 118
30 27 5719 L.ECO 221 01 Prin of Microeconomics 3.0

09:00-09:50 MWF HOFF 512 Smith, J
Aug 29 - Dec 15
30 28 5720 L.ECO 221 02 Prin of Microeconomics 3.0

10:00-10:50 MWF HOFF 512 Smith, J
Aug 29 - Dec 15
30 28 5722 L.ECO 222 01 Prin of Macroeconomics 3.0

12:30-01:20pm MWF HOFF 340 Maskay, B
Aug 29 - Dec 15
30 29 5723 L.ECO 222 02 Prin of Macroeconomics 3.0

01:30-02:20pm MWF KEAN 333 Eller, E
Aug 29 - Dec 15
30 10 5725 L.ECO 321 01 Intermed Microecon Theory 3.0

09:30-10:50 TTH HOFF 312 Smith, J
Aug 29 - Dec 15
20 16 7337 L.ECO 346 01 Public Finance 3.0

12:30-01:20pm MWF HOFF 311 Smith, J
Aug 29 - Dec 15
0 1 7925 L.ECO 498 01 Directed Readings 1-3

ARR ARR ARR Smith, J
Aug 29 - Dec 15
25 23 6213 L.EDU 200 01 Foundations of Education 3.0

08:00-09:20 TTH WAHL 143 Scheuerell, S
Aug 29 - Dec 15
MUST REGISTER FOR COREQUISITE: L.EDU-205
25 25 6215 L.EDU 205 01 Foundations/Special Education 3.0

08:00-08:50 MWF WAHL 143 Croatt, K
Aug 29 - Dec 15
25 26 6216 L.EDU 221 01 Learn Envirn & Collaborations 3.0

12:30-01:20pm MWF WAHL 110 Shaw, D
Aug 29 - Dec 15
0 23 7549 L.EDU 221 02 Learn Envirn & Collaborations 3.0

08:00-08:50 MWF WAHL 110 Shaw, D
Aug 29 - Dec 15
25 25 6217 L.EDU 230 01 Children & Young Adult Lit-AA 3.0

09:30-10:50 TTH WAHL 110 Monhardt, R
Aug 29 - Dec 15
ONLY TEACHER EDUCATION STUDENTS
HUMOR 119
26 25 6218 L.EDU 232 01 C/I in PE/Health/Wellness 1.0

02:30-03:20pm W WAHL 109 Schreiber, M
Aug 29 - Dec 15
Declared Elementary Ed Majors Only
MUST REGISTER FOR COREQUISITE: L.EDU-
233*L.EDU-234
26 25 6219 L.EDU 233 01 C/I in Performing Arts 1.0

03:30-04:20pm W WAHL 109 Davis-Orwoll, S
Aug 29 - Dec 15
232*L.EDU-234
26 25 6220 L.EDU 234 01 C/I in Visual Arts 1.0

04:30-05:20pm W WAHL 109 Lovell, J
Aug 29 - Dec 15
232*L.EDU-233
25 30 6223 L.EDU 265 01 Multicultural Education-AC 3.0

11:00-12:20pm TTH WAHL 143 Scheuerell, S
Aug 29 - Dec 15
20 6 6224 L.EDU 321 01 Infant/Toddlers Curriculum 3.0

08:00-09:20 TTH WAHL 109 Croatt, K
Aug 29 - Dec 15
19 5 6226 L.EDU 323 01 Preprimary Curriculum 3.0

03:45-06:45pm W WAHL 110 Steines David,T
Aug 29 - Dec 15
15 1 7552 L.EDU 323 02 Preprimary Curriculum 3.0

ARR ARR ARR Staff
Aug 29 - Dec 15
20 5 6225 L.EDU 327 01 Dev Curr & Methods Birth-Age 5 3.0

09:30-10:50 TTH WAHL 109 Croatt, K
Aug 29 - Dec 15
15 16 6227 L.EDU 331 01 Curr/Instr in Lang Arts 3.0

08:00-09:20 TTH WAHL 145 Salyer, D
Aug 29 - Dec 15
15 16 6228 L.EDU 332 01 Beginning Reading 3.0

09:30-10:50 TTH WAHL 145 Salyer, D
HUMOR 120
Aug 29 - Dec 15
15 15 6229 L.EDU 333 01 Curr/Instr in Math 3.0

03:15-07:15pm M WAHL 109 Nugent, C
Aug 29 - Dec 15
Meets at Fulton Elementary School
12 12 6231 L.EDU 334 01 Intermediate Clinical K-6 1.0

08:00-10:50 MWF WAHL 124 Monhardt, R
Aug 29 - Dec 15
12 2 7532 L.EDU 334 02 Intermediate Clinical K-6 1.0

ARR ARR ARR Monhardt, R
Aug 29 - Dec 15
20 3 7580 L.EDU 335 01 Curr/Instr in Soc Studies 3.0

01:00-03:00pm T WAHL 145 Monhardt, R
Aug 29 - Dec 15
15 14 7444 L.EDU 336 01 Science Curr/Instruct 3.0

12:30-03:20pm TH WAHL 145 Monhardt, R
Aug 29 - Dec 14
15 9 6230 L.EDU 337 01 Reading Across the Curriculum 3.0

12:30-01:50pm WF WAHL 145 Salyer, D
Aug 29 - Dec 15
0 1 7535 L.EDU 339 01 Differentiated Instr 5-12 2.0

ARR Welsh, H
Aug 29 - Dec 15
20 9 6233 L.EDU 340 01 Differentiated Instruction K-6 3.0

03:30-06:30pm W WAHL 145 Winkel, M
Aug 29 - Dec 15
20 10 6235 L.EDU 343 01 Assess Exceptionality Pre K-8 3.0

03:30-06:30pm TH WAHL 145 Winkel, M
Aug 29 - Dec 15
15 16 6234 L.EDU 346 01 Learning/Behavior Strategies I 3.0

09:00-09:50 MWF WAHL 110 Shaw, D
Aug 29 - Dec 15
20 8 7339 L.EDU 352 01 Special Sec Methods: English 3.0

08:00-09:20 TTH WAHL 124 Welsh, H
HUMOR 121
Aug 29 - Dec 15
20 6 7340 L.EDU 353 01 Special Sec Methods: Math 3.0

09:30-10:50 TTH HENN 180 Keller, R
Aug 29 - Dec 15
20 4 7533 L.EDU 354 01 Special Sec Methods: Science 3.0

04:00-07:00pm W WAHL 124 Monhardt, L
Aug 29 - Dec 15
15 20 6240 L.EDU 357 01 Reading in Sec Schools 3.0

08:00-09:20 WF WAHL 109 Welch, L
Aug 29 - Dec 15
20 7 6241 L.EDU 361 01 Practicum/Instr Read Problem 3.0

03:30-04:50pm TTH WAHL 110 Lansing, S
Aug 29 - Dec 15
30 0 6242 L.EDU 411 01 Student Tch Elem Music 5.0

ARR WAHL 109 Fabricius, R
Aug 29 - Dec 15
COURSE FEE: $100.00
30 0 6243 L.EDU 412 01 Student Tch Sec Music 5.0

ARR WAHL 110 Fabricius, R
Aug 29 - Dec 15
COURSE FEE: $100.00
30 2 6247 L.EDU 424 01 Stud Tch Early Child Sp Ed 0-5 5.0

ARR ARR ARR Fabricius, R
Aug 29 - Dec 15
COURSE FEE: $100.00
30 0 6248 L.EDU 425 01 Student Tch Early Child 0-5 5.0

Aug 29 - Dec 15
COURSE FEE: $100.00
30 2 6249 L.EDU 426 01 Student Tch Primary K-3 ECE 5.0

Aug 29 - Dec 15
MAY REGISTER FOR COREQUISITE: L.EDU-
424*L.EDU-425
COURSE FEE: $100.00
HUMOR 122
30 1 6250 L.EDU 432 01 Student Tch Elem School 10.0

Aug 29 - Dec 15
COURSE FEE: $200.00
20 1 6251 L.EDU 441 01 Student Tch Inst Strat I K-8 5.0

Aug 29 - Dec 15
COURSE FEE: $100.00
30 0 6252 L.EDU 442 01 Student Tch El Ed Inst Strat I 5.0

Aug 29 - Dec 15
COURSE FEE: $100.00
30 2 6255 L.EDU 452 01 Student Tch Secondary School 10.0

Aug 29 - Dec 15
COURSE FEE: $200.00
40 6 6256 L.EDU 490 01 Capstone Seminar/Portfolio-PJ 2.0

04:00-05:30pm M WAHL 101 Welsh, H
Aug 29 - Dec 15
0 1 7906 L.EDU 690 03 Institutes in Education 3.0

ARR ARR ARR Keller, R
Aug 29 - Dec 15
GRADUATE STUDENTS ONLY
COURSE FEE: $600.00
18 14 5860 L.EGR 105 01 Intro to Engineering I 3.0

08:00-09:20 TTH SCIE 118 Carstens, T
Aug 29 - Dec 15
09:00-09:50 M SCIE 109
COURSE FEE: $20.00
18 14 5862 L.EGR 105 02 Intro to Engineering I 3.0

08:00-09:20 WF SCIE 118 Carstens, T
Aug 29 - Dec 15
09:00-09:50 M SCIE 109
COURSE FEE: $20.00
16 11 5867 L.EGR 232 01 Engineering Dynamics 3.0

01:30-02:20pm MWF SCIE 118 Carstens, T
Aug 29 - Dec 15
20 14 7341 L.EGR 335 01 Electric Circuits 3.0

02:30-03:20pm MWF SCIE 231 Neebel, D
HUMOR 123
Aug 29 - Dec 15
20 15 7342 L.EGR 350 01 Engineering Laboratory I 1.0

12:30-03:20pm T SCIE 231 Neebel, D
Aug 29 - Dec 15
COURSE FEE: $20.00
1 1 7924 L.EGR 398 01 Empirical Research: Hydrofoil 1-4

ARR ARR ARR Thompson, K
Aug 29 - Dec 15
10 6 6553 L.EGR 490 01 Capstone Engineer Design I-PJ 3.0

12:30-01:20pm MWF SCIE 118 Thompson, K
Aug 29 - Dec 15
COURSE FEE: $20.00
20 21 6557 L.ENG 111 01 Critical Writing-FW 3.0

09:30-10:50 TTH HOFF 411 Stone, S
Aug 29 - Dec 15

11:00-12:20pm TF HOFF 511 Jablonsky, W
Aug 29 - Dec 15

08:00-08:50 MWF HOFF 511 Kanyusik, W
Aug 29 - Dec 15

11:00-12:20pm TF HOFF 111 Clark, N
Aug 29 - Dec 15
18 14 7343 L.ENG 224 01 African American Literature 3.0

12:30-01:50pm TTH HOFF 111 Stone, S
Aug 29 - Dec 15
25 22 6563 L.ENG 232 01 The Novel-AA 3.0

10:00-10:50 MWF HOFF 312 Kanyusik, W
Aug 29 - Dec 15
25 26 7886 L.ENG 232 02 The Novel-IA 3.0

11:00-12:20pm TF HOFF 512 Kanyusik, W
Aug 29 - Dec 15
Clustered with 6670 L.HIS 230 01
Community/Identity Am West-IA
15 10 6564 L.ENG 238 01 Poetry Writing 3.0

09:00-09:50 MWF HOFF 347 Pollock, J
Aug 29 - Dec 15
HUMOR 124
15 18 7426 L.ENG 239 01 Creative Nonfiction Writing-AA 3.0

02:00-03:20pm TTH WAHL 124 Koch, K
Aug 29 - Dec 15
25 29 7440 L.ENG 240 01 Nature of Nature/Ireland-CI 3.0

11:00-12:20pm TF HOFF 112 Koch, K
Aug 29 - Dec 15
Clustered with 7355 L.HIS 245 01 The
Celts-CI
25 15 6565 L.ENG 285 01 Modn Irish Lit & Culture 3.0

09:00-09:50 MWF HOFF 511 Auge, A
Aug 29 - Dec 15
18 8 7344 L.ENG 328 01 Am Lit Mod/Contemp Poetry 3.0

