Pedagogical Effect of Humor on Teaching

Said Shiyab
United Arab Emirates University
s.shiyab@uaeu.ac.ae

Humor is a social phenomenon and a form of communication that should not be disregarded in any
learning or teaching environment. It plays a fundamental role in creating harmony and cohesion
between students and teachers. The significant role humor plays stems from the fact that humor is
conducive to the learning process and intercultural awareness. It helps break the monotony and
keeps students tuned in to their teachers. One of the purposes of this paper is to examine the role
humor plays in teaching and students’ learning. It attempts to show how humor can be used as a
teaching and an effective communicative device in the classroom. The paper also identifies the
functions of humor, its effect in a teaching environment, and its contribution to learners’ creativity.
Questionnaires were distributed to students to see whether or not they have learned subject-matters in
humorous teaching and learning environments. The effect of humor on the learner’s creativity will
also be examined. Questionnaires were analyzed and a rationale was provided as to the effect and
role humor plays on their educational outcomes. Conclusions were drawn and further pedagogical
implications were provided for further studies.
INTRODUCTION
The meaning of the term “humor” has changed over the years. In the past, particularly during the
Renaissance, humor was perceived as something negative, usually denoting an unbalanced mental
condition, a mood or unreasonable caprice. In the mid-18th century the term was no longer regarded
as an aberration. Instead, it was perceived as a whimsical oddity, amusing and innocent. It was not
until the 19th century that humor became a literary concept and its function was to entertain people on
literary, social or cultural occasions. Today, the term humor is established as the highest and richest
form of comedy, denoting anything witty or anything that makes us laugh (Weaver & Cotrell 2001:
168).
Along the same line, Joshua et al (2005) point out that humor is used to refer to a stimulus (e.g.
comedy film), a mental process (e.g. perception or creation of amusing incongruities), or a response
(such as laughter or exhilaration). Bruner (2002) similarly asserts that humor is the quality that makes
something funny and amusing. Freud (1995:604) maintains that humor is caused by the pleasure in
stimulating others and/or by the desire to release emotions.
At the intercultural level, humor was perceived differently, i.e. what is humorous or funny in one
culture may not be humorous or funny in another. Even within the same culture, humor varies from
one community to another or from one individual to another. Over time and throughout history,
humor has been used as a way of entertaining people in most academic disciplines, whether such
entertainment is on campuses or in schools. At a later stage, humor was recognized as a social
propriety and an intellect where wit and travesty can be viewed on stage.
Furthermore, attitudes about humor and its effectiveness as a teaching or social device have varied
across the academic disciplines. On one hand, and according to Torok et al. (2004), humor was
traditionally perceived as a form of distraction and virtually a waste of time, as it reduces classroom
morale and efficiency. Nowadays, it has a significant role to play in college or classroom learning. In
an article entitled Is Humor an Appreciated Teaching Tool?, Torok et al. (2004) reported on such
attitudes by saying that by today’s pedagogical standards, humor is fundamental in classroom
teaching; it has a substantial place in classroom lectures and testing. Torok et al. believe that humor is
encouraged across all academic levels. In post secondary education, she argues, humor is viewed as a
significant teaching tool in statistics (Berk and Nanda 1998; Freedman et al. 1999), law (Gordon
1982), and other areas that are perceived by students as difficult (Kher et al. 1999). According to
Cornett (1986), humor has been an important factor in facilitating the retention of novel information,
and, above all, according to Gorham and Christophel (1990), it increases learning speed.
WHAT IS HUMOR?
Etymologically, and according to Weaver & Cotrell (2001), the word “humor” comes from the Latin
