The Role of Intersubjectivity in the Production and Appreciation of Humor

This study aims to investigate the role of intersubjectivity in the production and appreciation of humor. Intersubjectivity can be used to explain the nature and way of humor works; supplementing the three existing theories of humor namely incongruity theory, superiority theory, and relief theory. This study is a literature review in which data were obtained from 39 scientific articles related to humor and intersubjectivity using https://www.connectedpapers.com. The research stages taken under the stages of literature review included design, provision of literature (conduct), analysis, and presentation. The result showed that intersubjectivity has a role because it connects humor makers and connoisseurs through knowledge, feelings, awareness, and mutual unconsciousness. In the production and appreciation of humor intersubjectivity plays a role of (1) providing shared knowledge, (2) asserting the existence of emotions, and (3) directing the meaning of actions. This study is useful for expanding the understanding of the nature of humor. For comedians, this study can be used to increase the success of their shows.


Introduction
Humor has a large and diverse role in human life (Graham et al., 1992;Meyer, 2000) . Humor is not only used to release individuals from fatigue and emotional tension (Wijana, 2015) but also to build social identity (Martin, 2007), maintain the intimacy of relationships (Gordon, 2014), medical treatment (George & Baby Shari, 2020;Pinna et al., 2018) even to exercise power (Davis et al., 2018;Dubberley, 1988;Mohd Jan & Omar, 2013;Sorensen, 2008). Efforts to explain the nature of humor, why humor can be funny, and how humor can cause laughter, have been done by researchers with various perspectives. The three popular contemporary theories used are incongruity theory, superiority theory, and relief theory (Attardo, 2001;Attardo & Raskin, 2017;Larkin-Galiñanes, 2017;Raskin, 1985). These theories explain humor from different perspectives but have their own limitations (Meyer, 2000).
Incongruity theory, which focuses on explaining the existence of odd things (incongruent) from a series of information as the cause of the appearance of funny impressions, is considered inadequate to explain the pleasant effects of humor, even for cases that are considered as very suitable (Kulka, 2007). This theory is also criticized because incongruity is only a necessary condition but not what causes laughter (Larkin-Galiñanes, 2017). Superiority theory which focuses on questioning the pleasant feeling of being superior in the subject towards the object of humor is seen by Lintott (2016) as only appropriate to study certain aspects of certain types of humor as well. As for release theory, which views humor as a mechanism for releasing tension and nerve energy, according to Larkin-Galiñanes (2017), it is considered as a theory of laughter rather than a theory of humor.
The importance of the role of humor in human life has attracted the attention of various scientists to research it. Humor study like a tree that keeps growing, has new branches and its leaves are getting thicker.

Methods
This study used semi-systematic literature review as the approach. According to Snyder (2019), the general purpose of semi-systematic literature review is to create an overview and trail the progress of results in a particular field or topic.
According to Snyder (2019), the research stages taken under the literature review include design, provision of literature, analysis, and presentation. In the first stage, the researchers determined the topic and sample of literature to be studied-adjusted to the writing purpose. In the second stage, the researchers determined the relevant articles using a software (https://www.connectedpapers.com). In the third stage, the researchers categorized the literature based on the publication year and field of study. Then in the last stage, the researchers proposed correlations, compared the results, and presented analyses in the form of narratives.
In this study, the data were 39 scientific articles related to intersubjectivity, humor, and other topics intertwining the two. The resources were journals from philosophy, psychology, and sociology which were automatically selected by Connected Papers. This software traced and connected relevant studies based on keywords on title, abstract, and content. It demonstrates the authors and publication year, by that the influence between researchers could be revealed chronologically.
The researchers used Critical Appraisal Skills Program (CASP) to test and judge the level of relevance and trustworthiness of the automatic search results from Connected Papers. Data from the application were filtered using the protocol of inclusion or exclusion in CASP. Through the protocol, the researchers selected articles with "YES" on the following three questions: (a) Does this work answer clear questions?, (b) Are the research results valid?, and (c) Are the work and conclusions sufficiently presented to support the descriptive findings?
In the analysis stage, the researchers proposed comparison and illustrated the correlation of analyzed articles. The comparison was utilized to see both similarities and differences in terms of point of view, argumentation, and proof used to report the study. The correlation was then used to see interconnections and influences between the recent study and others. In the final stage of the analysis, the researchers utilized both correlation and comparison to synthesize new ideas about the role of intersubjectivity in the production and appreciation of humor.