02:30-03:50pm MW HOFF 111 Pollock, J
Aug 29 - Dec 15
18 14 7345 L.ENG 351 01 Milton & 17th C Literature 3.0

02:00-03:20pm TTH HOFF 112 Auge, A
Aug 29 - Dec 15
18 16 7346 L.ENG 355 01 English Novel 1800-1840 3.0

12:30-01:20pm MWF HOFF 111 VanLaningham, E
Aug 29 - Dec 15
15 13 7347 L.ENG 370 01 Fantastic Fiction 3.0

06:30-09:30pm W WAHL 143 Jablonsky, W
Aug 29 - Dec 15
15 10 6571 L.ENG 384 01 Adv Fiction Writing 3.0

06:30-09:30pm M HOFF 347 Jablonsky, W
Aug 29 - Dec 15
15 15 7433 L.ENG 395 01 Topics: Writing Social Action 3.0

08:00-09:20 TTH HOFF 511 Clark, N
Aug 29 - Dec 15
18 12 7503 L.ENG 395 02 Topics: Mod/Cont Brit/Am Drama 3.0

02:00-03:20pm TTH HOFF 312 Kanyusik, W
Aug 29 - Dec 15
22 23 6576 L.ENG 468 01 Literary Criticism 3.0

09:30-10:50 TTH ARCE 402 Auge, A
Aug 29 - Dec 15
25 12 6578 L.ENG 490 01 Senior Literature Capstone-PJ 3.0

01:30-02:20pm MWF HOFF 111 VanLaningham, E
Aug 29 - Dec 15
SENIORS ONLY
English Literature Major
HUMOR 125
25 12 6580 L.ENG 490D 01 Senior Lit Capstone Defense 0.0

ARR ARR ARR VanLaningham, E
Aug 29 - Dec 15
Need L.ENG-490
15 10 6581 L.ENG 491 01 Senior Thesis Seminar 3.0

12:30-01:20pm MWF WAHL 124 Jablonsky, W
Aug 29 - Dec 15
SENIORS ONLY
Creative Writing Majors Only
15 2 6582 L.ENG 491D 01 Senior Thesis Defense-PJ 0.0

ARR ARR ARR Jablonsky, W
Aug 29 - Dec 15
Need L.ENG-491
4 3 7570 L.ENG 498 01 Directed Readings 1-3

ARR ARR ARR Jablonsky, W
Aug 29 - Dec 15
20 18 7524 L.EXP 100 01 Foundation for College Success 1.0

02:30-03:20pm MW WAHL 101 Mulligan, D
Aug 29 - Dec 15
20 16 7525 L.EXP 100 02 Foundation for College Success 1.0

02:00-02:50pm TTH WAHL 101 Walsh, K
Aug 29 - Dec 15
0 19 7904 L.EXP 294 01 Internship 1-11

ARR ARR ARR Carroll, M
Aug 29 - Dec 15
0 1 7923 L.EXP 294 02 Internship 1-11

Aug 29 - Dec 15
0 6 7729 L.EXP 294 03 Internship 1-11

Aug 29 - Dec 15
15 9 7351 L.GRS 101 01 First Yr Ancient Greek I 3.0

09:00-09:50 MWF HOFF 212 Smith, C
Aug 29 - Dec 15
25 24 7352 L.HIS 117 01 Roman Civilization 3.0

10:00-10:50 MWF HOFF 212 Smith, C
Aug 29 - Dec 15
25 20 6667 L.HIS 121 01 U S History to 1877 3.0

08:00-08:50 MWF HOFF 512 Anderson-Bricker, K
Aug 29 - Dec 15
30 22 7353 L.HIS 141 01 Modern Europe Since 1750 3.0

12:30-01:50pm TTH HOFF 511 Zhu, L
Aug 29 - Dec 15
HUMOR 126
20 26 6670 L.HIS 230 01 Community/Identity Am West-IA 3.0

11:00-12:20pm MTH HOFF 512 Anderson-Bricker, K
Aug 29 - Dec 15
Clustered with 7886 L.ENG 232 02 The
Novel-IA
25 24 7354 L.HIS 231 01 History of U.S. Sexuality-AV 3.0

02:00-02:50pm MWF HOFF 512 Anderson-Bricker, K
Aug 29 - Dec 15
25 29 7355 L.HIS 245 01 The Celts-CI 3.0

11:00-12:20pm MTH HOFF 112 Eby, J
Aug 29 - Dec 15
Clustered with 7440 L.ENG 240 01 Nature of
Nature/Ireland-CI
25 21 6671 L.HIS 272 01 Japan in the Modern World-AI 3.0

09:00-09:50 MWF HOFF 312 Zhu, L
Aug 29 - Dec 15
25 23 7356 L.HIS 333 01 Imperial Geographies-AA 3.0

02:00-03:20pm MW HOFF 212 Kehren, M
Aug 29 - Dec 15
10 1 7695 L.HIS 394 01 Internship 1-3

ARR ARR ARR Anderson-Bricker, K
Aug 29 - Dec 15
25 14 7357 L.HIS 395 01 U.S./China:partners Or Enemies 3.0

09:30-10:50 TTH HOFF 511 Zhu, L
Aug 29 - Dec 15
25 15 7358 L.HIS 395 02 Topics: Israel/Palestine 3.0

01:30-02:20pm MWF HOFF 312 Eby, J
Aug 29 - Dec 15
25 9 6712 L.HIS 490 01 Research Seminar 3.0

08:00-09:20 TTH HOFF 512 Anderson-Bricker, K
Aug 29 - Dec 15
HISTORY MAJORS ONLY
0 1 8010 L.HIS 498 01 Ethics and Civil Rights - VA 1-3

ARR ARR ARR Lorenz, A / Kehren, M
Aug 29 - Dec 15
1 1 8011 L.HIS 498 02 IS: Contemp Urban Portugal 1-3

ARR ARR ARR Kehren, M
Aug 29 - Dec 15
22 17 7415 L.HON 100 01 MOI:Honors Modes of Inq-FI 3.0

08:00-09:20 TTH HENN 350 Grinde, L / VanLaningham, E
Aug 29 - Dec 15
HUMOR 127

ONLY STUDENTS IN HONORS PROGRAM
COURSE FEE: $60.00
22 11 7416 L.HON 100 02 MOI:Honors Modes of Inq-FI 3.0

11:00-12:20pm MTH ROHL 143 Garrett, M / VanLaningham, E
Aug 29 - Dec 15
COURSE FEE: $60.00
50 25 6550 L.HON 250 01 Honors Research Seminar 1.0

11:00-11:50 M HOFF 411 VanLaningham, E
Aug 29 - Dec 15
COURSE FEE: $25.00

02:30-03:20pm M HOFF 511 VanLaningham, E
Aug 29 - Dec 15
COURSE FEE: $25.00

Aug 29 - Dec 15
COURSE FEE: $25.00

Aug 29 - Dec 15
COURSE FEE: $25.00

Aug 29 - Dec 15
COURSE FEE: $25.00

Aug 29 - Dec 15
COURSE FEE: $25.00

Aug 29 - Dec 15
COURSE FEE: $25.00

HUMOR 128
Aug 29 - Dec 15
COURSE FEE: $25.00

Aug 29 - Dec 15
COURSE FEE: $25.00
20 13 7359 L.INS 489 01 Senior Seminar 3.0

04:30-05:50pm MW HOFF 212 Kehren, M
Aug 29 - Dec 15
6 4 5997 L.KIN 050 01 Personal Fitness 1.0

09:00-09:50 MWF ARR ARR Kult, T
Aug 29 - Dec 15
3 4 7518 L.KIN 050 02 Personal Fitness 1.0

01:30-02:20pm MWF ARR ARR Mertens, E
Aug 29 - Dec 15
10 7 7539 L.KIN 070 01 Trap and Skeet Shooting 1.0

02:30-05:30pm M OFC OFC Degenhardt, C
Aug 29 - Dec 15
Students enrolling in this course will be
required to purchase a
range membership ($80). Transportation to
Izaak Walton Club
shooting range is provided. Rifles are
provided - personal
weapons may not be used and may not be
brought to campus.
25 22 5999 L.KIN 074 01 Team Sports I 1.0

11:00-11:50 TTH GRAB CT1 Tebon, C
Aug 29 - Dec 15
25 25 6000 L.KIN 101 01 Introduction to Kinesiology 3.0

08:00-08:50 MWF GRAB 206 Glover, S
Aug 29 - Dec 15
25 24 6001 L.KIN 101 02 Introduction to Kinesiology 3.0

09:00-09:50 MWF ROHL 143 McDonald, M
Aug 29 - Dec 15
25 21 6002 L.KIN 121 01 Personal/Community Health 3.0

12:30-01:20pm MWF GRAB 206 Thraen-Borowski, K
Aug 29 - Dec 15
25 25 6003 L.KIN 145 01 Nutrition 3.0

10:00-10:50 MWF GRAB 206 Glover, S
Aug 29 - Dec 15
HUMOR 129
25 27 7360 L.KIN 145 02 Nutrition 3.0

01:30-02:20pm MWF ROHL 143 Kult, T
Aug 29 - Dec 15
25 21 6004 L.KIN 235 01 Sports Officiating 3.0

09:30-10:50 TTH GRAB 206 Tebon, C
Aug 29 - Dec 15
ONLY EDUCATION OR KIN MAJORS
15 16 6005 L.KIN 322 01 Physiology of Exercise 3.0

09:00-09:50 MWF SCIE 019 Mertens, E
Aug 29 - Dec 15
15 14 6006 L.KIN 322 02 Physiology of Exercise 3.0

12:30-01:20pm MWF SCIE 019 Mertens, E
Aug 29 - Dec 15
16 17 6007 L.KIN 344 01 Theory Strength Train & Condit 3.0

08:00-09:20 TTH GRAB 206 Mertens, E
Aug 29 - Dec 15
16 8 6008 L.KIN 344 02 Theory Strength Train & Condit 3.0

12:30-01:50pm TTH GRAB 206 Kult, T
Aug 29 - Dec 15
15 4 6794 L.KIN 392 01 Practm Phys Actvty & Health I 3.0

ARR ARR ARR Mertens, E
Aug 29 - Dec 15
1 1 7573 L.KIN 398 01 EMPIRICAL RESEARCH 3.0

ARR ARR ARR Glover, S
Aug 29 - Dec 15
10 3 6011 L.KIN 492 01 Internship in Kinesiology I 3.0

Aug 29 - Dec 15
10 0 6013 L.KIN 493 01 Internship in Kinesiology II 3.0

Aug 29 - Dec 15
22 22 5727 L.LIB 100 01 MOI: Modes of Inquiry-FI 3.0

08:00-08:50 MWF WAHL 101 Scheuerell, S
Aug 29 - Dec 15
HUMOR 130

10:00-11:00 MWF KEAN 008 Livingston, D
Aug 29 - Dec 15

10:00-10:50 MWF HOFF 136 Edwards, C
Aug 29 - Dec 15

11:00-12:20pm MTH GRAB 206 Newman, N
Aug 29 - Dec 15

01:30-02:20pm MWF HENN 350 Bell, V
Aug 29 - Dec 15

09:00-09:50 MWF HENN 470 Bechen, M
Aug 29 - Dec 15

12:30-01:50pm TTH WAHL 109 Welsh, H
Aug 29 - Dec 15

09:30-10:50 TTH HOFF 512 Belanger, K
Aug 29 - Dec 15

10:00-10:50 MWF ARCE 402 Pohland, G
Aug 29 - Dec 15

12:30-01:20pm MWF ARCE 402 Lammer-Heindel, C
Aug 29 - Dec 15

09:00-09:50 MWF ARCE 402 Kehren, M
Aug 29 - Dec 15
HUMOR 131


01:30-02:20pm MWF KEAN 334 Kerkenbush, R
Aug 29 - Dec 15

10:00-10:50 MWF WAHL 143 Kohlhaas, J
Aug 29 - Dec 15

09:30-10:50 TTH HENN 270 Heidenreich, J
Aug 29 - Dec 15

01:30-02:20pm MWF HOFF 340 Maskay, B
Aug 29 - Dec 15
20 22 6540 L.LIB 105 01 College Writing-FW 3.0

