explore
IIt sounds like a joke, but when I was starting out as a stand-up comedian, I also worked as a researcher at a sperm bank.
My laboratory was investigating the causes of infertility in young men. Part of my job was to conduct clinical visits with participants. They will provide semen samples for research purposes in exchange for $75.
However, common concerns quickly emerged among participants. Many feared that female scientists like me would steal semen samples without their consent and attempt to produce offspring. My first strategy to quell their paranoia was to push the standard scientific line and say that using their biological specimens outside of pure research is not only unethical but illegal. That was to explain.
This didn't seem to work. So I decided to try out a new side hustle for them.
“Oh, please,” I say. “Most women wouldn't compete for sperm from a man who happened to have three hours of free time during work hours. The sperm of Ivy League Olympians can be obtained from any sperm bank in the country.” Please don't praise me.”
Humor seems to work by flipping the same emotional switch that misinformation uses.
Laughing by irreverently exposing the irrationality of their fears seemed to be the only way to soothe anxious participants.
Since that first interaction in the sperm lab, I have employed humor as a way to cut through the noise of scientific communication and reach people more quickly and effectively. Especially when emotions run high and misinformation flows freely.
Decades of research have demonstrated that humor has the potential to enhance most forms of communication. Research shows that laughter increases people's energy, interest, and approval of topics big and small. During the early days of the COVID-19 pandemic, when panic broke out over toilet paper, the Taiwanese government launched a “humor over rumors” campaign. In one initiative, then-Taiwanese Prime Minister Su Tseng-chang released a popular meme featuring a cartoon of a man shaking his back with the caption, “We only have one butt!” Jacob Tischer, an anthropologist at Boston University, said the campaign was effective in reducing stockpiles.
A 2018 study evaluated whether humor could change attitudes toward MMR (measles, mumps, rubella) vaccination among vaccine-hesitant participants. Participants were randomly assigned to read an excerpt of the text below. jon stewart's daily showsome contain jokes or are edited for humor.1 An example of text quoting a news clip in which the anchor referred to measles as an “off-chain contagion”:
interesting example: I'll tell you this: Measles is contagious! (Singing) I like big lungs and I can't lie! I guess what she's trying to say is that the measles started at the bottom and now it's here. Obviously I'm not a doctor. Please pardon my ignorance. But what does “out-of-chain transmissibility” mean for healthcare organizations?
normal example: As you can see, measles is something we need to be concerned about again. Of course I'm not a doctor, just a news reporter. Please forgive my ignorance regarding infectious diseases. But what does “off-chain communicability” mean to healthcare organizations? See what they have to say in the following clip.
Researchers found that humorous examples were not only more effective at reducing MMR vaccine hesitancy among participants compared to examples without humor but containing the same factual information; It was also found that negative psychological reactions could be reduced. Anger or frustration about a topic, etc.
Humor is also an effective way to combat misinformation surrounding more existential scientific topics such as climate change. Another 2018 study looked at reactions to satirical videos in the United States. onion The title is “Climate change researchers discuss the challenge of thwarting a global warming conspiracy.''2 In it, a fictional scientist reports:
Have all the scientists in the world spread the lie that human activity is possible cause Global warming is a monumental undertaking…the work on this has been truly amazing. You don't even want to know how much planning went into making the Great Barrier Reef look like shit.
The study found that climate-skeptical participants who watched the video were more likely to later believe that climate change is real and have an increased awareness of the risks of climate change. This effect was strongest among participants who were originally the most skeptical about climate change.
Sperm from Ivy League Olympic athletes can be obtained from any sperm bank in the country. Don't flatter yourself.
Humor seems to work primarily by flipping the same emotional switch that misinformation uses. A comical approach can draw people in and override logical and critical thinking.3 However, researchers often avoid humor, perhaps because comedy and hard science often seem to be opposite ends of the spectrum. While humor is largely dependent on the most outlandish fences, science is fenced in by rigid specificity and perceived seriousness.
