本研究旨在：（一）歸納國中生幽默產出使用之幽默技巧與幽默內容類型，並分析不同性別國中生在不同幽默技巧、幽默內容類型使用與差異情形。（二）瞭解個體幽默特質、幽默改編教材包含之幽默技巧、幽默內容類型對國中生知覺教材好笑程度的影響。（三）探討不同幽默融入教材形式對國中生歷史學習成效的影響。
基於前述目的，執行上分成三個研究進行。研究一的研究對象為臺灣北、南部地區220名國中二年級學生，透過收集國中生幽默改編歷史短文與問題的方式，以文本分析歸納國中生使用之幽默技巧與幽默內容類型。研究二的研究對象為臺灣北、中、南地區226名國中二年級學生，受試在進行45則歷史幽默改編內容好笑程度共識評量前先完成「多向度幽默感量表與「正體中文版幽默風格量表」，所有資料取得後研究者計算每則歷史幽默改編內容所包含之幽默技巧、幽默內容類型使用頻率，並分析受試的幽默感、歷史幽默改編內容所含之幽默技巧、幽默內容與受試評定歷史幽默改編內容好笑程度之間的關聯。研究三以台灣南部地區153名國中二年級生為研究對象，受試依序進行五種幽默融入形式歷史短文的閱讀，並完成對前述五種短文的好笑、喜歡、愉悅感受、動機態度與學習知覺的程度評定，研究者亦同時測量受試對五種短文的立即記憶及延宕記憶。資料以二因子混合設計變異數分析進行假設考驗。
研究一文本分析歸納出誇飾、擬人化、雙關、諧音、矛盾…等14種幽默技巧以及自我提升、解嘲諷刺、無辜倒楣、禁忌、攻擊五類幽默內容。此外，男女國中生在部分幽默技巧與幽默內容類型有使用上的顯著差異，其中，男生在禁忌與攻擊類幽默內容使用頻率高於女生。研究二結果顯示：男生對男改編者的幽默改編內容好笑程度評定顯著高於女改編者的幽默改編內容，女生則無差異。男生對同性別者的幽默產出內容較為欣賞。此外，就男女國中生而言，幽默改編內容包含「套用流行事物與用語」幽默技巧、「語言諧音」幽默技巧以及「性」幽默內容的數量與好笑程度評定有顯著正相關。另外，對高幽默感及具正向幽默風格傾向（高親和、高自我提升）的國中生而言，幽默改編內容包含「語言轉換」、「套用流行事物與用語」、「語言諧音」三種幽默技巧以及「死亡」、「性」兩類幽默內容的數量愈多，其對幽默改編內容的好笑程度知覺愈高。對具負向幽默風格傾向（高自我貶抑、高攻擊）的國中生而言，幽默改編內容包含「語言轉換」、「套用流行事物與用語」、「語言諧音」、「矛盾」、「脈絡及借代雙關」五種幽默技巧以及「死亡」、「性」、「自我提升」三類幽默內容幽默技巧以及的數量愈多，其對幽默改編內容好笑程度知覺愈高。
研究三結果顯示：國中生在嵌入幽默技巧、嵌入幽默內容、嵌入幽默技巧與幽默內容三類短文的好笑、喜歡、愉悅感受、動機態度與學習知覺程度皆顯著高於在短文中外加笑話、無幽默成分的短文。此外，低幽默感者在外加笑話形式短文的立即記憶分數顯著高於無幽默、嵌入幽默技巧、嵌入幽默技巧與幽默內容短文。另外，比較受試在有經過幽默改編之短文內容及未經過幽默改編之短文內容的立即與延宕記憶表現，結果發現受試對有經過幽默改編的短文內容延宕記憶分數高於未經幽默改編的短文內容。
本研究以過去研究為基石，建立區分出較為完整、具系統性之幽默產出使用的幽默技巧、幽默內容類型並進行相關的性別差異檢視，提供與國外研究發現的呼應與對照。除不同性別的國中生在幽默技巧、幽默內容的類型使用及喜好有所差異外，本研究更進一步發現學習者對幽默改編教材的接受與效果受其個人幽默特質影響。最後。本研究發展之教材幽默改編策略能正向提升國中生對教材之情感評價、動機態度及學習知覺，並促進延宕記憶的保留。教師在教材設計上可多使用這些幽默改編技巧與內容，並針對不同性別、幽默特質學生進行不同的搭配。

The objectives of this study were: (1) To sum up the humor skills and humor content types in regard to the humor production of junior high school students, and analyze the utilization and difference of various humor skills and humor content types on students of different sexes. (2) Discern the effects on the funniness level perceived by junior high school students in terms of individual humor traits, the humor skills and content types of adapted materials. (3) Investigate the effects on history learning of junior high school students by incorporating humor into teaching materials.