word “humor.” The pronunciation of the initial /h/ is only of recent date, and sometimes omitted
(Fowler, 2004). According to Harper (2001), humor means “moist”. It refers to fluids in the body:
blood, phlegm, choler (yellow bile) and melancholy (black bile). At the communicative level, humor
is “any communication perceived by any of the interacting parties as humorous and leads to laughing,
smiling, or a feeling of amusement” (Robinson (1977).
It is not the contention of this study to define humor as being funny or acting like a clown in the
classroom as this is unequivocally counter- productive to any classroom learning or in any classroom
teaching. Teachers have to be careful about the uncalculated consequences of humor abuse or
overuse. For example, one may make a humorous statement regarding other people’s race, culture,
religion, etc. In such a situation, the effect of humor may be counter-productive. However, if humor
is conveyed to the students carefully without causing any kind of offense to them, it will create a
positive learning environment and promote understanding and enhance students’ attention.
At the social level, humor is a form of behavior that is needed in our society, simply because the life
we lead is demanding and stressful. As Robinson (1977) puts it, humor can ease the “tension of a
troubled world”. A sense of humor signifies emotional maturity and laughter is a sign of strength,
freedom and health, beauty, youth, and happiness. From a learning perspective, humor has been the
subject of investigation, and only recently, sprang from the disciplines of psychology, philosophy and
medicine (Brunner 2002).
Humor has two types: laughter and comedy. According to Sorell (1972:13), laughter is a
psychological and physiological phenomenon, whereas comedy is the creative act of one man’s
humorous capacity. Similarly, Langer (2003:346) argues that laughter is physical and can occur when
one is tickled. This kind of humor triggers feelings of amusement among people. Humor is simply
“one of the causes of laughter”. Langer goes on to stress that humor has its home in comic drama,
whereas laughter springs from its structure. According to Langer, humor is not the essence of comedy,
but only one of its most useful and natural elements.
ROLE OF HUMOR IN TEACHING
In an article entitled Transforming Thought: the Role of Humor in Teaching, Brunner (2002) shows
how humor can change the way individuals think about problems and situations. The new way in
which individuals view problems and situations is called the chemical element that transforms the
individual’s mood (Lin Yutang 1976). Yutang suggests that the effect of such transformation is that
of a catalyst, or may even be silent but inevitable and dramatic. This, according to Brunner (2002),
belongs to the teaching toolkit, and it should be used by teachers most of the time. Brunner believes
that the substance of what most teachers have to teach is problematic and is not funny, but in order for
humor to be effective, it must rely heavily on delivery. Although teachers have not learned this kind
of delivery in school nor was it part of their professional training, Brunner still believes that great
teachers display the ability to use humor effectively for the purpose of learning.
While humor has good advantages in teaching, there is a dangerous side to it. In an article entitled
Humor as a Double-Edged Sword: Four Functions of Humor, Meyer (2000) rightly asserts that while
humor use unites communicators through mutual identification and clarification of positions and
values, it divides them through enforcement of norms and differentiation of acceptable versus
unacceptable behavior of people. This paradox in the function of humor in communication, Meyer
argues, functions as a unifier and divider, allowing humor use to define social boundaries..
FUNCTIONS OF HUMOR IN COMMUNICATION
From a different angle, Powell and Andersen (1985) believe that most if not all teachers can be
humorous. Humor needs a skillful person, and it can sometimes be very offensive to audiences or
students if not delivered properly or perceived by students appropriately. Humor can lead to
misunderstanding, giving rise to sarcasm or ridicule. Many people can be characterized as racists or