Results and Discussion
The findings of this study will be presented in three inseparable subsections below. The three parts are chronologically related. To reach a final conclusion about the role of intersubjectivity in the production and appreciation of humor, two preliminary findings will be presented. The first initial finding was that intersubjectivity had three distinct forms. The second preliminary finding is that language has an intersubjective aspect according to the cognitive and interactional linguistic paradigm.

Intersubjectivity: Husserl, Heidegger, and Schütz
Lachowska (1980) mentions intersubjectivity as " ... an ability to understand others and constituting a common world, is a fundamental structure of the life-world." According to Adian 2016)intersubjectivity refers to the condition of one ego's perception of an object out there always showing the ego itself that the object is also present for the other egos. Grinnell (1983) mentions "... intersubjectivity refers to one's ability to interact with others in a reciprocal and meaningful fashion." The whole idea assumes that humans have the ability to connect with each other in accessing and understanding the world.
In its development, intersubjectivity has a number of versions of ideas. The earliest idea has been put forward by Edmund Husserl and later adapted by Heidegger and Schutz. The three figures both use phenomenological basic assumptions but have slightly different interpretations. Husserl ranks intersubjectivity as an epistemological entity to investigate the origin of knowledge. Heidegger uses intersubjectivity as an ontological concept that questions existence. Schütz uses it as a hermeneutical tool used to study the meaning of action.

Intersubjectivity and Origins of Knowledge
Edmund Husserl developed the notion of intersubjectivity by elaborating on the philosophers' earlier thinking, including Emanuel Kant's concept of empathy. Empathy and intersubjectivity are two inseparable concepts in the history of idea development that Husserl developed. Because "Intersubjective experience is (constitutes) an empathic experience; which occurs in the conscious process of the subject that deliberately uses the attribution of other subjects, where we place ourselves in the position of others" (Beyer, 2022). The intentionality in my own ego, which leads to a foreign ego, is what is called empathy (Overgaard, 2004). With these two concepts, it appears that the Husserl version of empathy is a symptom of ego that is more fundamental than just similarity presumption.
Husserl's monumental development of the notion of intersubjectivity occurred in 1910 when he began to reduce the concept of egological subjectivity to intersubjectivity in the lecture of "Fundamental Problems of Phenomenology". Since then, empathy and intersubjectivity have become one of Husserl's concerns. Husserl's increasing attention to these two concepts results in thoughts that according to (Kern, 2019) contain a more systematic notion of intersubjectivity.
Husserl's concept of intersubjectivity was considered established when in 1926 he gave the lecture "Introduction to Phenomenology" by making a fundamental effort to overcome the phenomenological problem of the resemblance of "the body that lives in itself" to "the body that lives in others". Husserl's concept of intersubjectivity is clearer when he explains the experiences of the world as the world in which he resides (homeworld) compared to the unknown world (foreign world). He illustrates that human experience lives in a world filled with attraction between the homeworld and the foreign world.

Intersubjectivity and Existence
The idea of intersubjectivity has also become the concern of Martin Heidegger, the German philosopher, who had a relatively close personal and intellectual relationship with Edmund Husserl. Heidegger's view of "being exist" makes his thinking coincide with the issue of self-reliance and subjectivity which is also Husserl's concern. The difference is that Husserl tends to focus on epistemologically "being exist" while Heidegger presupposes "being exist" in an ontological and existential sense. " Theunissen (1986) argues that the concept of co-being (co-existence) made by Hiedegger is also a reformulation of Husserl's notion of transcendental intersubjectivity. The main difference between the two, according to Theunissen (1986), is that Heidegger's notion of "being" relates to existence in an ontological sense whereas Husserl's emphasis is on epistemological subjectivity. This difference starts from Heidegger's orientation which indeed questions "existing" at the level of ontology, in contrast to Husserl's phenomenology which is at the level of epistemology because it is related to knowledge of the world (Hardiman, 2016,p. 34).
Heidegger's notion of intersubjectivity can be traced through the sorting of dasein, mitdasein, and mitsein that he used to explain Existence. According to Hardiman (2016), dasein is used by Heidegger to refer to humans who have awareness, questioning, and/or reflection about the Being-Exist in the world. Mitdasein (which in everyday language means "others"), is a concept used to describe the situation of human existence together. This term affirms the nature of humans as a social being. As for mitsein is a concept abstracted to describe the condition (or choice) of dasein to be authentic without withdrawing from the situation of the crowd forgetting its personal authenticity (das Man).
The concept of mitsein along with its differences from dasein and mitdasein in Heidegger's concept presupposes that humans (dasein) can live together with others (mitdasein) in a form of solidarity. In this concept, there is the assumption that there is a world where humans one with another human live together in their respective reflective consciousness. The world in this concept is clearly not in the literal sense (let alone simplified as the earth), but rather a world in which -as mentioned earlier -man resides and Being exists. In concrete form, this world can be referred to as a field, such as the field of economics, the field of religion, the field of politics, the field of sports, and other fields where humans find meaning and Being exist. The concept of the existence of this kind of shared "world" has conceptual proximity to Husserl's intersubjectivity.