In view of objectives mentioned above, the research execution was divided into three studies. In Study 1, the research subjects were 220 8th grade students from Northern and Southern Taiwan, who were asked to rewrite historical short essays and items into a humorous version. The results were collected and contextual analyzed to generalize the humor skills and humor content types used by junior high school students. Study 2 involved 226 subjects from Northern, Mid and Southern Taiwan 8th graders. Before they performed a consensual assessment of the funniness level included 45 humor-adapted historical texts, the subjects first completed “the multidimensional sense of humor scale” and “traditional Chinese version of the humor style questionnaire.” After all data were collected, researchers marked down the humor skills and humor content type using frequency of each humor-adapted historical text, and analyzed the correlation between the subjects’ sense of humor, humor skills and humor content contained in the adapted materials, and the funniness level assessed by the subjects. In Study 3, 153 junior high school students from the 8th grade in Southern Taiwan were involved. Subjects were required to read 5 types of humor-adapted historical essays consecutively, and evaluated the level of funniness, preference, pleasant feelings, motivated attitude, and learning perception on these 5 types of essays. Subjects’ immediate memory and delayed memory to the 5 types of essays were also measured. The data from abovementioned study were then collected for hypothesis testing by two-way mixed design ANOVA.
The contextual analysis in Study 1 generalized 14 humor skills, including exaggeration, personification, pun, homonym, contradiction, etc., and 5 humor contents, including self-enhancing, self-deprecation & irony, bummer & innocent, taboo, and aggressive. In addition, the humor skills and humor content types used by male and female students were distinctively different. Among all the subjects, boys resorted to taboo and aggressive humor content with a significant higher frequency than girls. Results from Study 2 demonstrated that boys showed a preference for male writers, significantly greater and more funny than female writers. Girls show no difference opinions on the sex of writer. Boys prefer the humor production which is created by the same sex. As far as sex was concerned, the humor-adapted texts involving humor skills of popular matters or sayings, and homophones across languages, or sex content had an outstanding correlation with the results in assessment of funniness level. Besides, for those with high sense of humor and positive humor styles(more affiliative humor and self-enhancing humor), there was a significant positive correlation between the perception of funniness level and two other factors: the frequency use of humor skill and humor contents in humor-adapted texts The former ones were shown by applying humor skills of language conversion, popular matters or sayings, and homophones across languages, while the latter ones involved death and sex. For those with negative humor styles(more self-defeating humor and aggressive humor), however, the perception of funniness level signified the positive correlation when humor-adapted texts involved five humor skills (language conversion, popular matters or sayings, homophones across languages, contradiction, and near-homophones) and three humor contents (death, sex and self-enhancing).
Results from Study 3 showed that junior high school students have significantly higher level of funniness, preference, pleasant feelings, motivated attitude, and learning perception toward three types of humor content (humor skill applied, humor content applied, and both humor skill and content applied) than essays with jokes appended and non-humorous essays. In addition, subjects with low sense of humor achieved significant higher scores in immediate memory test of essays with jokes appended than those non-humorous essays, essays with humor skills applied, and essays with both humor skills and contents applied. Furthermore, through the comparison of subjects’ performance of immediate and delayed memory toward essays content with/without humor-adaptation, it was noticed that the scores of delayed memory to adapted essays content were higher than essays content without humor-adaptation.