sexists simply because they were unable to deliver their humor in the right fashion. However, if it is
done properly and skillfully, humor can be an effective tool for learning. Parrott (1994) asserts that
humor can be used as a teaching strategy; it can promote understanding and increase attention and
interest. Humor, Parrott flatly asserts, motivates students toward learning. It improves students’
attitudes towards learning and increases productivity. Here is what the Australian Medical Publishing
Company (1999) says about the role of humor in teaching:
• Enhances student learning
• Improves rapport between teachers and students
• May enhance teachers’ status with students
• Helps student-teacher interaction
• May seduce students into believing that teaching is of high quality
• Entertains students as compensation or reward for their attendance
• Improves general social interaction, without educational connotations
Meyer (2002) looks at humor in communication as a subject that seems difficult to analyze.
However, the compelling and mysterious power of humor, he argues, leads scholars to return to it
again and again as a focus for study. Despite its dividing function, Meyer believes that humor releases
tension, or relates to a controversial issue. It also presents new perspectives and viewpoints. Through
humor, one can criticize opponents, and at the same time, unify groups.
METHOD
In order to achieve the objectives set out at the beginning of this study, questionnaires were
distributed to students in four separate courses within the College of Humanities and Social Sciences
at the United Arab Emirates University. These courses were Business Correspondence and
Promotional Material, Basic Issues in Translation, Introduction to Linguistics, and Introduction to
Language and Communication. Students spanned from different academic disciplines: Education,
English Literature, and Translation Studies.
QUESTIONNAIRE
The questionnaire was constructed to assess the participants’ perception of humor and their perception
of their professors utilizing humor in their classroom. The questionnaire consisted of 14 multiple
choice questions. All questions in the questionnaire dealt with the use of humor in academic settings.
PROCEDURE
Questionnaires were distributed to students at the beginning of the class. Students were asked to
answer the questions based on their understanding of humor as a teaching tool. Students were given
35 minutes to answer the questions. Questionnaires were collected and then analyzed.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Before we discuss the questionnaire results or findings, it should be noted that much of the literature
conducted on humor suffers from a limited number of participants. This is in addition to the absence
of a clear and cohesive methodology. This paper will address these concerns by making sure that
enough participants were involved in the questionnaire and clear and logical methodology will be
utilized to examine the interconnection between humor and pedagogy. It will also examine the impact
of humor on the process of learning and retention.
In what follows, an attempt will be made to examine students’ answers to questions one by one to
make sure that full analysis is provided and good conclusions are drawn from the analysis. The
questionnaire consists of 14 questions, and 108 students were asked to think carefully before they
provided their responses.
Knowledge of the Concept of Humor
Based on the students’ responses, it was apparent that some students were not really familiar with the
concept of humor. Ninety- two students (85.19 percent) believe that humor has to do with laughing
and smiling. Only four students (3.7 percent) believe humor means being friendly and four students
(3.7 percent) believe that humor means laughing and smiling, being friendly, and creating a sense of
humor. The reason students have not associated humor with being friendly and with creating a sense
of humor is cultural. Within the culture of the Middle East, teaching has always been associated with
seriousness and rigidness. Many years ago, students were subjected to smacking or hitting if they
happen to be humorous. However, schools all over the Middle East nowadays have shifted from the