10:00-10:50 MWF HOFF 112 Pollock, J
Aug 29 - Dec 15

08:00-09:20 TTH HOFF 111 Witthoeft, C
Aug 29 - Dec 15

09:00-09:50 MWF HOFF 111 Koch, K
Aug 29 - Dec 15

09:30-10:50 TTH HOFF 111 Witthoeft, C
Aug 29 - Dec 15

02:00-03:20pm TTH HOFF 111 Yazbec, W
Aug 29 - Dec 15

12:30-01:50pm TTH ARCE 102 Wolff, M
Aug 29 - Dec 15
HUMOR 132

02:00-03:20pm TTH ARCE 102 Wolff, M
Aug 29 - Dec 15
20 19 5849 L.LIB 110 01 Public Speaking-FS 3.0

08:00-08:50 MWF HOFF 427 Goodman, C
Aug 29 - Dec 15

09:00-09:50 MWF HOFF 427 Goodman, C
Aug 29 - Dec 15

11:00-12:20pm TTH HOFF 427 Merkel, D
Aug 29 - Dec 15

12:30-01:50pm MW HOFF 427 Pisarik, P
Aug 29 - Dec 15

08:00-09:20 TTH HOFF 427 Merkel, D
Aug 29 - Dec 15

09:30-10:50 TTH HOFF 427 Pisarik, P
Aug 29 - Dec 15

12:30-01:50pm TTH HOFF 427 Donald, D
Aug 29 - Dec 15

02:00-03:20pm TTH HOFF 427 Merkel, D
Aug 29 - Dec 15

06:00-09:00pm T HOFF 427 Hanson, T
Aug 29 - Dec 15
25 26 7308 L.LIB 130 01 Witnesses-Hope,Heart,Hum-MC 3.0

02:30-03:50pm MW KEAN 303 Joensen, W
Aug 29 - Dec 15
25 24 7447 L.LIB 130 02 The Displaced Person-MC 3.0

11:00-12:20pm WF KEAN 011 Welch, L
HUMOR 133
Aug 29 - Dec 15
25 29 6833 L.LIB 135 01 Priests,Ministers,Rabbis-MC 3.0

01:30-02:20pm MWF WAHL 101 Waldmeir, J
Aug 29 - Dec 15
25 23 6834 L.LIB 135 02 Body of Christ At Prayer-MC 3.0

09:00-09:50 MWF KEAN 009 Pitt, D
Aug 29 - Dec 15
25 25 7365 L.LIB 135 03 Body of Christ At Prayer-MC 3.0

10:00-10:50 MWF KEAN 009 Pitt, D
Aug 29 - Dec 15
22 25 5730 L.LIB 220 01 Democ & Global Diversity-MD 3.0

09:30-10:50 TTH HOFF 112 Darr, B
Aug 29 - Dec 15
22 22 6046 L.LIB 220 02 Democracy/Global Diversity-MD 3.0

02:00-03:20pm TTH HOFF 511 Eby, J
Aug 29 - Dec 15

02:30-03:50pm MW HENN 070 Cavanagh, B
Aug 29 - Dec 15

09:30-10:50 TTH WAHL 101 Bechen, M
Aug 29 - Dec 15

11:00-12:20pm TTH WAHL 101 Lammer-Heindel, C
Aug 29 - Dec 15
25 7560 L.LIB 236 01 Quest Ethical Development-AV 3.0

09:30-10:50 TTH HOFF 340 Maskay, B
Aug 29 - Dec 15
25 23 7366 L.LIB 276 01 Law/Tech/Informatnl Privcy-AI 3.0

Aug 29 - Dec 15
25 21 7499 L.LIB 305 01 Portfolio-PJ 1.0

ARR ONL ONL Adams, R
Aug 29 - Oct 14
HUMOR 134

ARR ONL ONL Adams, R
Oct 18 - Dec 15

06:00-08:00pm TH SMYT 102 Osheim, A
Oct 24 - Dec 15
CTL STUDENTS ONLY
25 25 5871 L.MAT 091 01 Intermediate Algebra 4.0

11:00-11:50 MTTHF ARCE 102 Mulligan, D
Aug 29 - Dec 15
FIRST YEAR ONLY
25 21 5872 L.MAT 091 02 Intermediate Algebra 4.0

12:30-01:20pm MTWF WAHL 143 Mulligan, D
Aug 29 - Dec 15
FIRST YEAR ONLY
25 18 5881 L.MAT 113 01 College Algebra-FM 3.0

09:00-09:50 MWF HENN 270 Heidenreich, K
Aug 29 - Dec 15
CAN'T REG IF TAKEN MAT117 OR ABOVE
25 26 5882 L.MAT 113 02 College Algebra-FM 3.0

10:00-10:50 MWF HENN 270 Meyer, J
Aug 29 - Dec 15
CAN'T REG IF TAKEN MAT117 OR ABOVE
25 25 5906 L.MAT 115 01 Statistics-FM 4.0

11:00-11:50 MTTHF HENN 280 Rissler, M
Aug 29 - Dec 15

12:30-01:20pm MTWF HENN 180 Keller, R
Aug 29 - Dec 15

12:30-01:20pm MTWF WAHL 101 Heidenreich, K
Aug 29 - Dec 15
25 21 5909 L.MAT 117 01 Pre-Calculus-FM 4.0

11:00-11:50 MTTHF HENN 470 Heidenreich, J
Aug 29 - Dec 15
25 12 5912 L.MAT 117 02 Pre-Calculus-FM 4.0

12:30-01:20pm MTWF SCIE 252 Kohlhaas, A
Aug 29 - Dec 15
HUMOR 135
28 24 5913 L.MAT 150 01 Calc of One Variable I-FM 4.0

11:00-11:50 MTTHF HENN 250 Crook, S
Aug 29 - Dec 15
NO CREDIT IF L.MAT-170 TAKEN
25 22 5916 L.MAT 150 02 Calc of One Variable I-FM 4.0

12:30-01:20pm MTWF HENN 270 Crook, S
Aug 29 - Dec 15
25 14 5931 L.MAT 160 01 Calc of One Variable II 4.0

11:00-11:50 MTTHF HENN 270 Kohlhaas, A
Aug 29 - Dec 15
25 13 5933 L.MAT 250 01 Linear Algebra 3.0

12:30-01:20pm MWF HENN 250 Heidenreich, J
Aug 29 - Dec 15
25 18 5934 L.MAT 260 01 Analytic Geom/Calc III 4.0

08:00-08:50 MTWF HENN 180 Meyer, J
Aug 29 - Dec 15
25 13 7844 L.MAT 260 02 Analytic Geom/Calc III 4.0

07:00-07:50 MTWTH OFC OFC Heidenreich, K
Aug 29 - Dec 15
14 3 5936 L.MAT 390 01 Seminar 1.0

12:30-01:20pm F HENN 450 Meyer, J
Aug 29 - Dec 15
MAY REGISTER FOR COREQUISITE: L.MAT-250
14 6 7368 L.MAT 391 03 Guided Research 3.0

02:30-03:50pm MW HENN 250 Meyer, J
Aug 29 - Dec 15
25 12 7367 L.MAT 450 01 Modern Algebra 3.0

01:30-02:20pm MWF HENN 250 Kohlhaas, A
Aug 29 - Dec 15
25 9 6969 L.MBA 510 01 Managerial Effectiveness 3.0

05:30-09:30pm T KEAN 334 Gambrall, D
Sep 13 - Oct 25
MBA Students Only
10 3 7931 L.MBA 511 01 Business Analytics Overview 3.0

ARR ARR ARR Conway, D.
Oct 3 - Dec 16
25 13 7321 L.MBA 515 01 Ethical & Social Resp Bus 3.0

05:30-09:30pm M KEAN 303 Ciapalo, R
Sep 12 - Oct 24
MBA Students Only
HUMOR 136
20 8 6970 L.MBA 520 01 Data Science 3.0

05:30-09:30pm T KEAN 334 Lehman, D
Nov 1 - Dec 13
MBA Students Only
20 13 5732 L.MBA 555 01 Financial Management 3.0

05:30-09:30pm M KEAN 303 Hammermeister, J
Oct 31 - Dec 12
MBA Students Only
25 18 5907 L.MUS 101 01 Music Theory I 3.0

11:00-11:50 MTTHF VISI 115 Tyler, L
Aug 29 - Dec 15
10 5 5910 L.MUS 110 01 Applied Voice 1.0

ARR ARR ARR Kluck, A
Aug 29 - Dec 15
COURSE FEE: $275.00

ARR ARR ARR Kluck, A / Tyler, E
Aug 29 - Dec 15
COURSE FEE: $550.00

ARR ARR ARR Kluck, A / Tyler, E
Aug 29 - Dec 15
COURSE FEE: $275.00

ARR ARR ARR Kluck, A / Allen, C
Aug 29 - Dec 15
COURSE FEE: $275.00

ARR ARR ARR Kluck, A / Allen, C
Aug 29 - Dec 15
COURSE FEE: $550.00
20 14 5919 L.MUS 121 01 Applied Piano 1.0

ARR VISI 135 Tyler, L
Aug 29 - Dec 15
COURSE FEE: $275.00
20 0 5920 L.MUS 121 02 Applied Piano 2.0

ARR VISI 135 Tyler, L
Aug 29 - Dec 15
COURSE FEE: $550.00
20 15 5921 L.MUS 121 03 Applied Piano 1-2

ARR VISI 135 Chapman, C
Aug 29 - Dec 15
COURSE FEE: $275.00 or $550.00
10 1 7468 L.MUS 131 01 Applied Violin 1-2

ARR ARR ARR Luke, W
Aug 29 - Dec 15
HUMOR 137
COURSE FEE: $275.00 or $550.00
10 1 7469 L.MUS 132 01 Applied Viola 1-2

ARR ARR ARR Brenner, P
Aug 29 - Dec 15
COURSE FEE: $275.00 or $550.00
10 1 7470 L.MUS 133 01 Applied Cello 1-2

ARR ARR ARR Luke, W
Aug 29 - Dec 15
COURSE FEE: $275.00 or $550.00
10 0 7471 L.MUS 134 01 Applied String Bass 1-2

ARR ARR ARR Luke, W
Aug 29 - Dec 15
COURSE FEE: $275.00 or $550.00
10 9 7472 L.MUS 135 01 Applied Guitar 1-2

ARR ARR ARR McConnell, M
Aug 29 - Dec 15
COURSE FEE: $275.00 or $550.00
10 2 7473 L.MUS 141 01 Applied Flute 1-2

ARR ARR ARR Omarzu, J
Aug 29 - Dec 15
COURSE FEE: $275.00 or $550.00
10 1 7474 L.MUS 142 01 Applied Oboe 1-2

ARR ARR ARR Omarzu, M
Aug 29 - Dec 15
COURSE FEE: $275.00 or $550.00
10 2 7475 L.MUS 143 01 Applied Clarinet 1-2

Aug 29 - Dec 15
COURSE FEE: $275.00 or $550.00
10 2 7476 L.MUS 144 01 Applied Saxophone 1-2

Aug 29 - Dec 15
COURSE FEE: $275.00 or $550.00
10 0 7477 L.MUS 145 01 Applied Bassoon 1-2

ARR ARR ARR Pohland, G
Aug 29 - Dec 15
COURSE FEE: $275.00 or $550.00
5 1 5947 L.MUS 151 01 Applied Trumpet 1.0

ARR VISI 134 Gaunitz, M / Pohland, G
Aug 29 - Dec 15
COURSE FEE: $275.00
10 0 7369 L.MUS 151 02 Applied Trumpet 2.0

ARR VISI 134 Gaunitz, M / Pohland, G
Aug 29 - Dec 15
COURSE FEE: $550.00
HUMOR 138
5 1 5948 L.MUS 152 01 Applied French Horn 1.0

ARR VISI 134 Pohland, G
Aug 29 - Dec 15
COURSE FEE: $275.00
10 0 7370 L.MUS 152 02 Applied French Horn 2.0

Aug 29 - Dec 15
COURSE FEE: $275.00 or $550.00
5 0 5950 L.MUS 153 01 Applied Trombone 1.0