Based on the past researches, this study set and distincted a more complete and systematic humor production of humor skills and humor content types. Also, the researchers examined the related differences between sexes, corresponding with those foreign studies. Besides the differences and preferences of humor skills and humor content types between the junior high school students of two sexes, the researchers found that the learners’ acceptability and effectiveness toward humor adapted-materials are influenced by individual humor traits. Last, the strategies of the humor-adapted materials developed by this study can not only positively make the junior high school students enhance their emotion evaluation, motive attitude, and learning perception toward teaching materials, but also prolong the delayed memory. Teachers are suggested to use more of these humor-adapted skills and contents when designing teaching materials, and are able to vary with students of different sexes and humor traits.

參考文獻

王建雅（2010）。八向度幽默風格量表之發展與自尊、人格特質、依附風格關係之探討（未出版之博士論文），國立臺灣師範大學，台北市。
王曉睿、張雅華、陳姵汝（2010年10月）。數位原生代學生書寫退化情形現況分析研究。「台灣網際網路學術研討會」發表之論文，臺南大學。
朱采慧（1993）。試論國中歷史教科書的圖表與圖示教學（未出版之碩士論文），國立臺灣師範大學，台北市。
江思誼（2011）。國中歷史教科書插圖設計及教材目標之研究（未出版之碩士論文），國立中正大學，嘉義市。
吳靜宜（2004）。新編幽默理解與幽默創造測驗的發展研究暨其相關因素之探討（未出版之碩士論文），國立臺灣師範大學，台北市。
林清山（譯）（1997）。教育心理學－認知取向（原作者：R. E. Mayer）。台北市：遠流。（原著出版年：1987）。
邱坤芳（2004）。吳姐姐講歷史故事研究（未出版之碩士論文），國立台東大學，台東市。
邱發忠（1999）。幽默創造訓練之課程設計及效果評估研究（未出版之碩士論文）。私立輔仁大學，台北市。
邱發忠、陳學志、卓淑玲（2003）。幽默創造訓練之課程設計暨實徵效果評估。教育心理學報。34（2），179-198。
洪浩唐（2007年3月22日）。「台灣國語」真的好笑嗎？中國時報，版A15。
孫聖和（2000）。遊戲理論及幽默感應用於設計教育之可行性初探（未出版之碩士論文），國立臺灣師範大學，台北市。
孫曉如（2002）。國中生的幽默偏好與行為困擾之相關研究（未出版之碩士論文），國立臺灣師範大學，台北市。
張慧菊（2005）。國中小學生一般應答與幽默應答之分析研究（未出版之碩士論文），國立臺灣師範大學，台北市。
陳巧陵（2007）。當代笑話之研究（未出版之碩士論文）。國立台中教育大學，台中市。
陳正治（2003）。修辭學。台北市：五南。
陳淑蓉（2003）。幽默感對可能壓力事件及負向生活事件的認知評估、情緒反應之影響（未出版之碩士之論文）。國立臺灣師範大學，台北市。
陳淑蓉、陳學志（2005）。幽默感的定義與測量：多向度幽默感量表之編製。應用心理研究。26，167-187。
陳學志（2001）。小心，幽默會毀掉你的煩惱。張老師月刊，284，20-23。
陳學志、徐芝君（2006）。幽默創意課程對教師幽默感及創造力的影響。師大學報，51，71-93。
陳學志、詹雨臻、卓淑玲、Martin, R. A. （2011）區分良善與有害的幽默中文版幽默風格量表的發展區分良善與有害的幽默中文版幽默風格量表的發展。測驗學刊，58（專刊），207-234。
陳麗華（2008）。評介「為學習而設計的教科書」及其對我國中小學教科書設計與研究的啟示。教科書研究，1（2），137-159。
黃于娟（1994）。性別、依附風格與自我坦露、幽默、撒嬌之關係（未出版之碩士論文），國立政治大學，台北市。
黃顯華、霍秉坤（2005）。尋找課程和教科書設計的理論基礎（增訂版）。中國北京市：人民教育出版社。
葉季蓉（2010）。國中生幽默欣賞類型、幽默風格與創造能力、創造傾向之研究（未出版之碩士論文），國立臺灣師範大學，台北市。
葉珊吟（2007）。九年一貫國小低年級國語教科書插圖效能之研究（未出版之碩士論文）。國立高雄師範大學，高雄市。
廖保朝（2005）。國小學童日記分析研究（未出版之碩士論文），國立嘉義大學，嘉義市。
盧國屏、黃立楷（2008）。當代文字學概論。台北市：五南。
蕭颯、王文欽、徐智策（1991）。幽默心理分析。台北市：智慧大學。
謝達（1991）。精妙幽默技巧。新北市：漢欣。
藍順德（2004）。二十年來國內碩博士論文教科書研究之分析。國立編譯館館刊，32（4），2-25。
鐘雷恩（2010）。幽默在台灣大學英語課堂（未出版之碩士論文），國立交通大學，新竹市。
Berk, R. A., & Nanda, J. P. (1998). Effects of jocular instructional methods on attitudes, anxiety, and achievement in statistics courses. Humor: International Journal of Humor Research, 11(4), 383-409.