Intersubjectivity and Meaning of Actions
The phenomenological influence in the social field was brought about by Alfred Schütz. As a sociologist, he had been heavily influenced by Max Weber's thoughts after attending his lectures in Vienna between 1919 and 1920. As a phenomenologist, he was "exposed" by Edmund Husserl's idea through Husserl's works that Schütz assessed could be used to investigate the basis of Weber's interpretative sociology (Trujillo, 2018). Two interests, to sociology and phenomenology, are what make him give birth to the typical "branch" of phenomenology on social sciences. Popularly, the branch is often called social phenomenology.
The concept of intersubjectivity in Schütz's thinking is used to explain the meaning of action, among others in a book entitled Phenomenology of The Social World. Schutz (1967) wrote: ... the phenomena of the external world have meaning not only for you and me, for F and S, but for everyone living in it. There is only one external world, the public world, and it is given equally to all of us. Therefore, every act of mine through which I endow the world with meaning refers back to some meaning-endowing act (Sinngebung) of yours with respect to the same world. Meaning is thus constituted as an intersubjective phenomenon.
In Schütz's view, external phenomena that emerge in the outer world (extramundane) do not only emerge in one or two persons but emerge to all who live in them. There is only one external world, the public world, and it is given evenly to all. Therefore, the subject's meaning of the phenomenon will refer back to the meaning of actions that give meaning to the same world. In short, as Trujillo (2018) reveals, Schütz views "World experience" not as "personal experience" but "shared experience". The world of everyday life is "the world for all of us", although in general it is realized as "especially as the world of 'me'".
It is this initial statement that distinguishes Schütz's intersubjectivity from Husserl's intersubjectivity on the epistemological level and Heidegger's ontological pattern (questioning being). Schütz uses this concept to understand the meaning of action in human daily life. By Schütz (1962( , as cited in Lachowska, 1980, "understanding" is not seen as a special method in the study of the humanities that distinguishes it from the study of nature but rather as a way of experiencing the world in everyday life. Therefore, in his analysis of "everyday intersubjectivity", Schütz attempts to answer two questions: (1) how do we understand others in various areas of social life? and (2) what makes the understanding of others become unproblematic in everyday life?

Intersubjective in Language
The study of the role of intersubjectivity in the production and appreciation of humor can be done by putting language as an intersubjective symptom. This step needs to be done because most humor utilizes language features to create humor (Attardo & Raskin, 2017). These language features include phonological, cognitive, semantic, and pragmatic features (Larkin-Galiñanes, 2017) The basic assumption that language has an intersubjective aspect can be traced in cognitive linguistics and interactional linguistics. According to Etelämäki (2016) in general, the use of the concept of intersubjectivity in language study places intersubjectivity in three different approach focuses. The first approach places intersubjectivity as a property in the human mind so that intersubjectivity is associated with philosophical, psychological, cognitive, and neuroscience issues. The second approach places intersubjectivity as a cognitive phenomenon. The third approach places intersubjectivity as the achievement of human social interaction.
Cognitive linguistics studies prioritize explanations of how language and the mind are present together in a language act (Arimi, 2015;Zahra & Nirmala, 2020). It can simply be said that every time people speak a language, they are basically thinking. One of the key concepts learned in cognitive linguistics is the existence and way the concept works, namely the knowledge unit that is central to categorization and conceptualization (Arimi, 2015). Every man who thinks is basically conceptualizing something. A concept is an abstract and new cognitive reality that becomes concrete when realized in the form of language expression, namely lexicon. Cognitive linguists believe that every human being has the ability to conceptualize things. The shared ability to conceptualize, one of which, makes humans to have the ability to connect to understand the concept that one individual has with the concept that other individuals have.
Concepts about concepts and conceptualization show from a cognitive linguistics standpoint that humans have the same pattern in empowering their cognitive abilities. The similarity of patterns in creating concepts is what makes people connect to each other. Langacker (2008, as cited by Boogaart & Reuneker, 2017) shows the cognitive scheme when humans produce concepts in language production activities. In the scheme developed with the basic framework of phenomenology, it appears that the most basic point of the concept is the subject who projects his attention intensely to the object. The subject's projection on the object is not only focused on one point because the object is a symptom that is present in the "onstage region" related to other objects conceptually. The whole operation works in the frame of consciousness.