Aug 29 - Dec 15
COURSE FEE: $275.00
10 0 7371 L.MUS 153 02 Applied Trombone 2.0

Aug 29 - Dec 15
COURSE FEE: $275.00 or $550.00
5 0 5951 L.MUS 154 01 Applied Baritone 1.0

Aug 29 - Dec 15
COURSE FEE: $275.00
10 0 7372 L.MUS 154 02 Applied Baritone 2.0

Aug 29 - Dec 15
COURSE FEE: $275.00 or $550.00
5 0 5952 L.MUS 155 01 Applied Tuba 1.0

Aug 29 - Dec 15
COURSE FEE: $275.00
10 1 7373 L.MUS 155 02 Applied Tuba 2.0

Aug 29 - Dec 15
COURSE FEE: $550.00
10 1 7478 L.MUS 160 01 Applied Percussion 1-2

ARR ARR ARR Iwasaki, M
Aug 29 - Dec 15
COURSE FEE: $275.00 or $550.00
10 1 7374 L.MUS 176 01 Brass Techniques 1.0

ARR ARR ARR Pohland, G
Aug 29 - Dec 15
60 8 5957 L.MUS 181 01 Wind Ensemble 0.0

07:00-08:50pm TTH VISI 236 Pohland, G
Aug 29 - Dec 15
60 27 5958 L.MUS 181 02 Wind Ensemble 1.0

Aug 29 - Dec 15
HUMOR 139
12 2 7422 L.MUS 182 01 Jazz Ensemble 0.0

Aug 29 - Dec 15
30 7 7423 L.MUS 182 02 Jazz Ensemble 1.0

Aug 29 - Dec 15
80 11 5967 L.MUS 183 01 Loras Concert Choir 0.0

03:30-04:50pm TTH VISI 236 Kluck, A
Aug 29 - Dec 15
80 47 5969 L.MUS 183 02 Loras Concert Choir 1.0

03:30-04:50pm TTH VISI 236 Kluck, A
Aug 29 - Dec 15
20 4 5970 L.MUS 184 01 Chamber Singers 0.0

04:30-05:50pm MW VISI 236 Kluck, A
Aug 29 - Dec 15
REQUIRES AUDITION
MUST REGISTER FOR COREQUISITE: L.MUS-183
20 16 5971 L.MUS 184 02 Chamber Singers 1.0

Aug 29 - Dec 15
REQUIRES AUDITION
MUST REGISTER FOR COREQUISITE: L.MUS-183
30 3 5973 L.MUS 185 01 Bella Voce 0.0

Aug 29 - Dec 15
30 8 5974 L.MUS 185 02 Bella Voce 1.0

Aug 29 - Dec 15
30 0 7479 L.MUS 186 01 Con Brio 1.0

ARR ARR ARR Kluck, A
Aug 29 - Dec 15
REQUIRES AUDITION
12 3 5977 L.MUS 203 01 Music Theory III 3.0

10:00-10:50 MWF VISI 115 Tyler, L
Aug 29 - Dec 15
6 4 7420 L.MUS 295 01 Topics: Class Piano 1.0

09:30-10:20 TTH VISI 136 Tyler, L
Aug 29 - Dec 15
20 6 7421 L.MUS 295 02 Topics: Intro.Music Therapy 3.0

09:30-10:50 TTH VISI 115 Clark, D
Aug 29 - Dec 15
6 2 7467 L.MUS 295 03 Topics; Class Piano 1.0

02:30-03:20pm MW VISI 136 Tyler, L
Aug 29 - Dec 15
HUMOR 140
12 5 7424 L.MUS 309 01 Orchestration 2.0

Aug 29 - Dec 15
20 9 7425 L.MUS 315 01 History & Lit of Music III 3.0

08:00-09:20 TTH VISI 115 Brenner, P
Aug 29 - Dec 15
20 9 7270 L.NEU 281 01 Exploring the Brain Thru TBI 3.0

02:30-03:50pm MW SCIE 109 Kurczek, J
Aug 29 - Dec 15
0 3 7376 L.NEU 390 01 Research Experience 1-3

ARR Kurczek, J
Aug 29 - Dec 15
Neuroscience Majors Only
30 22 6741 L.PHI 150 01 Logic 3.0

10:00-10:50 MWF WAHL 109 Lammer-Heindel, C
Aug 29 - Dec 15
25 30 6855 L.PHI 311 01 Business Ethics-IV 3.0

11:00-12:20pm MTH KEAN 333 Ciapalo, R
Aug 29 - Dec 15
Clustered with 7409 L.COM 255 01
Interpersonal Communicatn-IV
20 20 6742 L.PHI 317 01 Ethics & New Genetics-HV 3.0

06:00-09:00pm T ARCE 402 Idziak, J
Aug 29 - Dec 15
Clustered with 6743 L.BIO 273 01 Human
Genetics-HV
30 17 7320 L.PHI 322 01 Modern Philosophy 3.0

09:30-10:50 TTH KEAN 009 Joensen, W
Aug 29 - Dec 15
2 2 7546 L.PHI 498 01 Directed Readings 1-3

ARR Lammer-Heindel, C
Aug 29 - Dec 15
20 19 5941 L.PHY 208 01 Astronomy-AH 4.0

06:00-08:50pm MTH SCIE 242 McLaughlin, Ken
Aug 29 - Dec 15
36 35 7378 L.PHY 210 01 Elements Physics I 4.0

01:30-02:20pm MWF SCIE 128 Thompson, K
Aug 29 - Dec 15
21 16 7888 L.PHY 210 02 Elements Physics I 4.0

11:25-12:10pm MTWTHF OFC OFC Thompson, K
Aug 29 - Dec 15
PSEO HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS ONLY
HUMOR 141
18 12 7380 L.PHY 223 01 Physics Scientist/Engineers I 5.0

12:30-01:20pm MTWF SCIE 242 McLaughlin, Ken
Aug 29 - Dec 15
18 12 7381 L.PHY 290 01 Physics Lab I 0.0

02:30-05:20pm W SCIE 122 Stierman, T
Aug 29 - Dec 15
COURSE FEE: $20.00

12:30-03:20pm TH SCIE 122 McLaughlin, Ken
Aug 29 - Dec 15
COURSE FEE: $20.00

01:30-04:20pm T SCIE 122 Carstens, T
Aug 29 - Dec 15
COURSE FEE: $20.00

MTWTHF OFC OFC Stierman, T
Aug 29 - Dec 15
COURSE FEE: $20.00
1 1 7545 L.PHY 398 01 Empirical Research 1-3

ARR ARR ARR McLaughlin, Ken
Aug 29 - Dec 15
30 26 7385 L.POL 101 01 Issues in American Politics 3.0

09:00-09:50 MWF ARCE 102 Cochran, D
Aug 29 - Dec 15
30 25 7386 L.POL 101 02 Issues in American Politics 3.0

10:00-10:50 MWF ARCE 102 Cochran, D
Aug 29 - Dec 15
25 21 7387 L.POL 131 01 Found Western Political Thgt 3.0

02:30-03:20pm MWF HOFF 311 Cochran, D
Aug 29 - Dec 15
25 27 7393 L.POL 201 01 Campaigns & Elections 3.0

01:30-02:20pm MWF HOFF 112 Budzisz, C
Aug 29 - Dec 15
25 16 7394 L.POL 301 01 Constitutional Law 3.0

02:00-03:20pm TTH HOFF 340 Budzisz, C
Aug 29 - Dec 15
25 24 7395 L.POL 314 01 Politics in Developing World 3.0

12:30-01:50pm TTH HOFF 312 Darr, B
Aug 29 - Dec 15
10 1 7694 L.POL 394 01 Internship 1-10

ARR ARR ARR Budzisz, C
Aug 29 - Dec 15
HUMOR 142
25 28 7271 L.PSY 101 01 Introductory Psychology 3.0

10:00-10:50 MWF HENN 280 Omarzu, J
Aug 29 - Dec 15

12:30-01:20pm MWF KEAN 011 Ashbrook, G
Aug 29 - Dec 15

12:30-01:20pm MWF HENN 350 Schilder, S
Aug 29 - Dec 15

09:00-09:50 MWF HENN 070 Schilder, S
Aug 29 - Dec 15
25 28 7275 L.PSY 121 01 Developmental Psych 3.0

10:00-10:50 MWF WAHL 101 Grinde, L
Aug 29 - Dec 15

09:30-10:50 TTH HENN 250 Homb, J
Aug 29 - Dec 15

09:00-09:50 MWF HENN 250 Grinde, L
Aug 29 - Dec 15

12:30-01:20pm MWF HENN 470 Hanson, J
Aug 29 - Dec 15
24 24 7278 L.PSY 211 01 Res Methods & Statistics I 4.0

01:30-02:20pm MWF HENN 360 Omarzu, J
Aug 29 - Dec 15
02:30-04:20pm W HENN 360
Psychology/Neuroscience Major/Minor
25 21 7279 L.PSY 221 01 Abnormal Psychology 3.0

02:30-03:50pm MW HENN 180 Simcox, A
Aug 29 - Dec 15
25 21 7280 L.PSY 221 02 Abnormal Psychology 3.0

12:30-01:50pm TTH HENN 250 Johnson, M
Aug 29 - Dec 15
HUMOR 143
25 20 7281 L.PSY 225 01 Personality-AI 3.0

03:30-04:50pm TTH HENN 070 Hopper, M
Aug 29 - Dec 15
20 19 7282 L.PSY 242 01 Industrial-Organiz Psych 3.0

02:00-03:20pm TTH HENN 280 Omarzu, J
Aug 29 - Dec 15
20 9 7283 L.PSY 265 01 Psychology As A Profession 1.0

12:00-12:50pm M HENN 280 Johnson, M
Aug 29 - Dec 15
20 20 7284 L.PSY 278 01 Cross-Cultural Psychology 3.0

02:00-03:20pm TTH HENN 070 Grinde, L
Aug 29 - Dec 15
16 15 7285 L.PSY 285 01 Drugs & Human Behavior-AH 3.0

12:30-01:50pm TTH HENN 070 Kurczek, J
Aug 29 - Dec 15
02:00-03:50pm T SCIE 014
COURSE FEE: $20.00
16 16 7286 L.PSY 285 02 Drugs & Human Behavior-AH 3.0

12:30-01:50pm TTH HENN 070 Kurczek, J
Aug 29 - Dec 15
02:00-03:50pm TH SCIE 014
COURSE FEE: $20.00
25 27 7287 L.PSY 331 01 Physiological Psychology 3.0

12:30-01:20pm MWF HENN 070 Hopper, M
Aug 29 - Dec 15
25 27 7288 L.PSY 332 01 Learning & Cognition 3.0

10:00-10:50 MWF HENN 070 Hopper, M
Aug 29 - Dec 15
15 16 7289 L.PSY 351 02 Adv Research Methods 1.0

ARR ARR ARR Omarzu, J
Aug 29 - Dec 15
10 1 7290 L.PSY 390 01 Psych Peer Assistantship 1.0

ARR ARR ARR Hopper, M
Aug 29 - Dec 15
10 0 7291 L.PSY 394 01 Internship 1.0

ARR ARR ARR Johnson, M
Aug 29 - Dec 15
10 0 7292 L.PSY 394 02 Internship 2.0

HUMOR 144
Aug 29 - Dec 15
10 2 7293 L.PSY 394 03 Internship 3.0

Aug 29 - Dec 15
25 22 7294 L.PSY 490 01 Senior Seminar & Portfolio-PJ 3.0

09:30-10:50 TTH HENN 280 Johnson, M
Aug 29 - Dec 15
PSYCHOLOGY MAJORS/MINORS ONLY
SENIORS ONLY
10 10 7501 L.PSY 527 01 Human Development 3.0

ARR ONL ONL Dunn, R
Aug 29 - Dec 15
15 12 7296 L.PSY 612 01 Prof. Orien & Ethical Practice 3.0

04:00-07:00pm W HENN 250 Johnson, M
Aug 29 - Dec 15
15 9 7297 L.PSY 615 01 Assessment 3.0

