While it's unlikely to find a bunch of scientists doing stand-up on Comedy Central, some new research has shown that the use of humor can benefit those in the field. The study published in the Journal of Science Communication (JCOM) suggests that being funny can enhance both the likability of scientists and the perceived reliability of the scientific information they convey.
It's something politicians caught onto a while back, and many use it to their advantage by throwing in a well-placed joke to capture public attention and building trust. "Scientists, however, are much more reluctant to use humor when engaging in science communication," notes a Journal of Science Communication article. "They may fear that a lighthearted approach could make them seem less authoritative and, consequently, make scientific findings appear less credible."
The study, led by Alexandra Lynn Frank, a doctoral student at the Grady College of Mass Communication at the University of Georgia, examined humor in the context of social media posts from scientists, similar to the ones featured on this Bored Panda listicle. But the researchers focused on artificial intelligence-related content, by creating a fictional scientist called Dr. Jamie Devon.
They then posted cartoons on Devon's Twitter/X account. The type of humor the fake scientist used fell into three categories: satire (a mild, Horatian type), anthropomorphism (using animals or objects behaving like humans), or a combination of the two.
“Our study aimed to bridge this gap by enhancing our understanding of how individuals react to anthropomorphism and satire while providing practical insights for scientists and science communicators,” Frank explained.
The researchers created an an online survey with an embedded experiment. The 2,212 participants were aware they were taking a survey but not that they were part of an experiment. They were shown one of eight versions of a fictional Twitter/X conversation initiated by 'Dr. Devon.'
"After viewing the content, participants reported how much mirth (i.e., perceived humor) they experienced, how likable they found the scientist, and they evaluated the legitimacy of the content as an appropriate form of science communication," reports JCOM.
The findings showed that humor “can both have positive impacts on the likeability of a communicator, as well as enhancing perceptions that the message is an appropriate and legitimate source of scientific information.”
“Politicians, entertainers, and advertisers often use humor because people tend to like and connect with people who can make them laugh. When people find something funny, they’re usually less likely to argue with or reject the message or the person delivering it," said Frank. "Our research supports this idea. We found that humor can aid scientists’ communication efforts, but only if people think they’re funny.”
The researchers warned that the incorrect use of humor could backfire. "Harsh forms of satire can be perceived as aggressive, which may undermine the credibility of the source of scientific information,” explains Frank, adding that sarcasm or aggressively targeting someone is highly discouraged.
One of the downsides to the findings is a funny enough communicator could insert themselves into debates where their knowledge is lacking. "Our respondents were given almost no background about the scientists who posted the cartoon, outside of their credentials as a 'Dr.' as listed within their name on Twitter and our introduction to the stimulus, which told participants they would be viewing 'a screenshot of a Twitter conversation started by a scientist,'" Frank says.
The researcher says despite this, a simple humorous cartoon, along with a few playful user comments served to elevate not only the likeability of the poster, but also the appropriateness and legitimacy of the cartoon as a piece of social commentary.
This raises fears that 'disingenuous actors' posing as scientists, or using the fake title "Dr." could cultivate a following and push anti-science agendas and disinformation. "What does that say about the nature of debates taking place around the important scientific topics of the day?" ponders Frank.
However, Frank adds that when used responsibly, humor is a powerful tool that can humanize scientists and create meaningful connections with the public on social media.
"By leveraging humor, scientists can simplify complex concepts, making them more relatable and easier to understand," says the researcher. "This approach not only fosters goodwill but also has the potential to dispel misinformation in a friendly manner. Moreover, humor can spark curiosity, motivating people to seek out additional information on important scientific topics.”