Figure 1
Conceptual operation of subjects and objects according to Langacker (as adapted by Boogaart and Reuneker, 2017) Intersubjectivity plays a role not only in supporting the occurrence of communication between the subject (S) and the hearer (H) but also as a prerequisite for the communication to occur (Etelämäki, 2016) . When doing communication, basically S invites H to enter into the same ground in order to be able to interpret reality in a certain way that is more or less the same. When H meets S invitation to access the same ground, both are connected so that they can understand the same object in roughly the same way. From this perspective, cognitive linguistics assumes intersubjectivity as the same mind operating pattern between one individual and another so as to allow those thoughts to connect. The connectedness surpasses semantic connectedness (understanding the meaning of speech) because it underpins the interpretation of semantic work.
Apart from the cognitive linguistics paradigm, language as an intersubjectivity reality is also contained in interactional linguistics. According to Kern (2019), interactional linguistics aims to describe linguistic phenomena as a source of construction and organization in human interaction practices. Kern and Selting (2013) explain that in interactional linguistics it is recognized fact that language is used in and for a specific purpose in human interaction. Consequently, linguistic phenomena need to be analyzed in relation to the conversational actions they use and their sequences. Based on these basic assumptions, interactional linguistics focuses its study on symptoms that are based on the use of language in social interactions.
Intersubjectivity and interactional linguistics have a similar interest in questioning human interactions so that they can connect with each other. In the practice of analysis, the two concepts can help each other to explain the things that underlie the possibility of interaction between individuals. To explain the role of intersubjectivity in interaction, Stevanovic and Koski (2018) first sorted three domains of social interaction; namely the affective domain, the deontic domain, and the epistemic domain to their participants.
The affective domain is related to the emotions perceived by the participants of an interaction. This domain becomes important because social interaction is essentially anchored in what they call the "emotional order," which consists of "socio-cultural, personal, and local expectations of the expression of influence in the momentary relationships of the interacting participants." The deontic domain is related to the ability to recognize and understand social rules and what happens when rules are violated. According to Stevanovic and Koski (2018), this aspect is related to power, control, and agency or the right of individuals to determine actions. The deontic domain assumes that humans have the capacity to understand unwritten rules that guide them to choose actions that are worth doing, those are not worth doing, and their respective consequences. The epistemic domain is related to a series of open relationships between one person and another in accessing and connecting certain knowledge. This knowledge-mediated connection is constantly at stake when two or more people interact with each other. In interacting, a speaker gathers information about what his or her listeners know or don't know as a foundation for designing our speech.
The three domains show that human interaction with one another is based on connectedness at various levels at once. In addition to the symbolic discursive level, human connectedness occurs at a transcendental level. Such connectedness is based on the innate capacity of humans to understand each other. This connection allows two individuals to interact well without having to first agree on the rules of the interaction.
From this review, it can be concluded that intersubjectivity has a role in interaction events. The language used by humans also operates with intersubjective connectedness. Thus, the use of language in human interaction cannot be separated from intersubjectivity. This awareness, by pragmatic experts, has been developed so that it becomes a more empirical concept.