Berlyne, D. E. (1960). Conflict, arousal, and curiosity. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
Brodzinsky, D. M., & Rubien, J. (1976). Humor production as a function of sex , creativity, and cartoon content. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 44(4), 597-600.
Brown, A. S., & Itzig, J. M. (1976). The interaction of humor and anxiety in academic test situation. (Rep. No. TM006-706). Dallas, TX: Southern Methodist University. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service NO. ED152 783)
Bryant, J., & Zillmann, D. (1989). Using humor to promote learning. In P. E. McGee (Ed.), Humor and children’s development: A guide to practical applications (pp. 49-78). New York: Haworth Press.
Bryant, J., Brown, D., Silberberg, A. R., & Elliot, S. M. (1981). Relationship of humorous illustrations in college textbooks. Human Communication Research, 8(1), 43-57.
Bryant, J., Comisky, P. W., & Zillmann, D. (1979). Teacher’s humor in classroom. Communication Education, 28, 110-118.
Bryant, J., Comisky, P. W., Crane, J. S., & Zillmann, D. (1980). Relationship between college teachers’use humor in the classroom and students’evaluations of their teachers. Journal of Educational of psychology, 72(4), 511-519.
Bryant, J., Gula, J., & Zillmann, D. (1980). Humor in communication textbooks. Communication Education, 29, 125-134.
Clore, G. L., Schwarz, N., & Conway, M. (1994). Affective causes and consequences of social information processing. In J. R.S. Wyer & T. K. Srull (Eds.), Handbook of social cognition (2nd., Vol. 1, pp. 323-417). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Cornett, C. E. (1986). Learning through laughter: Humor in the classroom. Bloominton, IN: Phi Delta Kappa Educational Foundation.
Craik, K. H., Lampert, M. D., & Nelson, A. J. (1996). Sense of humor and styles in everyday humorous conduct. Humor: International Journal of Humor Research, 9(3-4), 273-302.
Crawford, M., & Gressley, D. (1991). Creative, caring and context: Women’s and men’s accounts of humor preferences and practices. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 15, 217-231.
Cunningham, W. A., & Derks, P. (2005). Humor appreciation and latency of comprehension. Humor : International journal of Humor Research, 18(4), 389-403.
Davies, A. P., & Apter, M. J. (1980). Humour and its effect on learning in children. In P. E. McGhee & A. J. Chapman(Eds.), Children’s Humour (pp. 237-253). Chichester: John Wiley & Sons.
Derks, P., Gardner, J. B., & Agarwal, R. (1998). Recall of innocent and tendentious humorous material. Humor: International Journal of Humor Research, 11(1), 5-19.
Fave, L. L., Haddad, J., & Maesen, W. A. (1996). Superiority, enhanced self-esteem, and perceived incongruity humour theory. In A. J. Chapman, & H. C. Foot (Eds.). Humor and laughter (pp. 63-91). New Brunswick: Transaction.
Ferguson, S., & Campinha-Bacote, J. (1989). Humor in nursing. Journal of Psychosocial Nursing, 27, 29-34.
Fleiss, J. L. (1971) Measuring nominal scale agreement among many raters. Psychological Bulletin, Vol. 76, No. 5. 378–382
Fleiss, J. L.; Levin, B.; and Paik, M.C. (2003). Statistical Methods for Rates and Proportions (3rd ed.). New York: John Wiley & Sons.
Fortson, S. B., & Brown, W. E. (1998). Best and worst university instructors: The opinions of graduate students. College Student Journal, 32(4), 572-576.