policy of being rigid and serious into a policy of friendliness and lenience, and the idea of being
friendly and humorous in the classroom is becoming more acceptable.
Managing Humor Properly
Although there is an inherent fear of being funny and humorous in the classroom, students believe that
humor is a good thing. Based on the students’ responses, ninety-eight students (90.7 percent) believe
that humor is a good thing. Only six students (5.6 percent) believe that humor is dangerous. The
staggering point here is that none of the students believe that there is a dangerous side to humor. This
indicates that those students either have no idea of the double edge of humor or lack the knowledge of
the fact that humor can sometimes be personal, subjective and contextual.
Effects of Humor
As to the effects of humor on students’ learning, only eighteen students (16.7 percent) believe that
humor has a psychological positive effect. The majority of participants (eighty-four = 77.8 percent)
believe that humor has both healthy and psychological positive effects. This is aligned with Berk
(1998) who believes that humor has a physiological and psychological effect on learners. In terms of
the psychological effect, Berk believes that humor and laughter have been shown to reduce anxiety,
decrease stress, enhance self-esteem, and increase self-motivation. According to Glenn (2002),
humor can help individuals engage in the learning process by creating a positive and social
environment where their defenses are lowered and their concentration is better. According to Glenn,
humor can create an environment where teachers and students feel they share a common ground and
this in turn creates a psychological bond between the two.
Garner (2004) argues that humor can also have physiological effects: it can assist learning through
improved respiration and circulation. It can also lower pulse and blood pressure. According to Berk
(1998), humor can exercise the chest muscles, and provide more oxygen to the body. Above all,
humor releases endorphins into the bloodstream. Cousins (1991) suggests that humor has healing
effects. In an article entitled Anatomy of an Illness as Perceived by the Patient, Cousins (1991)
asserts that humor can reduce anxiety, relieve stress and increase mental sharpness. All these
physiological effects are desirable things specifically in pedagogical environments.
Humor in the Classroom
As to how students feel when humor is delivered in the classroom, only six students (5.6 percent)
believe that humor obstructs their thinking. While seventy-two students (66.7 percent) believe that
humor can both increase their understanding and comprehension of the subject-matter and make them
motivated to attend class. This is in harmony with White (1992) who suggests that one of the positive
effects of humor in the classroom is that it increased attendance in class.
When students were asked whether humor is functioning positively in the classroom or not (i.e.
Questions 7, 8 and 9), their responses were that humor is a communicative and learning device. In
their responses, ninety-eight students (90.7 percent) responded that it is a learning tool. None of the
students stated that humor is a disturbing tool nor it was a waste of time. When students were asked
about the importance of humor in the classroom, ninety-four (87.7 percent) responded that it should
be present or felt at times in the classroom environment. Only six students (5.6 percent) believed that
it should be there at all times. When students were asked to specify other choices not listed in the
questionnaire, only six students (5.6 percent) came up with choices that humor has a pleasant effect;
others indicated that humor is motivating.
The following table shows students’ responses regarding the questions examined above:
Table 1
Item Choices Out %
of
108
a. laughing & smiling 92 85.19%
1. The term humor means: b. being friendly 4 3.7%
c. creating a sense of humor 4 3.7%
d. all the above 4 3.7%
a. a good thing 98 90.7%
2. Humor, if managed properly in b. a disturbing thing 0 0%
the classroom, is: c. a dangerous thing 6 5.6%
d. both (b) & (c) 2 1.9%
a. psychological positive effect 18 16.7%
3. Humor can have: b. health effect 2 1.9%
c. harmful effect 2 1.9%
d. both ( a) & (b) 84 77.8%