Intersubjectivity in Humor Production and Appreciation
From a linguistic perspective, humor is a type of discourse which form is equivalent to another unit of discourse. What makes humor different from other discourses is its textual properties, cognitive and psychological mechanisms of its creation and appreciation, as well as its social function. Humor has special textual, cognitive, and psychological properties that allow it to generate excitement that is spontaneous, unintentional, and voluntary (Newirth, 2006)). Intersubjective relationships in humor are very important because, as Altman (2008) states, the funny experiences and sensations a person feels are strongly influenced by unconscious encounters that are mostly spontaneous. All humor has implicit unconscious aspects (Fry, 2010) Based on the form of intersubjectivity as stated by Husserl, Heidegger, and Shutz in the previous section; there are three roles of intersubjectivity in the production and appreciation of humor; namely (1) providing shared knowledge, (2) ensuring the existence, and (3) seating meaning.

Providing Shared Knowledge
The role of intersubjectivity in providing shared knowledge can be found by retracing the basic assumptions contained in incongruity theory. This theory states that funny effects are born because of the presence of something that is inappropriate, something that violates our mental and expectations patterns (Forabosco, 1992;Larkin-Galiñanes, 2017;Raskin, 1985). The theory of bringing out set up and punch line patterns is very often used in various types of humor. The setup contains information used to condition or create a specific set of expectations. The punch line is information that in an unexpected way contradicts the expectations that have been created in the set up. The combination of set up and punch line creates the perceptual discrepancies necessary for humor to occur (Martin, 2007) This formula may only be used if there is mutual knowledge between makers and connoisseurs of humor. Shared knowledge is needed so that the two agree on which is "normal" and which is "odd". The ability of humorous writers to understand the normal and odd requires empathic experiences. The two different subjects must first access the same world, a world that provides shared knowledge. In the same world, objects manifest themselves in the same way to authors and potential connoisseurs of humor so that what is understood and felt by the creators of humor is also understood and felt by the readers or listeners.
This one-line humor (one liner) shows how intersubjectivity plays a role in the production and appreciation of humor: Humor 1 It's a real shame that Barrack Obama recently had to give a speech stood behind bullet proof glass. Just because he's black doesn't mean he's gonna shoot anybody. (source: http://www.funnyshortjokes.com/) Humor 2 I'll admit that the Chinese kids in math class are pretty smart. But doing it with their eyes closed... that's a bit cocky. (source: http://kickasshumor.com/) Humor 3 Q. What do Nike and the KKK have in common? A. They both make black guys run faster. (source: http://www.funnyshortjokes.com/ The three humors may only be funny if the maker and the connoisseur have adequate shared knowledge. In Humor 1, readers are only likely to feel anomalies (incongruent) if they know (1) who Barack Obama is, (2) the function of the bulletproof glass around him, and (3) why black people have to do with the shooting. Humor 2 requires a shared knowledge of (1) stereotypes of Chinese skilled in mathematics and (2) the phrase "closed eyes" has two meanings: denotative and connotative. As for Humor 3, the shared knowledge required is (1) what is Nike, (2) who is KKK, and (3) the ambiguity of the meaning of the phrase "run faster".

Asserting the Existence of Emotions
Intersubjectivity has a role in the mechanism of energy release as described in release theory. Release theory states that laughter is the body's mechanism to release tension felt due to the accumulation of nerve and muscle energy (Freud, 1905;Koestler, 1989;Larkin-Galiñanes, 2017). Our emotions are stored in the nervous system in the form of neural energy that demands to be released in order not to become a burden. Koestler (1989) speaks of a "safety valve theory" that assumes some excess emotions such as anger, sexual desire, fear, pride, and so on; require a reliever to reduce them. Excess energy can encourage people to take aggressive action to release it, requiring a safety valve for the energy to be deflated. When channeling excess energy, people tend to feel relieved because the accumulated energy can be released. The delightful funny effect of humor is the result of the release of such repressed energy (Newirth, 2006) This mechanism involves intersubjectivity because it is only possible if there is an emotional similarity between the maker and the connoisseur. Vague and unconscious emotions turn into solid emotions when makers and connoisseurs of humor connect with each other. Such a mechanism can be observed in the production and appreciation of the following three humors. Mr. Fadli Zon went abroad to reconcile other countries. Even though Indonesia has many conflicts because of him. (source: stand up Kiky Saputri) Humor 6 "South of the border is a sea of violence, corruption and stupidity I wouldn't touch with a ten foot pole," Trump said.
As a Canadian, I confirm that. (source: https://upjoke.com) The three humors above require certain emotions that can generate energy to be released, not just shared knowledge. Humor Connoisseur 1 not only has to understand the game of words to enjoy the humor. This humor will be easily enjoyed by people who feel frustration, anger, or other negative emotions toward politicians. Humor 5 which was brought by a stand-up comedian Kiky Saputri to roast vice chairman of the House of Representatives (DPR) Fadli Zon also involved intersubjectivity in the process of writing and appreciation of humor. The bit is funny because there is a shared negative feeling, in the form of annoyance, which is reinforced by the standup comedian to be released together through laughter. As for Humor 6, intersubjectivity provides the same feelings or emotions, namely the dislike for American and Trump. It was that feeling of dislike that was released through laughter.
Certain themes such as sex, physical disability, racism, and politics often succeed in igniting laughter because they use these release mechanisms. Enthusiasts of humor basically have feelings or emotions about sex and physical disabilities that are difficult to express in a normal way. Similarly, many people are upset with politicians but are too afraid to express it because they worry about breaking the norm. The repressed feeling is an intersubjective experience that arises in the minds of many people but is often repressed or denied its existence. When conveyed through humor, the existence of the feeling is recognized and released together as laughter.