Gagne, R. M., & Driscoll, M. P. (1988). Essentials of learning for instruction. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Gorham, J. (1988). The relationship between verbal teacher immediacy behaviors and student learning. Communication Education, 37(1), 40-53.
Gorham, J., & Christophel, D. M. (1990). The relationship of teacher’s use of humor in the classroom to immediacy and student learning. Communication Education, 39(1), 46-62.
Grice, H. P. (1967). Logic and Conversation. Unpublished MS. Of the William James Lectures, Harvard University.
Hill, D. J. (1988). Humor in the classroom. A handbook for teachers and other entertainers. Springfield, IL: Charles C. Thomas.
In D. H. Schunk, B. J. Pintrich (2nd eds.), Motivation in education: Theory, research, and applications (pp.1-22). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Jacob Cohen (1988). Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences (second ed.). Lawrence.
Johnson, H. A. (1991). Humors as an innovative method for teaching sensitive topics. Educational Gerontology, 16, 547-559.
Kaplan, R. M., & Pascoe, G. C. (1977). Humorus lectures and humorous examples: Some effects upon comprehension and retention. Journal of Educational of psychology, 69(1), 61-65.
Klein, D. M., Bryant, J., & Zillmann, D. (1982). Relationship between humor in introductory textbooks and students’ evaluations of the texts’ appeal and effectiveness. Psychological Reports, 50(1), 235-241.
Kuiper, N. A., Martin, R. A., & Olinger, L. J. (1998). Coping humour, stress, and cognitive appraisals. Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science, 25(1), 81-96.
Lampert, M. D., & Ervin-Tripp, S. M. (1998). Exploring paradigm: The study of gender and sense of humor near the end of the 20th century. In W. Ruch (Eds.), The sense of humor: Explorations of a personality characteristic (pp. 231-270). Berlin, Germany: Walter de Gruyter.
Lefcourt, H. M., & Martian, R. A. (1986). Humor and life stress: Antidote to adversity. New York: Springer-Verlag.
Lippman, L. G., & Dunn, M. L. (2000). Contextual connections with puns: Effects on perceived humor and memory. Journal of General Psychology, 127(2), 185-197.
Long, D. L., & Graesser, A. C., (1988). Wit and humor in discourse processing: Discourse Processes, 11(1), 35-60.
Martin, R. A. (2007). The psychology of humor: An integrative approach. Burlington, MA : Elsevier Academic Press.
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, 48-75.
Martin. R. A. (2001). Humor, laughter, and physical health: Methodological issues and research findings, Psychological Bulletin,127(4), 504-519.
Matarazzo, K. L., Durik A. M., & Delaney, M. L. (2010). The effect of humorous instructional materials on interest in a math task. Motiv Emot, 34, 293-305.
McGee, P. E. (1980). Toward the integration of entertainment and educational functions of television: The role of humor. In P. H. Tannenbaum (Eds.), The entertainment functions of television (pp. 183-208). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
McGhee, P. E. (1979) .Humor: Its origin and development. San Francisco, CA: W. H. Freeman.
McMorrie, R. F., Boothroyd, R. A., & Pietrangelo, D. J. (1997). Humor in educational testing: A review and discussion. Applied Measurement in Education, 10(3), 269-297.
McMorris, R. F., Urbach S. L., & Connor, M. C. (1985). Effects of incorporating humor in test items. Journal of Educational Measurement, 22, 147-155.
Mickes, L., Walker, D. E., Parris, J. L., Mankoff, R., & Christenfeld, N. J.(2012).Who's funny: gender stereotypes, humor production, and memory bias. Psychon Bull Rev, 18,.108-112.
Miron, D., Bryant, J., & Zillmann, D. (2001). Creating vigilance for better learning from television. In D. G. Singer & J. L. Singer (Eds.), Handbook of children and the media (pp. 153-181). Thousand Oaks, CA:Sage.
Neuliep, J. W. (1991). An examination of the content of high school teachers’humor in the classroom and the development of an inductively derived taxonomy of class humor. Communication Education, 40(4), 343-355.
Nevo, O., & Nevo, B. (1983). What do you do when asked to answer humorously? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 44(1), 188-194.