04:00-06:30pm T HENN 180 Schilder, S
Aug 29 - Dec 15
15 7 7905 L.PSY 615 02 Assessment 3.0

09:00-11:30 T HENN 360 Schilder, S
Aug 29 - Dec 15
12 7 7541 L.PSY 625 01 Psychopathology 3.0

ARR ONL ONL Dunn, R
Aug 29 - Dec 15
15 10 7299 L.PSY 633 01 Physiological Psychology 3.0

06:00-08:30pm TH HENN 070 Hopper, M
Aug 29 - Dec 15
10 10 7502 L.PSY 647 01 Helping Relationships 3.0

04:00-06:30pm M WAHL 124 Tuescher, K
Aug 29 - Dec 15
Open to Masters in Psych Program
8 2 7300 L.PSY 694 01 Practicum 3.0

ARR ARR ARR Dalsing, D
Aug 29 - Dec 15
NEED 12 GR PSY CREDS PRIOR TO REG
8 1 7301 L.PSY 696 01 Supvsed Clinical Internship I 3.0

Aug 29 - Dec 15
HUMOR 145

NEED 12 GR PSY CREDS PRIOR TO REG
8 0 7302 L.PSY 698 01 Supvsed Clinical Internship II 3.0

Aug 29 - Dec 15
8 0 7303 L.PSY 699 01 Supvsed Clinical Internshp III 3.0

Aug 29 - Dec 15
20 17 6751 L.REL 112 01 Intro Theology & Rel Studies 3.0

09:00-09:50 MWF SMYT 102 Kohlhaas, J
Aug 29 - Dec 15
25 22 7465 L.REL 250 01 Introduction to Old Testament 3.0

02:30-03:50pm TTH KEAN 305 Waldmeir, J
Aug 29 - Dec 15
25 21 7397 L.REL 261 01 Christ & Culture-AC 3.0

02:30-03:50pm MW WAHL 143 Pitt, D
Aug 29 - Dec 15
25 25 7398 L.REL 270 01 Intro Christian Values-AV 3.0

02:30-03:50pm MW KEAN 009 Kohlhaas, J
Aug 29 - Dec 15
25 29 7399 L.REL 316 01 Pilgrims in Their Own Land-IA 3.0

11:00-12:20pm MTH ARCE 402 Waldmeir, J
Aug 29 - Dec 15
Clustered with 7432 L.SPW 247 01 Colonia
Lit Latin America-IA
25 12 7400 L.REL 391 01 The Catholic Heritage 3.0

08:00-09:20 TTH SMYT 102 Idziak, J
Aug 29 - Dec 15
15 4 7516 L.REL 491 01 Thesis Writing 3.0

02:30-03:30pm F SMYT 102 Pitt, D
Aug 29 - Dec 15
SENIORS ONLY
RELIGIOUS STUDIES MAJORS ONLY
15 1 7619 L.SCP 690 01 School Counseling 3.0

04:00-06:30pm W HENN 170 Tuescher, K
Aug 29 - Dec 15
15 1 7620 L.SCP 694 01 Practicum in School Counseling 3.0

ARR ARR ARR Tuescher, K
Aug 29 - Dec 15
HUMOR 146
25 20 6097 L.SCW 130 01 Intro Social Welfare 3.0

09:00-09:50 MWF HENN 450 Cavanagh, B
Aug 29 - Dec 15
25 21 6098 L.SCW 130 02 Intro Social Welfare 3.0

10:00-10:50 MWF HENN 470 Bechen, M
Aug 29 - Dec 15
25 19 6099 L.SCW 231 01 Human Behav & Soc Environmt 3.0

09:30-10:50 TTH HENN 480 Fett, N
Aug 29 - Dec 15
25 23 7401 L.SCW 265 01 Culturl Competncy in Pract-AC 3.0

02:00-03:20pm TTH HENN 480 Cavanagh, B
Aug 29 - Dec 15
25 16 6101 L.SCW 347 01 Social Work Practice II 3.0

12:30-01:50pm TTH HENN 480 Bechen, M
Aug 29 - Dec 15
18 22 6102 L.SCW 348 01 Social Work Practice III 3.0

10:00-10:50 MWF HENN 450 Fett, N
Aug 29 - Dec 15
24 19 7402 L.SCW 350 01 Career Options & Prof Practice 3.0

08:00-09:20 TTH HENN 450 Fett, N
Aug 29 - Dec 15
SOCIAL WORK MAJORS ONLY
0 1 7929 L.SCW 394 01 Internship 1-6

ARR ARR ARR Fett, N
Aug 29 - Dec 15
10 29 5733 L.SMG 150 01 Intro Sport Management 3.0

08:00-08:50 MWF ROHL 143 Garrett, M
Aug 29 - Dec 15
Non-Senior Standing Only
25 22 5734 L.SMG 240 01 Sport and Society 3.0

09:30-10:50 TTH ROHL 143 Marx Scheuerell, A
Aug 29 - Dec 15
25 20 5735 L.SMG 240 02 Sport and Society 3.0

12:30-01:50pm TTH ROHL 143 Marx Scheuerell, A
Aug 29 - Dec 15
0 1 8012 L.SMG 294 01 Level-2 Internship Sport Mgmt 3-4

ARR ARR ARR Marx Scheuerell, A
Aug 29 - Dec 15
MINIMUM GPA OF 2.0 REQUIRED
0 1 8013 L.SMG 294 02 Level-2 Internship Sport Mgmt 3-4

ARR ARR ARR Marx Scheuerell, A
Aug 29 - Dec 15
HUMOR 147
25 24 5738 L.SMG 450 01 Sport Finance & Revenue Mgmt 3.0

02:30-03:50pm MW ROHL 143 Marx Scheuerell, A
Aug 29 - Dec 15
25 26 5739 L.SMG 468 01 Sport Marketing & Promotions 3.0

08:00-09:20 TTH ROHL 143 Garrett, M
Aug 29 - Dec 15
10 1 5741 L.SMG 492 01 Lev 3 Field Experience Spt Mgt 12.0

ARR ARR ARR Garrett, M
Aug 29 - Dec 15
SENIORS ONLY
SPORT MGMT MAJORS ONLY
25 26 6759 L.SOC 115 01 Intro to Sociology 3.0

12:30-01:20pm MWF ARCE 102 Garoutte, L
Aug 29 - Dec 15
Has Not Taken L.SOC-101

01:30-02:20pm MWF ARCE 102 Garoutte, L
Aug 29 - Dec 15

09:00-09:50 MWF HENN 180 Anderson, R
Aug 29 - Dec 15
30 28 7403 L.SOC 216 01 Social Problems 3.0

09:30-10:50 TTH HOFF 311 Parks, K
Aug 29 - Dec 15
30 28 7544 L.SOC 216 02 Social Problems 3.0

12:30-01:50pm TTH HOFF 311 Parks, K
Aug 29 - Dec 15
25 26 6762 L.SOC 240 01 Gender & Society 3.0

02:00-03:20pm TTH HOFF 311 Garoutte, L
Aug 29 - Dec 15
25 24 6765 L.SOC 254 01 Race & Ethnicity-AC 3.0

08:00-09:20 TTH HOFF 311 Anderson, R
Aug 29 - Dec 15
25 26 7404 L.SOC 295 01 Topics: Sociology of Sport 3.0

12:30-01:20pm MWF HOFF 312 Anderson, R
Aug 29 - Dec 15
25 8 6766 L.SOC 333 01 Statistical Analysis 3.0

02:30-03:50pm MW HOFF 340 Parks, K
Aug 29 - Dec 15
HUMOR 148
25 10 7405 L.SOC 336 01 Classical Sociological Theory 3.0

09:30-10:50 TTH HOFF 212 Garoutte, L
Aug 29 - Dec 15
10 1 7553 L.SOC 398 01 Emperical Research 1-4

ARR ARR ARR Garoutte, L
Aug 29 - Dec 15
18 10 6584 L.SPA 210 02 Intermediate Spanish I 3.0

01:30-02:20pm MWF ARCE 402 McCarthy-Gilmore, K
Aug 29 - Dec 15
18 8 6585 L.SPA 270 01 Adv Communicative Modes 3.0

09:00-09:50 MWF WAHL 143 Livingston, D
Aug 29 - Dec 15
18 14 6586 L.SPA 270 02 Adv Communicative Modes 3.0

01:30-02:20pm MWF WAHL 143 Livingston, D
Aug 29 - Dec 15
18 13 6587 L.SPA 350 01 El Mundo Hispano 3.0

09:30-10:50 TTH WAHL 143 Livingston, D
Aug 29 - Dec 15
18 19 7407 L.SPA 395 01 Special Topics:redaccion Avanz 3.0

02:30-03:50pm MW ARCE 402 McCarthy-Gilmore, K
Aug 29 - Dec 15
18 11 7408 L.SPA 460 01 Topics: Escritoras 3.0

02:00-03:20pm TTH WAHL 143 Jeffries, K
Aug 29 - Dec 15
25 29 7432 L.SPW 247 01 Colonia Lit Latin America-IA 3.0

11:00-12:20pm TF ARCE 402 McCarthy-Gilmore, K
Aug 29 - Dec 15
Clustered with 7399 L.REL 316 01 Pilgrims
in Their Own Land-IA
20 12 7507 L.SSE 101 01 Learning Strategies 2.0

10:00-10:50 MW WAHL 145 Wolff, M
Aug 29 - Dec 15
ENHANCED PROGRAM STUDENTS ONLY
10 2 7889 L.STM 501 01 Curriculum Inquiry in Stem 3.0

ARR ONL ONL Monhardt, R
Aug 29 - Sep 23
10 4 7696 L.STM 502 02 Scientif and Engineering Pract 3.0

ARR ONL ONL Monhardt, R
Oct 3 - Nov 18
HUMOR 149
Appendix C: Random Number Table

HUMOR 150
HUMOR 151
Appendix D: Email to Professors

HUMOR 152
Layout:
Dear Professor _______________,
My name is ___________. My COM 485 Communication Research group is conducting a

study on _______________________. Your course, (name of course), which meets on (days of
the week) at (time of day), has been randomly selected to be included in our study.
I would like to come to your class on ________________ and ask your students to complete our
questionnaire. It will take your students approximately 5 -7 minutes to complete the
questionnaire.
I appreciate your consideration of my request.
Please let me know if I may come to your class on __________ or tell me another date which
will work better for you.
Sincerely,
Your name.
Example:
Dear Professor Waldmeir,
My name is Erica Elsbernd. My COM 485 Communication Research group is conducting a

study on humor. Your course, REL 316, which meets on MTH at 11:00-12:20pm, has been
randomly selected to be included in our study.
I would like to come to your class on Monday, October 24 and ask your students to complete our
questionnaire. It will take your students approximately 5 -7 minutes to complete the
questionnaire.
I appreciate your consideration of my request.
Please let me know if I may come to your class on Monday, October 24 or tell me another date
which will work better for you.
Sincerely,
Erica Elsbernd
HUMOR 153
Appendix E: Questionnaire Cover Letter

HUMOR 154
HUMOR 155
Appendix F: Questionnaire Code Book

HUMOR 156
Instructions: Please read each question carefully. Circle the response that best reflects
your answer. You may only circle one option per question.
Year
1. What is your year in school?
1 = Freshman 2 = Sophomore 3 = Junior 4 = Senior 5 = Graduate Student
Gender
2. What is your gender?
1 = Male 2 = Female
For questions 3-21, circle the response that best reflects the extent to which you agree or
disagree with each given statement. You may only circle one option per question.
FUenjoy
3. I enjoy making people laugh.
1 = Strongly 2 = Disagree 3 = Neutral 4 = Agree 5 = Strongly

Disagree Agree
FUfriends
4. I joke around a lot with my closest friends.

Disagree Agree
FUothers
5. I usually dont joke around much with other people.

Disagree Agree
FUeffort
6. I dont have to work very hard at making other people laughI seem to be a naturally
humorous person.

Disagree Agree
FUstories
7. I rarely make other people laugh by telling funny stories about myself.

Disagree Agree
HUMOR 157
GUoffended
8. People are never offended by my sense of humor.