a. obstruct my thinking 6 5.6%

4. When used in the classroom, b. make me feel more motivated 4 3.7%
humor will: c. increase my understanding 24 22.3%
d. both (b) & (c) 72 66.7%
a. mentally disturbed 4 3.7%
5. Humor in the classroom makes b. upset 0 0%
me: c. relaxed 98 90.7%
d. both (a) & (b) 6 5.6%

a. a communicative or/and 94 87%

learning device 4 3.7%
6. From my experience, humor acts b. a waste of time 4 3.7%
as: c. a disturbing teaching device 2 1.9%
d. please specify 6 5.6%

a. help me bond with the students 6 5.6%

b. help me connect with the
7. Humor in the classroom can: teacher 20 18.5%
c. breaks my concentration 4 3.7%
d. both (a) & (b) 76 70.4%

8. Humor a. must be present in the

classroom 88 81.5%
b. should not be present in the
classroom 2 1.9%
c. must be there at all times 12 11%
d. none of the above 6 5.6%
Humor and the Teacher
In the next two sections, I am going to discuss the seven remaining questions under the section Humor
and the Teacher, simply because all the items deal with questions that have to do with a teacher
teaching in a humorous setting or the teacher himself. Also these questions deal with the relationship
between the teacher and the student, i.e. the kind of teacher students prefer to have in their classroom.
Taking a cursory look at students’ responses, it was apparent that they favor a teacher who has a sense
of humor. In their responses, one hundred students (92.6 percent) indicate that teachers in the
classroom must be humorous and should create a joyful environment. The amazing thing here is that
none of the students believe that teachers should be serious or have no sense of humor. This finding
indicates that there is unanimity as to the kind of teachers students prefer, specifically in this college.
Only four students (3.7 percent) indicated that teachers should be funny all the time. When students
were asked to list other choices, none of them provided any answer.
When students were asked (Question 10) whether they understand the topic better or worse in a
humorous environment, eighty-six students (79.6 percent) responded that they can understand the
topic if they have a teacher who makes the class amusing. Only eight students (7.4 percent) indicated
that the teacher should present the topic in a serious way whereas four students (3.7 percent) indicated
that they can understand the topic better if the teacher tells jokes all the time, which shows clearly that
students differentiated between teachers telling jokes and teachers creating a humorous environment
where they feel connected with them. Students were asked to comment on this topic, and only ten
students (9.3 percent) indicated that teachers should not be humorous all the time as this spoils the
academic setting. Others mysteriously indicated that teachers should be humorous only in the first
thirty minutes.
Furthermore, when students were asked if they feel comfortable taking courses with a teacher who has
a sense of humor, one hundred and two students (94 percent) indicated that they feel comfortable.
Only four students (3.7 percent) indicated that they prefer to take courses with a serious teacher. This
finding supports the studies (Brown & Tomlin 1996; Bryant et al. 1980; Pollio and Humphreys 1996
and Garner 2004) which indicate that students appreciate and enjoy the use of humor in the classroom.
Pollio and Humphreys (1996) assert that a sense of humor establishes a connection between the
teacher and the student, and this is a key factor to effective teaching. Also, Lowman (cited in Garner
2004) reported that effective college teachers were most often described as fervent and have a strong
sense of humor which plays a major role in developing a positive learning environment.
Further investigation on the correlation between the teacher and the students indicated that students
feel interested if they take the course with a teacher with a sense of humor. Only two students (3.7
percent) indicated that a teacher with a sense of humor helps cheat, whereas none of the students
believe that taking a course with a humorous teacher discourages them from taking any part in
communication. The majority of students (eighty students = 74 percent) indicate that taking a course
with a humorous teacher encourages them to express their ideas without fear. This lends support to
Torok’s (2004) analysis that humor promotes a sense of community. It creates a rapport between
teachers and students. When asked to list other choices, none of the students provided any answers.
The following table shows the number as well as the percentages of students’ responses:
Table 2
Item Choices Out %
of
108
a. have a sense of humor 100 92.6%
9. I like the teacher in the b. be serious 0 0%
classroom to: c. funny all the time 4 3.7%
d. others: specify 0 0%
a the teacher makes the class
10. I understand the topic if: amusing 86 79.6%
b. The teacher gives the
information only in serious 8 7.4%
way
c. The teacher tells jokes all 4 3.7%
the time
d. Others: specify 10 9.3%

a. someone with a sense of

11. I feel comfortable taking the humor 102 94%
course with: b. someone who does not laugh
or smile 0 0%
c. someone who is serious 4 3.7%
d. others: specify 0 0%

a. interested 18 16.7%
12. An amusing teacher makes me: b. comfortable 10 9.3%
c. bored 0 0%
d. both (a) & (b) 80 74%

a. helps me cheat 2 1.9%

13. Taking a course with a teacher b. encourages me to express my
with a sense of humor: ideas 80 79.1%
c. discourages me from
participating 0 0%
d. helps me interact with the
teacher 26 24.1%

14. When it comes to a teacher with a. disrespect the teacher 6 5.6%

a sense of humor, university and b. think highly of the teacher 80 74.1%
college students c. believe he should be fired 0 0%
d. both (a) & (b) 16 14.8%