Directing the Meaning of Action
Although with different measurements, the theory of superiority also assumes the existence of intersubjectivity in the production and appreciation of humor. What is called superiority in this context is not actual superiority but assumed superiority. Superior feelings arise because the observer interprets the event that the subject experiences as a silly event, not a sad event. The observer will laugh only if the victim shows a funny confused face, not an expression of pain or anger.
The subject's facial expression who experiences is an important element in the processing of the situation so that it leads to a funny experience for the observer. As stated by (Manfredi et al., 2014) that the same event has a lower weight of humor if it is not accompanied by facial expressions. A confused face on a subject that is experiencing is interpreted by the observer as a funny experience. The dialogue between Sule and Bolot in the dialogue Ini Talkshow, December 20, 2018 edition, below shows the role of intersubjectivity in determining the meaning of Action. Verbally, this dialogue looks like any other disconnected dialogue. Sule's annoyed expression and Bolot's innocent expression made the audience understand the comicality of the dialogue.
Humor 7 Bolot : Accidentally, I come in, Sule has many guests. Sule : As usual, indeed, there are many guests. Bolot : You have many guests. Sule : Yes, a lot. Bolot : A lot yes. Three.
In general, the audience knows that the dialogue is artificial because Bolot is known as a comedian who consistently builds his persona as a deaf person. Because the audience knew it was artificial, the discontinuity of the dialogue was expected by the audience. In incongruity theory, the audience's ability to predict the scenario played by the comedian will make the dialogue less funny. But the audience still laughed because the comedian's facial expressions were able to connect funny messages beyond the verbal messages in the dialogue.
There is a role of intersubjectivity in the humor appreciation mechanism because the comedian and the audience are connected to each other. The connection lets the viewer know that the two comedians are not simply playing a role in a pre-arranged dialogue, but are actually having a misunderstanding. This meaning makes the audience feel that the dialogue is still funny.
This also applies to cartoons and slapstick humor that explore the misfortunes of the characters. For example, Tom and Jerry cartoon shows can provoke the audience's laughter even though they contain various forms of violence (Islam et al., 2021) such as hitting, throwing, and even detonating bombs. The funny experience perceived by the audience is obtained through interpretive mechanisms that interpret misfortune as silly, not sad.

Conclusions
Intersubjectivity explains inter-subject connectedness both consciously and unconsciously. This happens because every human being has an ego and a phenomenon that manifests itself to one ego also manifests itself to another ego. In humor, intersubjectivity has a role because it connects humor makers and connoisseurs through knowledge, feelings, awareness, and even shared unconsciousness. Funny experiences can occur because makers and connoisseurs are connected and can access the "shared world". The three roles of intersubjectivity in the production and appreciation of humor are to provide shared experiences, affirm the existence of emotions, and direct the meaning of actions. The role of intersubjectivity as demonstrated in research allows the study of the production and appreciation of humor to be carried out with a new perspective. Humor can not only be studied based on its textual structure but also studied as a form of human connection. However, this study has limitations because it only uses data from library sources. Empirical research is needed to further quantify the role of intersubjectivity in the production and appreciation of humor.