Disagree Agree
GUinappropriate
9. I joke in inappropriate situations.

Disagree Agree
GUconcern
10. When saying funny things, I am usually not very concerned about how other people are
taking it.

Disagree Agree
GUparticipate
11. I never participate in laughing at others.

Disagree Agree
GUputdown
12. If I dont like someone, I often use humor to put them down.

Disagree Agree
TESTjoke
13. I find jokes amusing.

Disagree Agree
GAtease
14. I find it attractive when someone teases someone who makes a mistake.

Disagree Agree
HUMOR 158
GAcriticize
15. I find it attractive when people use humor as a way of criticizing others.

Disagree Agree
GAoffend
16. I find it attractive when people do not worry about offending others with their humor.

Disagree Agree
GAparticipate
17. I find it attractive when someone does not participate in his or her groups laughter.

Disagree Agree
FAstories
18. I find it attractive when people tell funny stories about themselves.

Disagree Agree
FAothers
19. I find it attractive when people joke around with other people.

Disagree Agree
FAeffort
20. I find it attractive when someone is effortlessly humorous.

Disagree Agree
FAfriends
21. I find it attractive when someone says witty things with friends.

Disagree Agree
Thank you!
HUMOR 159
Appendix G: Raw Data

HUMOR 160
1.00 2.00 4.00 4.00 3.00 4.00 3.00 3.00 2.00 4.00 2.00 1.00 4.00
1.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 4.00 3.00 3.00
3.00 1.00 4.00 5.00 3.00 3.00 2.00 2.00 3.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 5.00
2.00 4.00 3.00 2.00 5.00 5.00 4.00 4.00
3.00 2.00 5.00 4.00 2.00 4.00 2.00 2.00 3.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 4.00
1.00 2.00 1.00 3.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00
3.00 1.00 5.00 5.00 2.00 4.00 2.00 2.00 3.00 2.00 4.00 2.00 4.00
2.00 2.00 2.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 5.00
3.00 1.00 4.00 4.00 3.00 3.00 2.00 4.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 3.00 4.00
3.00 4.00 2.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 5.00 4.00
4.00 2.00 4.00 4.00 3.00 3.00 2.00 3.00 2.00 3.00 2.00 2.00 4.00
1.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00
4.00 2.00 4.00 5.00 1.00 4.00 2.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 2.00 2.00 4.00
3.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 4.00
4.00 2.00 5.00 4.00 2.00 4.00 2.00 3.00 3.00 2.00 3.00 3.00 5.00
3.00 2.00 1.00 3.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00
3.00 2.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 2.00 4.00 4.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 4.00
2.00 4.00 2.00 2.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00
4.00 2.00 4.00 4.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 4.00 2.00 2.00 3.00 2.00 4.00
4.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00
3.00 2.00 3.00 2.00 5.00 5.00 3.00 2.00 3.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 3.00
1.00 5.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 3.00 4.00 4.00
3.00 2.00 4.00 5.00 2.00 3.00 2.00 3.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 4.00
3.00 4.00 1.00 3.00 5.00 4.00 4.00 4.00
4.00 2.00 4.00 4.00 2.00 4.00 2.00 3.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 1.00 4.00
1.00 1.00 1.00 3.00 5.00 5.00 4.00 4.00
3.00 2.00 5.00 5.00 1.00 4.00 2.00 4.00 2.00 3.00 2.00 2.00 4.00
3.00 4.00 2.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00
3.00 2.00 5.00 4.00 2.00 4.00 2.00 2.00 4.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00
2.00 3.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 4.00 5.00 5.00
4.00 2.00 5.00 5.00 4.00 4.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 4.00 5.00
1.00 2.00 2.00 4.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00
3.00 2.00 4.00 5.00 2.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 4.00 2.00 2.00 5.00
2.00 2.00 3.00 2.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00
HUMOR 161
3.00 1.00 5.00 5.00 2.00 4.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 2.00 4.00 4.00
2.00 2.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 5.00
3.00 2.00 5.00 5.00 1.00 5.00 5.00 1.00 2.00 4.00 1.00 2.00 3.00
5.00 3.00 3.00 4.00 3.00 5.00 4.00 5.00
3.00 2.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 2.00 3.00 3.00 3.00
3.00 4.00 2.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 4.00 4.00
4.00 2.00 5.00 5.00 1.00 4.00 2.00 4.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 4.00
1.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 4.00 4.00 5.00 4.00
4.00 2.00 5.00 5.00 2.00 3.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 3.00 1.00 5.00
1.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00
3.00 2.00 4.00 4.00 3.00 2.00 3.00 5.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 1.00 4.00
1.00 1.00 1.00 3.00 4.00 4.00 5.00 4.00
4.00 2.00 5.00 4.00 2.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 2.00 3.00 3.00 2.00 5.00
4.00 2.00 3.00 3.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00
3.00 2.00 4.00 4.00 3.00 3.00 2.00 3.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 4.00 4.00
3.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 5.00 4.00 5.00 5.00
3.00 1.00 5.00 5.00 2.00 2.00 4.00 3.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 4.00
3.00 4.00 2.00 2.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00
4.00 2.00 5.00 5.00 2.00 4.00 2.00 2.00 4.00 3.00 2.00 2.00 4.00
2.00 4.00 2.00 3.00 3.00 4.00 4.00 5.00
4.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 4.00 1.00 2.00 5.00 5.00 1.00 4.00 5.00
4.00 4.00 4.00 1.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00
4.00 1.00 4.00 5.00 2.00 4.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 4.00 3.00 3.00 4.00
3.00 2.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00
4.00 1.00 5.00 5.00 2.00 5.00 1.00 1.00 4.00 5.00 2.00 2.00 5.00
3.00 2.00 4.00 3.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 4.00
4.00 1.00 5.00 5.00 1.00 5.00 1.00 2.00 4.00 3.00 4.00 2.00 5.00
4.00 2.00 2.00 5.00 4.00 5.00 5.00 5.00
4.00 2.00 4.00 4.00 2.00 4.00 2.00 3.00 2.00 4.00 3.00 2.00 1.00
4.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 4.00 4.00 4.00
4.00 2.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 2.00 4.00 2.00 2.00 4.00 2.00 2.00 2.00
4.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 4.00 4.00 4.00
4.00 1.00 5.00 5.00 2.00 4.00 2.00 3.00 3.00 2.00 4.00 2.00 5.00
1.00 2.00 2.00 3.00 5.00 5.00 4.00 5.00
HUMOR 162
3.00 2.00 4.00 5.00 2.00 3.00 3.00 2.00 4.00 3.00 2.00 2.00 5.00
2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 4.00 4.00 5.00 4.00
3.00 2.00 5.00 5.00 2.00 4.00 2.00 3.00 2.00 1.00 2.00 4.00 5.00
2.00 2.00 3.00 3.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00
4.00 1.00 5.00 5.00 4.00 5.00 4.00 1.00 5.00 4.00 2.00 4.00 5.00
2.00 4.00 4.00 2.00 4.00 4.00 5.00 4.00
4.00 2.00 5.00 5.00 3.00 4.00 3.00 3.00 4.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 4.00
1.00 1.00 1.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 5.00 2.00
2.00 1.00 4.00 5.00 3.00 4.00 2.00 2.00 4.00 4.00 2.00 2.00 5.00
2.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00
4.00 1.00 5.00 5.00 4.00 5.00 4.00 3.00 1.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00
5.00 3.00 4.00 3.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00
2.00 1.00 4.00 4.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 4.00 2.00 2.00 3.00 2.00 4.00
2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00
3.00 1.00 5.00 5.00 1.00 4.00 2.00 2.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 1.00 5.00
3.00 1.00 4.00 1.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00
2.00 2.00 4.00 4.00 3.00 3.00 2.00 4.00 2.00 2.00 3.00 2.00 4.00
2.00 2.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00
3.00 2.00 5.00 5.00 2.00 4.00 2.00 2.00 3.00 2.00 4.00 2.00 4.00
1.00 1.00 2.00 2.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00
2.00 2.00 5.00 5.00 2.00 4.00 2.00 4.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 1.00 4.00
2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00
2.00 2.00 4.00 4.00 2.00 4.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 1.00 3.00 2.00 5.00
2.00 1.00 5.00 3.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 4.00
2.00 1.00 5.00 5.00 2.00 4.00 1.00 3.00 3.00 2.00 3.00 2.00 4.00
1.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 3.00 4.00 3.00 4.00
4.00 1.00 4.00 4.00 3.00 2.00 2.00 4.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 1.00 4.00
4.00 3.00 2.00 2.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00
2.00 2.00 5.00 5.00 1.00 4.00 1.00 4.00 3.00 1.00 4.00 2.00 5.00
2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 4.00 5.00 5.00 4.00
4.00 1.00 5.00 5.00 1.00 3.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 2.00 2.00 1.00 5.00
2.00 3.00 4.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 4.00 4.00
4.00 2.00 5.00 5.00 2.00 4.00 2.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 2.00 3.00 5.00
2.00 2.00 3.00 2.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 4.00
HUMOR 163
4.00 2.00 4.00 4.00 3.00 4.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 4.00
2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00
4.00 2.00 5.00 5.00 3.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 2.00 2.00 3.00 1.00 5.00
2.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 4.00 5.00 5.00
4.00 2.00 5.00 5.00 3.00 3.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 1.00 4.00
1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 3.00 4.00 3.00 3.00
4.00 1.00 5.00 5.00 2.00 4.00 4.00 1.00 5.00 2.00 2.00 1.00 4.00
1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00
4.00 1.00 5.00 4.00 1.00 5.00 2.00 3.00 1.00 1.00 3.00 1.00 4.00
1.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00
4.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 4.00 2.00 4.00 2.00 2.00 3.00 3.00 2.00 4.00
2.00 2.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 3.00
4.00 2.00 4.00 5.00 3.00 4.00 2.00 3.00 2.00 3.00 2.00 1.00 5.00
2.00 3.00 2.00 2.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00
4.00 2.00 4.00 5.00 2.00 3.00 2.00 3.00 3.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 4.00
2.00 2.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00
2.00 2.00 5.00 5.00 2.00 5.00 5.00 4.00 4.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 5.00
1.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 4.00 5.00 5.00 4.00
4.00 2.00 4.00 5.00 2.00 3.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 3.00 2.00 5.00
2.00 2.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 4.00 4.00
2.00 2.00 4.00 5.00 3.00 4.00 2.00 3.00 2.00 3.00 2.00 2.00 4.00
1.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 4.00 4.00 5.00 4.00
2.00 2.00 4.00 5.00 2.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 5.00
1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00
2.00 2.00 4.00 5.00 3.00 3.00 2.00 4.00 2.00 2.00 4.00 2.00 5.00
3.00 1.00 1.00 3.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00
2.00 1.00 4.00 5.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 1.00 4.00 3.00 3.00 2.00 3.00
2.00 3.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00
2.00 2.00 4.00 4.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 4.00 2.00 2.00 3.00 2.00 4.00
3.00 2.00 3.00 3.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00
2.00 2.00 4.00 4.00 2.00 4.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 4.00 4.00
2.00 2.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00
2.00 2.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 3.00 2.00 4.00 3.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 4.00
2.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 3.00 4.00 4.00
HUMOR 164