HUMOR AND PEDAGOGICAL IMPLICATIONS

There is a growing body of research which investigated the use of humor and its positive effect on
teaching and learning. Civikly (1986) has indicated that humor can increase students’ interest in
learning. It can also lessen students’ stress and boost self-confidence.
Although the findings of this study are encouraging, this study was confined to students’ responses
only. Future investigation of this phenomenon can investigate the effect of students’ age, gender and
the class size. As indicated by Provine (2000), there is a correlation between humor and the size of
the classroom. Provine indicates that the relationship between class size and the effect of humor as a
teaching tool would be interesting to explain. According to Berk (2002), humor can be more effective
in large classes than in small classes, simply because humor is contagious and communal. One laugh
by a student may lead to another. Humor can also have a pedagogical role to play in helping students
understand and enjoy hard courses, such as statistics, simply because humor can have a positive
impact on content retention. This assumption is supported by Garner’s analysis of humor as an
appreciated teaching tool. Even in health, at the grassroots level, humor has shown to have an
impact on students’ productivity and creative abilities. Flavier (1990) believes that humor is
instrumental in teaching health. Flavier, being the president of the International Institute of Rural
Reconstruction (IIRR) who started teaching rural communities, found out that relying on lectures
alone may not lead to the desired learning outcomes. To help students understand the subject-matter
he used analogies between health processes and the villagers’ everyday experiences. Flavier
demonstrated this by using a string bean to explain the ovulation process. He then explained the idea
of immunization by comparing it to a preliminary skirmish that alerts an army to the coming of an
invasion. These teaching methods, Flavier believes, proved to be highly effective and enjoyable.
The outcome of this method, according to Flavier, got the villagers involved in the teaching process,
simply because they were eager to come up with their own comparisons.
CONCLUSION
As indicated, humor can have a positive effect on students’ learning. It can create an atmosphere
where students can feel relaxed and comfortable. Garner (2004) indicates that humor can provide a
cognitive break which allows students to assimilate the information (see Korobkin (1989) for more
information). Also, Ziv (1988) believes that the use of some appropriate humorous examples can
provide students with a new perspective on the material that could lead to new fresh cognitive
perspectives.
Garner (2004) indicates that while we all know that humor should be used carefully, it can be used as
a potent medium for communication or social activities. Garner argues that some educators
unfortunately, believe that their role is too serious to engage humor or they look at humor as merely a
disrupting factor. However, this study has shown quite clearly that students believe that the use of
humor in teaching has a positive psychological and physiological effect on their learning. It can
improve the learning milieu and has a major positive impact on preserving the educational material.
There is a cultural aspect of humor. In addition to the fact that it provides exercise to some organs of
the body (i.e. face, jaws, etc.), stimulates the brain, and fosters creativity, humor facilitates our
relations with others (Berger (2005). At the cultural level, Berger argues that humor helps members
of various subcultures and cultures maintain their identity and cope with problems connected with
their marginality and status. Pedagogically, humor serves as a vehicle for classroom illustration and
instruction of specific linguistics and cultural phenomena in the Target Language (Askildson 2005).
Askildson asserts that humor can be used as a way of transmitting cultural clues to students. For
example, advertisement humor conveys a great deal of cultural and pragmatic knowledge about a
language. Humor thus is an interesting way to teach language and culture at all levels of instruction.
Schmitz (2002), cited in Askildson (2005), argues that classroom exposure to humor helps students
understand and react to the cultural and pragmatic knowledge of their language. It also helps them
create and maintain their own identities (Brown (2000).
REFERENCES
Askildson, Lance. (2005). Effect of Humor in the Language Classroom: Humor as a Pedagogical Tool in
Theory and Practice. Arizona Working Paper. In Second Language Acquisition and Teaching
(SLAT) 12: 45-61.
