↓ Skip to main content

Pleasures of the Mind: What Makes Jokes and Insight Problems Enjoyable

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, January 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (76th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (63rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
10 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
24 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
53 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Pleasures of the Mind: What Makes Jokes and Insight Problems Enjoyable
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, January 2018
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.02297
Pubmed ID
Authors

Carla Canestrari, Erika Branchini, Ivana Bianchi, Ugo Savardi, Roberto Burro

Abstract

In this paper, a parallel analysis of the enjoyment derived from humor and insight problem solving is presented with reference to a "general" Theory of the Pleasures of the Mind (TPM) (Kubovy, 1999) rather than to "local" theories regarding what makes humor and insight problem solving enjoyable. The similarity of these two cognitive activities has already been discussed in previous literature in terms of the cognitive mechanisms which underpin getting a joke or having an insight experience in a problem solving task. The paper explores whether we can learn something new about the similarities and differences between humor and problem solving by means of an investigation of what makes them pleasurable. In the first part of the paper, the framework for this joint analysis is set. Two descriptive studies are then presented in which the participants were asked to report on their experiences relating to solving visuo-spatial insight problems (Study 1) or understanding cartoons (Study 2) in terms of whether they were enjoyable or otherwise. In both studies, the responses were analyzed with reference to a set of categories inspired by the TPM. The results of Study 1 demonstrate that finding the solution to a problem is associated with a positive evaluation, and the most frequent explanations for this were reported as being Curiosity, Virtuosity and Violation of expectations. The results of Study 2 suggest that understanding a joke (Joy of verification) and being surprised by it (Feeling of surprise) were two essential conditions: when they were not present, the cartoons were perceived as not enjoyable. However, this was not enough to explain the motivations for the choice of the most enjoyable cartoons. Recognizing a Violation of expectations and experiencing a Diminishment in the cleverness or awareness initially attributed to the characters in the cartoon were the aspects which were most frequently indicated by the participants to explain why they enjoyed the joke. These findings are evaluated in the final discussion, together with their limitations and potential future developments.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 10 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 53 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 53 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 7 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 13%
Student > Bachelor 5 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 4%
Professor 2 4%
Other 6 11%
Unknown 24 45%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 18 34%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 4%
Linguistics 2 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 2%
Computer Science 1 2%
Other 5 9%
Unknown 24 45%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 27 November 2022.
All research outputs
#4,740,368
of 23,202,641 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#7,721
of 30,772 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#105,044
of 442,112 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#195
of 538 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,202,641 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 79th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 30,772 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 442,112 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 538 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% of its contemporaries.