2.00 2.00 5.00 5.00 3.00 5.00 2.00 2.00 3.00 1.00 2.00 1.00 5.00
2.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00
2.00 2.00 4.00 5.00 2.00 5.00 4.00 2.00 4.00 3.00 4.00 1.00 5.00
1.00 1.00 1.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 5.00 5.00
3.00 1.00 4.00 5.00 2.00 3.00 2.00 2.00 4.00 3.00 3.00 1.00 5.00
3.00 3.00 4.00 2.00 5.00 5.00 4.00 4.00
2.00 2.00 4.00 4.00 2.00 3.00 2.00 4.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 1.00 3.00
1.00 1.00 1.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 4.00 3.00
2.00 2.00 4.00 4.00 3.00 3.00 2.00 3.00 3.00 2.00 2.00 3.00 4.00
3.00 2.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00
1.00 1.00 4.00 5.00 1.00 4.00 2.00 5.00 4.00 4.00 1.00 3.00 5.00
5.00 3.00 4.00 1.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00
2.00 2.00 4.00 5.00 2.00 3.00 2.00 3.00 3.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 4.00
3.00 2.00 1.00 3.00 4.00 4.00 5.00 5.00
1.00 2.00 5.00 4.00 4.00 3.00 2.00 2.00 3.00 1.00 2.00 2.00 4.00
3.00 4.00 2.00 2.00 4.00 5.00 5.00 5.00
1.00 2.00 5.00 5.00 2.00 3.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 3.00 5.00 2.00 5.00
1.00 1.00 1.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 5.00 5.00
1.00 1.00 5.00 5.00 2.00 4.00 2.00 2.00 5.00 5.00 4.00 1.00 5.00
2.00 4.00 5.00 2.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00
2.00 1.00 4.00 5.00 2.00 4.00 2.00 3.00 2.00 3.00 5.00 1.00 4.00
3.00 2.00 3.00 2.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00
1.00 2.00 4.00 5.00 1.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 2.00 3.00 4.00
3.00 3.00 3.00 2.00 4.00 4.00 3.00 5.00
1.00 2.00 5.00 5.00 2.00 5.00 2.00 4.00 3.00 2.00 2.00 1.00 5.00
3.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 4.00 4.00 5.00 5.00
1.00 2.00 4.00 5.00 2.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 2.00 2.00 4.00 2.00 4.00
2.00 2.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 5.00
1.00 1.00 5.00 5.00 2.00 4.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 5.00
3.00 3.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 4.00 5.00 5.00
4.00 2.00 4.00 5.00 2.00 4.00 2.00 1.00 3.00 4.00 3.00 2.00 5.00
3.00 3.00 5.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 5.00 5.00
1.00 2.00 4.00 5.00 3.00 3.00 2.00 3.00 3.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 4.00
2.00 2.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 4.00 5.00 4.00
HUMOR 165
3.00 1.00 4.00 4.00 2.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 2.00 1.00 3.00 2.00 4.00
2.00 2.00 2.00 3.00 3.00 4.00 3.00 4.00
1.00 2.00 4.00 5.00 3.00 4.00 2.00 4.00 2.00 4.00 5.00 1.00 3.00
1.00 1.00 2.00 2.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00
4.00 1.00 5.00 5.00 2.00 4.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 3.00 3.00 2.00 5.00
2.00 2.00 4.00 3.00 5.00 5.00 4.00 5.00
4.00 1.00 4.00 4.00 2.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 2.00 4.00 3.00 2.00 4.00
3.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00
3.00 1.00 4.00 5.00 1.00 4.00 3.00 2.00 4.00 2.00 2.00 4.00 5.00
1.00 4.00 4.00 3.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 5.00
4.00 1.00 4.00 4.00 1.00 5.00 5.00 1.00 3.00 3.00 1.00 4.00 4.00
4.00 4.00 3.00 3.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00
4.00 1.00 5.00 5.00 3.00 4.00 2.00 2.00 4.00 4.00 2.00 2.00 4.00
2.00 2.00 4.00 2.00 4.00 4.00 2.00 4.00
3.00 1.00 4.00 5.00 1.00 4.00 2.00 1.00 4.00 5.00 2.00 5.00 5.00
3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00
4.00 1.00 5.00 5.00 1.00 3.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 2.00 1.00 5.00
3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00
3.00 1.00 4.00 4.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 4.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 2.00 4.00
3.00 2.00 3.00 2.00 4.00 5.00 4.00
3.00 2.00 3.00 1.00 4.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 5.00 2.00 5.00 1.00 3.00
1.00 3.00 3.00 2.00 4.00 3.00 3.00 3.00
3.00 1.00 5.00 5.00 2.00 4.00 2.00 3.00 3.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 5.00
4.00 3.00 3.00 2.00 4.00 5.00 5.00 5.00
4.00 1.00 4.00 4.00 3.00 3.00 4.00 3.00 4.00 4.00 2.00 2.00 4.00
2.00 2.00 3.00 3.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00
4.00 1.00 5.00 5.00 2.00 4.00 2.00 3.00 3.00 2.00 3.00 2.00 4.00
1.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 4.00 5.00 3.00
4.00 1.00 3.00 4.00 3.00 4.00 3.00 3.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 1.00 3.00
2.00 3.00 3.00 4.00 3.00 3.00 4.00 4.00
4.00 1.00 5.00 5.00 2.00 3.00 2.00 4.00 3.00 4.00 3.00 1.00 4.00
1.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 4.00 3.00
4.00 1.00 5.00 5.00 1.00 4.00 1.00 3.00 5.00 4.00 4.00 1.00 5.00
3.00 1.00 3.00 3.00 4.00 4.00 5.00 4.00
HUMOR 166
3.00 1.00 5.00 5.00 3.00 4.00 2.00 2.00 5.00 4.00 1.00 3.00 5.00
4.00 4.00 3.00 3.00 4.00 4.00 5.00 4.00
4.00 1.00 4.00 5.00 2.00 4.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 4.00
2.00 1.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 4.00 4.00 4.00
4.00 1.00 4.00 5.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 2.00 3.00 2.00 2.00 3.00 5.00
3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00
3.00 1.00 4.00 5.00 2.00 3.00 2.00 3.00 3.00 2.00 1.00 4.00 4.00
4.00 4.00 4.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 4.00 3.00
3.00 1.00 5.00 5.00 2.00 5.00 3.00 1.00 3.00 4.00 2.00 2.00 5.00
3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00
4.00 1.00 4.00 5.00 3.00 4.00 3.00 4.00 2.00 3.00 2.00 3.00 4.00
3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 4.00 3.00
3.00 2.00 5.00 5.00 2.00 4.00 2.00 3.00 2.00 2.00 3.00 2.00 3.00
1.00 1.00 1.00 3.00 4.00 4.00 5.00 5.00
3.00 2.00 5.00 5.00 4.00 3.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 3.00 5.00
2.00 2.00 4.00 2.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00
3.00 2.00 5.00 5.00 2.00 3.00 2.00 2.00 3.00 2.00 2.00 3.00 4.00
2.00 2.00 4.00 2.00 5.00 4.00 4.00 4.00
3.00 1.00 5.00 5.00 2.00 5.00 2.00 4.00 2.00 2.00 4.00 2.00 5.00
1.00 1.00 1.00 5.00 4.00 5.00 5.00 3.00
1.00 2.00 5.00 5.00 2.00 4.00 1.00 4.00 4.00 3.00 2.00 2.00 5.00
1.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 4.00 4.00 5.00 5.00
1.00 1.00 5.00 5.00 2.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 1.00 5.00 1.00 1.00 5.00
3.00 5.00 5.00 1.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00
1.00 2.00 4.00 5.00 3.00 3.00 2.00 2.00 3.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 4.00
2.00 3.00 3.00 2.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00
1.00 2.00 4.00 5.00 3.00 4.00 1.00 2.00 4.00 1.00 2.00 2.00 5.00
1.00 1.00 2.00 2.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00
1.00 1.00 4.00 5.00 4.00 3.00 2.00 1.00 4.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 4.00
4.00 5.00 5.00 2.00 4.00 4.00 5.00 4.00
1.00 2.00 4.00 4.00 3.00 2.00 2.00 3.00 3.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 4.00
2.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 4.00 3.00 4.00 4.00
1.00 1.00 5.00 5.00 3.00 3.00 2.00 3.00 2.00 4.00 4.00 2.00 5.00
1.00 3.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 3.00 3.00 3.00
HUMOR 167
4.00 1.00 5.00 5.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 4.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 1.00 4.00
3.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 4.00 5.00 5.00 5.00
4.00 1.00 5.00 4.00 1.00 5.00 1.00 5.00 4.00 4.00 2.00 1.00 5.00
3.00 3.00 3.00 1.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 1.00
2.00 2.00 3.00 2.00 3.00 2.00 1.00 4.00 1.00 2.00 2.00 3.00 3.00
1.00 1.00 1.00 3.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 3.00
2.00 2.00 4.00 5.00 3.00 2.00 4.00 3.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 4.00
4.00 4.00 1.00 3.00 2.00 4.00 4.00 4.00
3.00 1.00 5.00 4.00 2.00 3.00 2.00 2.00 3.00 1.00 2.00 4.00 5.00
2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00
1.00 1.00 4.00 4.00 3.00 4.00 2.00 3.00 3.00 4.00 2.00 2.00 5.00
3.00 2.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 4.00 4.00 4.00
1.00 2.00 5.00 5.00 3.00 4.00 2.00 4.00 4.00 2.00 5.00 2.00 5.00
3.00 1.00 4.00 2.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00
1.00 2.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 3.00 4.00 4.00 2.00 2.00 3.00 2.00 3.00
2.00 2.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 3.00
3.00 1.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 2.00 2.00 4.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 5.00
2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 4.00 4.00 5.00 4.00
2.00 2.00 4.00 5.00 2.00 4.00 2.00 2.00 4.00 1.00 4.00 1.00 5.00
2.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00
2.00 2.00 5.00 5.00 4.00 3.00 2.00 5.00 3.00 4.00 2.00 2.00 5.00
1.00 1.00 2.00 2.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00
3.00 2.00 5.00 5.00 2.00 4.00 4.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 4.00 3.00 4.00
2.00 2.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 4.00 5.00 4.00
2.00 2.00 4.00 4.00 3.00 3.00 1.00 3.00 2.00 2.00 3.00 2.00 4.00
2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 2.00
2.00 2.00 5.00 5.00 2.00 4.00 3.00 2.00 4.00 4.00 3.00 2.00 5.00
2.00 2.00 2.00 4.00 4.00 5.00 5.00 5.00
2.00 1.00 5.00 5.00 2.00 4.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 2.00 3.00 2.00 5.00
3.00 2.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 5.00 5.00
2.00 1.00 5.00 5.00 2.00 4.00 1.00 2.00 2.00 1.00 4.00 2.00 4.00
3.00 1.00 1.00 5.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 5.00
2.00 4.00 2.00 2.00 3.00 2.00 4.00 1.00 3.00 3.00 4.00
1.00 3.00 1.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 5.00 5.00
HUMOR 168
4.00 1.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 3.00 2.00 4.00 2.00 2.00 4.00 4.00
2.00 2.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00
2.00 2.00 5.00 5.00 3.00 4.00 2.00 2.00 4.00 3.00 2.00 2.00 5.00
2.00 5.00 4.00 3.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00
1.00 1.00 4.00 5.00 2.00 4.00 2.00 2.00 4.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 5.00
2.00 2.00 1.00 3.00 4.00 4.00 5.00 5.00
2.00 2.00 4.00 4.00 2.00 3.00 2.00 4.00 3.00 2.00 1.00 2.00 4.00
2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 4.00 5.00 5.00 4.00
4.00 1.00 5.00 5.00 2.00 4.00 2.00 2.00 3.00 2.00 2.00 4.00 5.00
3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00
4.00 1.00 5.00 5.00 1.00 4.00 1.00 4.00 2.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 5.00
5.00 4.00 3.00 2.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00
4.00 1.00 5.00 5.00 3.00 2.00 2.00 4.00 2.00 3.00 2.00 2.00 5.00
2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 5.00 4.00 4.00 4.00
4.00 1.00 5.00 5.00 2.00 4.00 1.00 2.00 4.00 4.00 2.00 5.00 5.00
4.00 2.00 4.00 2.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00
4.00 2.00 4.00 5.00 2.00 4.00 2.00 4.00 2.00 3.00 2.00 2.00 5.00
2.00 2.00 2.00 3.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00
4.00 2.00 4.00 5.00 2.00 4.00 1.00 3.00 4.00 4.00 3.00 2.00 4.00
1.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 5.00 3.00 5.00 4.00
4.00 2.00 5.00 5.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 2.00 4.00 4.00 1.00 4.00 5.00
4.00 3.00 3.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 5.00 5.00
4.00 2.00 5.00 5.00 2.00 4.00 2.00 3.00 3.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 5.00
1.00 1.00 3.00 2.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00
4.00 2.00 5.00 5.00 4.00 3.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 4.00
1.00 2.00 1.00 2.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00
4.00 2.00 5.00 4.00 2.00 3.00 2.00 3.00 2.00 3.00 1.00 5.00 5.00
3.00 2.00 1.00 3.00 4.00 4.00 5.00 5.00
HUMOR 169
Appendix H: IRB Form