Cornett, Claudia. (1986). Learning Through Laughter: Humor in the Classroom. Phi Delta Kappa
Educational Foundation Funded Study. ISBN 0-87367-241-0.
Berger, Arthur. (2005). How Humor Heals: An Anatomical Perspective. Journal of Psychology. 2 (7): 211-
221.
Berk, R.A. (2002). Humor as an Instrumental Defibrillator. Sterling, VA: Stylus Publications. _____
(1998). Professors are from Mars, Students are from Snickers: How to Write and Deliver Humor in
the Classroom and in Professional Presentations. Madison, WI: Mendota Press.
Berk, R.A and J.P. Nanda. (1998). Effects of Jocular Instructional Methods on Attitudes on Anxiety and
Achievement in Statistic Courses. Humor 11 (4): 383-409.
Brown, H. D. (2000). Principles of Language Learning and Teaching. White Plains. New York: Addison
Wesley Longman, Inc.
Brown, W. and J. Tomlin. (1996). Best and Worst University Teachers: The Opinion of Undergraduate
Students. College Students Journal 30 (1): 431-434.
Brunner, Robert. (2002). Transforming Thought: The Role of Humor in Teaching. University of Virginia,
Darden Graduate School of Business Administration.
Bryant, J., P. Comisky, J. Crane, and D. Zillman. (1980). Relationship Between College Teachers’ Use of
Humor in the Classroom and Students’ Evaluation of Their Teachers. Journal of Educational
Psychology 72 (4): 511-519.
Civikly, J. (1986). Humor and the Enjoyment of College Teaching. In J.M. Civikly (ed.) Communicating in
College Classrooms. New Directions for Teaching and Learning 26: 61-70.
Cousins, Norman. (1991). Anatomy of an Illness as Perceived by the Patient. New York: Bantam.
Flavier, J.M. (1990). The Lessons of Laughter. World Health Organization 11 (4): 412-415.
Fowler, H.W. (2004). Oxford Fowler’s Modern English Usage Dictionary. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Freud, Sigmund (1995). Wits and its Relations to the Unconscious. In The Basic Writing of Sigmund Freud,
A.A. Brill (trans.), New York: Modern Library.
Friedman, H.H., N. Halpern, and D. Salb. (1999). Teaching Statistics Using Humorous Anecdotes.
Mathematics Teacher 92 (4): 305-308.
Garner, R. (2004). Humor in Pedagogy: How HA Ha can Lead to AHa!. College Teaching 54 (1): 177-180.
Glenn, R. (2002). Brain Research: Practical Applications for the Classroom. Teaching for Excellence 21 (6): 1-
2.
Gordon, J.D. (1992). Humor in Legal Education. Brigham Young University Law Review 2: 313-324.
Gorham, J. and D. M. Christophel. (1990). The Relationship of Teachers’ Use of Humor in the Classroom to
Immediacy and Student Learning. Communication Education 39: 46-62.
Joshua, Anthony M. (et al) (2005). Humor and Oncology. Journal of Clinical Oncology, 23 (3): 645-649.
Harper, Douglas. (2001). Humor. Online Etymology Dictionary. Web Link Available at
<http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=humor>.
Kher, N., S. Moslstad, and R. Donahue. (1999). Using Humor in the College Classroom to Enhance Teaching
Effectiveness in “Dread Courses.” College Student Journal 33 (3): 400-406.
Korobkin, D. (1989). Humor in the Classroom: Considerations and Strategies. College Teaching 36 (4): 154-
158.
Langer, Susan. (2003). The Comic Rhythm. Feeling and Form. New York: Charles Scribner.
Meyer, John. C. (2000). Humor as a Double-Edged Sword: Four Functions of Humor in Communication.
Communication Theory 10 (3): 310-331.
Parrott, T. (1994). Humor as a Teaching Strategy. Nurse Educator 19 (3): 36-38.
Pollio, H. and W. Humphreys. (1996). What Award-Wining Lecturers Say About Their Teaching: It is All
About Connection. College Teaching 44 (3): 101-106.
Powell, J. and L. Andersen. (1985). Humor and Teaching in Higher Education. Studies in Higher Education 10
(1): 79-90.
Provine, R. R. (2000). Laughter: A Scientific Investigation. New York: Viking Penguin.
Robinson, V.M. (1977). Humor and the Health Professions. Thorofare, New Jersey: Charles B. Slack.
Schmitz, J B. (2002). Humor as a Pedagogical Tool in Foreign Language and Translation Courses. Humor 15:
89-113
Sorell, Walter (1972). The Facets of Comedy. New York: Grosset and Dunlap.
The Medical Journal of Australia. (1999). Get Playing to Get Creative Web link available at
<http://www.mja.com.au>.
Torok, S., R. McMorris, and W. Lin. (2004). Is Humor an Appreciated Teaching Tool? Perceptions of
Professors’ Teaching Styles and Use of Humor. College Teaching 52 (1):14-20.
Ziv, A. (1988). The Influence of Humorous Atmosphere on Divergent Thinking. Contemporary Educational
Psychology 8:68-75.
Weaver II, Richard L. and Howard W. Cotrell. (2001). Ten Specific Techniques for Developing Humor in
the Classroom. Education 108 (2): 167-179.
White, F. (1992). Enhancing Class Attendance. National Association of Colleges and Teachers in Agriculture
Journal 36:113-115.
Yutang, Lin. (1976). The Importance of Living. New York: John Day.