When I first started using humor to enhance my work as a scientist, I still doubted whether I would be taken seriously. Sarah Yeo, a communication professor at the University of Utah, knows that hesitation all too well. “Science is seen as a neat, serious, somewhat sterile process,” she says. “Humor is at odds with this perception.” But Yeo argues that humor, when used well, can blend well with serious scientific discovery. According to her review, a solid and humorous approach can almost always improve scientific communication and does not reduce a scientist's credibility.Four
“There always needs to be some kind of balance. [in science communication]' says John Cooke, senior research fellow at the Melbourne Center for Behavior Change at the University of Melbourne. “You don't want people to feel hopeless and depressed because it can be paralyzing. But you can't just give them solutions full of hope and humor, because then people lack a sense of urgency.” We need both. We need to say there's a problem here, but we can solve it.”
Scientific humor can be successful by exploiting emotional reasoning, a cognitive distortion in which logical reasoning is overwhelmed when a person feels a strong emotional response.Five (This is why love is blind, or why we say things in an argument that we later regret. The heart has an uncanny ability to override the brain.)
People are conditioned to stay there waiting for the punchline.
One comedic technique known as parallel argument uses emotional reasoning to counter persuasive misinformation by forcing more logical thinking. The author creates a flawed story with too much context. I had a similar argument with the nervous young men at the sperm bank. By comparing their samples to those of Olympians who graduated from Princeton University, we were able to counteract their fears by highlighting their irrationality.
John Cook uses this approach to making hay in his illustrated book Grumpy Uncle vs. Climate Change: Understanding and How to Deal with Climate Science Deniers. One illustration depicts a man dressed outdoors in winter and saying, “It's cold… There's no such thing as global warming!” Below that is a similar illustration of the same man outside at night saying, “It's dark… there's no sun!” Cook uses humor to fact-check misinformation about climate change by pointing out logical flaws in absurd ways. In a case study, Cook and his colleagues found that the spin-off “Cranky Uncle” video game was successful in helping students identify misinformation and encourage critical thinking. “Humor has been an effective way to make people more resilient to misconceptions,” he says.
Even when dealing with heavy topics like the global climate crisis, “humor can be soothing,” Cook said. “You can bring people in, but you can also give them enough information to properly understand the threat.” This is partly because people are conditioned to stay there waiting for the punchline. This is because it is attached. “When you start telling jokes, people expect that there will be a payoff at the end of this journey. They stay with you because they know there will be a payoff. So this gets people's attention. “It's a way to engage, get more cognitive effort from people,'' and potentially widen the frontier for sharing accurate information.
Supporting that conclusion, a 2021 study found that parallel discussion with humor was better than non-humor approaches in correcting misinformation about the HPV vaccine.6 According to the study participants, humorous revisions were actually more believable than honest, factual versions.
One of the big challenges in applying humor to serious scientific topics is that jokes tend to provoke strong emotional reactions, and in some cases, those reactions can backfire. “It's especially important to know who's in your audience. How can you make a joke that doesn't alienate your audience or make them feel targeted?” says Yoh. But clinging to the typical, pragmatic scientific attitude comes with its own dangers. “Decades of research have shown that simply providing information is not enough to change attitudes and behaviors,” she added.
Sometimes all you need is a shocking joke about chickens and roads or genetic aptitude to get the point across. 
Lead image: Kues / Shutterstock
References
- Moyer-Gusé, E., Robinson, MJ, Mcknight, J. The role of humor in messages about the MMR vaccine. health communication journal twenty three514-522 (2018).
- Anderson, AA and Becker, AB At the end of the day, it's more than just funny. Irony as a catalyst for public engagement on climate change. science communication Four (2018).
- Yeo, SK and McKasy, M. Emotion and humor as antidotes to misinformation. PNAS 15 (2021).
- Riesch, H. Why did the proton cross the road? Humor and science communication. Public understanding of science 7768-765 (2015).
- Cook, J., Ellerton, P., Kinkead, D. Deconstructing climate misinformation to identify inferential errors. environmental research 13 (2018).
- Kim, SC, Vraga, EK, Cook, J. An eye-tracking approach to understanding misinformation and correction strategies on social media: The mediating role of attention and credibility in reducing HPV vaccine misinformation. health communication 131687-1696 (2021)
Get the Nautilus Newsletter
Cutting edge science explained by the brightest thinkers alive.