HUMOR 170
Loras College Institutional Review Board

REQUEST FOR IRB REVIEW
Student Research Project
Please complete the following research application. Provide all information requested as part of this
application. Do not simply refer to other documents or grant applications. Once completed, send this
form, with the attached Research description, and all supporting documents (email preferred) to the
Institutional Review Board chair: Kathrin Parks, Sociology Program (588-7819); irb@loras.edu
Ethics Certification: In submitting this review request, you agree to conduct this research as described in the
attached documents. You agree to request and wait to receive approval from the IRB for any changes to the research
proposal. You will comply with the policies for conducting ethical research as outlined in the Belmont Report (at
http://www.hhs.gov/ohrp/policy/belmont.html .) and other applicable professional ethical standards.
Please watch the video The Belmont Report: Basic Ethical Principles and Their
Application from the Office for Human Research Protections of the U.S.
Department of Health & Human Services, from the beginning of the program
to minute 13, available at www.youtube.com/watch?v=Up09dioFdEU . Your
electronic signature in the space below affirms that you have watched the
video and understand the ethical principles presented:
1. Student Investigator(s) and contact information:

Louisa Pavlik- Louisa.Pavlik@loras.edu, Erica Elsbernd- Erica.Elsbernd@loras.edu, Austin
McElroy- Austin.Cousins@loras.edu, Frank Fernandez Frank.Fernandez@loras.edu
2. Title of Project: Humor: Usage and Perception of Affiliative and Aggressive Styles among
College Students
3. Course Requiring Project: COM 485- Communication Research

4. Faculty sponsor name and contact information:
Faculty sponsors should be satisfied the procedures outlined in this review application are in line with the
ethical principles of the Belmont Report as well as any appropriate professional ethical standards. Faculty
sponsors should email the IRB chair (irb@loras.edu) to indicate that they have reviewed this
application prior to it being submitted. Students, you should copy your faculty sponsor on all IRB-
related correspondence.
5. Proposed duration of all project activities: From September to December 2016.
6. Approximate number of subjects: 175
7. Type of subject: (Mark all appropriate)
__ Adults, Non-student
_x_ Loras College students
__ Other college students
__ Minors (under age 18)
__ Persons with cognitive or psychological impairment
__ Persons with limited civil freedom
__ Persons with HIV+/AIDS
HUMOR 171
__ Pregnant women
6. Special considerations: (Mark all appropriate)
__ No special materials
__ Videotaping
__ Audio taping
__ Use of deception (explain in attachment)
__ Use of alcohol or drugs
__ Other (explain):
7. Funding source (other than Loras College): Not applicable.
Please complete the Research Description outlined on the next page.
RESEARCH DESCRIPTION
Please address each of the following points below. If a question or section is not applicable to
your research, please state this.
1. Purpose & Significance of Project.

Briefly describe the purpose of your research.
We are looking into the connection between humor use and perceptions through
questionnaire distribution. We would like to know how humor style relates to humor
perception. Negative and positive humor styles will be measured.
Describe your hypotheses/goals. If you give background on previous research that supports your
goals, please include reference citations at end of this section.
Our hypothesis is: Students are attracted to positive humor. Our research question is: To
which type of humor are students attracted?
Include an explanation of the expected outcome.
Through our research, we propose that students will report attraction for positive humor style
whether or not they enact positive humor in their own communication
Indicate why the information obtained might be useful or beneficial.
Humor has been found to be an effective coping mechanism for students under stress. It
would be beneficial to Loras College to know what kind of humor style (either positive or
negative) is more widely used by students.
2. Participants
Recruitment:
How will you recruit the participants?
We will find participants via stratified random sampling.
Where will they be recruited from?
Each student will have a non-zero or equal chance of being chosen to be in our study
because the pool we have selected from is the Fall 2016 complete class schedule.
How will they be selected?
HUMOR 172
The students enrolled in the classes will be found via stratified random sampling and
have the opportunity to complete our questionnaire. Members of our research team
will distribute the questionnaires to the selected classes.
Justification is required if participants will be restricted to one gender, racial, or ethnic group.
Not applicable.
Consent:
How will you obtain consent?
There is a form attached to the questionnaire which requests consent from the student
to take part in our research. The student may either consent or refuse.
If, due to the nature of your research, a formal consent document cannot be used, justification
for this must be given.
Not applicable.
Collaboration:
If you will be collaborating with other institutions in order to recruit participants and conduct
the research, please attach approvals that have been or will be obtained (e.g., school districts,
hospitals, other colleges). Preferably these will be letters on the cooperating institutions
letterhead, stating willingness to participate.
Not applicable.
3. Methods and Procedure: Describe your research procedure.

What will you ask the participants to do?
For each question or statement, students will be asked to circle the response that best reflect
their answer. 19 of the 21 questions use a Likert Scale, in which students will be asked to
respond: 1 = Strongly Disagree, 2 = Disagree, 3 = Neutral, 4 = Agree, 5 = Strongly Agree.
Where will they do this? Alone or in groups?
The respondents will work individually on their questionnaires during class time.
How long will the procedure take? How many sessions?
Eight total classes will be visited. The procedure takes 10-15 minutes from distributing to
collecting the questionnaires.
Give details about any questionnaires or stimuli participants will be exposed to; be specific in
amounts or dosages of any substances participants will be asked to ingest. (Participants may not
consume alcoholic beverages in student research projects.)
Not applicable.
Instruments/Materials: Attach copies of all forms, surveys and instruments to be used.
4. Risk & Benefit Analysis

What are the psychological, physical, or social (loss of reputation, deception, privacy, etc) risks
subjects might encounter by participating? (Please do not say none. All activities involve some risk,
although it may be minimal.)
Privacy is a risk, as the respondents name will be attached to the rest of the anonymous
questionnaire until we detach it immediately following collection.
HUMOR 173
What precautions will you take to protect participants or reduce risk?

We will detach all consent forms from the questionnaires as soon as possible.
What benefit, if any, will the participants gain from participating in this research? (Please do not
include compensation or course credit as benefit. If none, simply state that.)
Students might have the opportunity to reflect on their own humor use and perception.
What compensation, if any, will participants receive (payment, gifts, course credit, etc.)? (If none,
simply state that.)
None.
What follow-up or debriefing procedures will you have after the research is concluded?
We will thank them for their time and assure them that all responses are confidential.
If any deception or withholding of information is required for this research, please explain why it is
necessary and how this will be handled in the debriefing. Attach debriefing script.
Not applicable.
5. Data Handling
How will the data be kept anonymous or confidential?
We will detach the consent form from the questionnaire as soon as possible.
Where will data be stored and for how long? Who will have access to the data?
Data will be stored in the locked office of our research advisor, Dr. Harris. We will have
access to the data upon request and only as long as we need it to record the responses in a
data program.
Include specific details on the use and storage of any audio or video tapes.
Not applicable
Do you plan to share the results of this research in a class? If so, how?
Yes. We will give a presentation on the relationships found between humor style and humor
style perception in our Communication Research class. We will discuss general trends and
the importance of collecting data.
Do you plan to share the results of this research outside of your class? If so, how?
No.
6 If Participants Will Be Minors (Under age 18)

Justify the inclusion of minors.
N/A
Specify how parental consent will be obtained
N/A
Specify how you will obtain assent of minor subjects.
N/A
HUMOR 174
Describe any activities planned for non-participants, if other children in a classroom will be
participating.
N/A
Describe how you will use nonverbal signs to indicate when young children wish to stop
participating.
N/A
7. Investigator Background (Student researchers only)

What coursework have you had to prepare you for research?
We have all taken classes that required research collection in the past. As we proceed in
researching, Dr. Harriss Communication Research class has expanded our knowledge on
social science. We have specific instruction on how to conduct our research accurately and
professionally.
What is your previous research-related experience, if any?
We have never conducted primary research through a questionnaire method.
How will your faculty sponsor supervise or be involved?
We have learned in class how to construct items in our questionnaire as well as how to
analyze the data we collect. Dr. Harris is always available for more specific instruction and
inquiry.
8. Consent Forms. Please attach one of the following options related to obtaining consent:
Written Consent Attach copy of all consent & assent forms. See Informed Consent Checklist
on the IRB website
(https://lorasedu.sharepoint.com/Academics/AcademicCommittees/IRB/default.aspx).
Oral consent Provide justification for not obtaining written consent and the text of the script you
will use to obtain oral consent.
Waiver of consent Provide written justification for waiving consent process. This is rare and
usually granted only if consent process itself adds substantial risk to the research.

Humor Research Paper Final Draft

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Humor Research Paper Final Draft

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Running head: HUMOR 1

Humor: Perceived Usage and Attractiveness of Affiliative and Aggressive Styles

Erica Elsbernd, Austin McElroy, Louisa Pavlik, and Frank Fernandez

Analysis of the Results...31

Limitations of the Study.....82

Recommendations for Further Study.85

suggest a similarity-attraction relationship between perceived humor usage and humor

Keywords: perception, humor, affiliative, aggressive, similarity-attraction

into four categories.

The purpose of this study is to further the understanding of humor in interpersonal

humor. This study is grounded in components of the similarity and complementarity

battle between the two sides (Fry, 2011).

Theoretical Conceptualizations of Humor

situations points to a common application of relief theory of humor (Meyer, 2000).

explained this theory:

An accepted pattern is violated, or a difference is noted close enough to the norm to be

non-threatening, but different enough from the norm to be remarkable. It is this

receiver (p. 313).

experience humor under this theory (Meyer, 2000).

some ridiculed others (Meyer, 2000, p. 315).

Humor as a Social Function

relationship development. In a discussion of humors place in the field of communication,

Therefore, to refuse to take a joke is, in effect, to refuse to accept a relationship

(Perinbanayagam, 1991, p. 130).

Functions of Humor in Interpersonal Communication

Humor in interpersonal communication has many uses. Because of the communicative

affects a variety of relationships including student-teacher, manager-subordinate, romantic

specific ways humor is used in interpersonal communication.

Meyers (2000) Four Functions of Humor Model

explained this model:

unify and those that divide (p. 318).

Identification. The identification function strengthens support between communicators

equal relationship to the speaker (Meyer, 2000).

Clarification. The clarification function allows communicators to condense their views

Divine, 1981; & Meyer, 2000).

Differentiation. The final function is differentiation, which communicators often use to

groups (Meyer, 2000).

Halls (2013) Five Positive Functions of Humor

stress, let go of conflict, and apologize (p. 274).

creating special bonds among members (Graham, et al., 1992).

Butterfield, & Booth-Butterfield, 1995).

particularly by making insulting jokes at one and other (Grade, 2008).

varies from person to person, S. Booth-Butterfield and Booth-Butterfield (1991) identified

work or social, formal or informal (M. Booth-Butterfield, et al., 2007, p. 302).

efficiently in society (Wanzer, M. Booth-Butterfield & Booth-Butterfield, 1996).

enact humor in communication was linked to healthy social relationships in higher HO

Humor Orientation and Stress

In 2007, M. Booth-Butterfield, et al. measured the humor orientation, job satisfaction,

emotional expressivity and coping effectiveness of 186 undergraduate students through a

Butterfield, et al., 2007, p. 312).

Butterfield, et al. (2007) there is support:

A growing body of research is demonstrating that the personality trait of enacting

relieved by others (p. 312).

students use humor to manage stress (UNI Counseling Center, 2006).

Humor Styles Questionnaire

stable, and concerned for others (p. 70-71).

Similar to affiliative humor, self-enhancing humor is also a form of positive humor

(Martin, et al., 2003, p. 48), not ones relationship with others.

understood using relief and/or incongruity theory, as discussed earlier.

aggression and negatively related to seriousness (p. 71).

78). When humor is domineering, belligerent, critical, or contemptuous in close relationships, it

negative social desirability (Kuiper, et al., 2004).

considered nonconformists who used an active and verbally-hostile style of presentation;