Nevo, O.,Nevo, B., & Yin, L. L.(2001). Singaporean humor: A cross-cultural, cross-gender comparison. Journal of General Psychology, 128(2), 143-156.
Norrick, N. R. (2003). Issues in conversational joking. Journal of Pragmatics, 35(9), 1333-1359.
O’Connell, W. S. (1969). Creative in humor. The Journal of Social Psychology, 78, 237-241.
Oppliger, P. A. (2003). Humor and learning. In J. Bryant, D. Roskos-Ewoldsen & J. R. Cantor (Eds.), Communication and emotion: Essays in honor of Dolf Zillmann (pp. 255-273). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Powell, J. P., & Anderson, L. W. (1985). Humour and teaching in higher education. Studies in Higher Education, 10(1), 79-90.
Ruch, W. (1988). The sense of humor: Explorations of a personality characteristic. Berlin, Germany: Mouton de Gruyter.
Schmidt, S. R. & Williams, A. R. (2001). Memory for humorous cartoon. Memory and Cognition, 29(2), 305-311.
Schmidt, S. R. (1994). Effects of humor on sentence memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 20(4), 953-967.
Schwarz, G. (1989). The importance of being silly. Educational Leadership, 46, 82-83.
Shultz, T. R. (1972). The role of incongruity and resolution in children’s appreciation of cartoon humor. Journal of Experiment Child Psychology, 13(2), 456-477.
Smith, R. E., Ascough, J. C., Ettinger, R. F., & Nelson, D. A. (1971). Humor, anxiety, and task performance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 2, 243-246.
Suls,J.(1972) A Two-stage Model for the Appreciation of Jokes and Cartoons: An Information Processing Analysis. In J. H. Goldstein & P. E. McGhee ( Eds.), The Psychology of Humor. New York & London: Academic Press.
Terry, R. L., & Woods, M. E. (1975). Effects of humor on the test performance of elementary school children. Psychology in the Schools, 12, 18-185.
Teslow, J. L. (1995). Humor me: A call for research. Educational Technology Research and Development, 43(3), 6-28.
Thorson, J. A., & Powell, F. C. (1993). Development and validation of a multidimensional sense of humor scale. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 49(1), 13-23.
Torok, S. E., McMorris, R. F., & Lin, W. C. (2004). Is humor an appreciated teaching tool? College Teacher, 52(1), 14-20.
Townsend, M. A., & Mahoney, P. (1980). Effects on class test performance. Psychology in the School, 18(2), 228-234
Vance, C. M. (1987).A comparative study on the use of humor in the design of instruction. Instructional Science, 16, 79-100.
Wakshlag, J. J., Day, K. D., & Zillmann, D. (1981). Selective exposure to educational television programs as a function of differently paced humorous inserts. Journal of Educational Psychology, 73, 27-32.
Walter, G. (1990). Laugh, teacher, laugh!. The Educational Digest, 55, 43-44.
Wandersee, J. H. (1982). Humor as a teaching strategy. The American Biology Teacher, 44, 212-218.
Wanzer, M. B., & Frymier, A. B. (1990). The relationship between student perceptions of instructor humor and student’s reports of learning. Communication Education, 48(1), 48-62.
Zillmann, D., & Bryant, J. (1983). Uses and effects of humor in educational ventures. In P. E. McGhee & J. H. Goldstein (Eds.), Handbook of humor research: Vol. 2.Applied studies (pp. 173-193). New York: Springer-Verlag.
Zillmann, D., Williams, B. R., Bryant, J., Boynton K. R., & Wolf, M. A. (1980). Acquisition of information from educational television programs as a function of differently paced humorous inserts. Journal of Educational Psychology, 72, 172-180.
Ziv, A. (1981). The self concept of adolescent humorists. Journal of Adolescence, 4, 187-197.
Ziv, A. (1983). The influence of humorous atmosphere on divergent thinking. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 8, 68-75.
Ziv, A. (1984). Personality and Sense of humor. New York: Springer.
Ziv, A.(1988). Teaching and learning with humor: Experiment and replication. Journal of Experimental Education, 57(1), 5-15.
Ziv, A., & Gadish, O. (1990). The disinhibiting effects of humor: aggressive and affective responses. Humor: International Journal of Humor Research, 3(3), 247-257.