Figure 2 - uploaded by Anna Milanowicz
Content may be subject to copyright.
Source publication
The paper explores why certain adults are, or at least consider themselves to be, more ironic than others. The study looked at comprehension and application of irony compared to subjective affective evaluation of irony reported by Polish-speaking adults and with relation to nonverbal intelligence measured with the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale-...
Citations
... Irony is characterized by ambiguity, which makes the interpretation and perception of such figurative language subjective (Milanowicz, 2013). Irony not only relays information about the reality but also expresses attitudes and emotions (Gucman, 2016;Milanowicz, 2013). ...
... Irony is characterized by ambiguity, which makes the interpretation and perception of such figurative language subjective (Milanowicz, 2013). Irony not only relays information about the reality but also expresses attitudes and emotions (Gucman, 2016;Milanowicz, 2013). It is not easy to identify the speaker's intended meaning by merely focusing on literal words. ...
The smiling emoji has been claimed to be a marker of sarcastic intention among young Chinese users in computer-mediated communication. However, it is not well understood whether people interpret the emoji differently based on the characteristics or traits of the sender, as conveyed by occupation stereotypes. We investigated the effect of sender occupation on emoji-based sarcasm interpretation in both unambiguous (Experiment 1) and ambiguous (Experiment 2) contexts. The results showed that contextual incongruity was privileged over sender occupation in cueing sarcastic intention. In unambiguous contexts, sender occupation exerted no significant influence on the interpretation of emoji-based sarcastic statements. In contrast, sender occupation played an important role in the interpretation of emoji-based statements in ambiguous contexts. Specifically, emoji-based ambiguous statements delivered by senders in high‑irony occupations were more likely to be perceived as sarcastic than by those in low-irony occupations. However, sender occupation did not affect the interpretation of the emoji; instead, it biased the judgment of emoji in sarcasm interpretation. In a follow-up experiment (Experiment 3), we investigated the perceived characteristics of both high- and low-irony occupations. The results demonstrated that individuals in high-irony occupations were stereotyped with characteristics, including being humorous, insincere, easy to setting up close relationships, and of a lower social status. Taken together, our study suggests that stereotypical information about the sender could drive the interpretation of potentially sarcastic statements, and the contextual information modulates the effect of sender occupation on sarcasm interpretation.
... In the previously described conversation study, Rockwell (2007) also measured cognitive complexity with the Role Category Questionnaire (RCQ, Crockett, 1965) and found that scores on this measure were positively correlated with the participants' frequency of identifying sarcasm in their own utterances. Finally, in a Polish sample, Milanowicz (2013) found that nonverbal intelligence, assessed by the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale Revised (WAIS-R) was positively correlated with describing oneself as a sarcastic person in a series of open-ended questions. However, Ruch, Heintz, Platt, Wagner, and Proyer (2018) found that, in a sample of Swiss and German participants, the only correlation between irony and sarcasm use, measured by the CSM, and intelligence, was a positive one between irony use and self-rated spatial intelligence as well as a total aggregated self-rated intelligence score. ...
... The SSS itself has also variously been used to measure constructs identified as irony (e.g., Markowitz, 2007) and sarcasm (e.g., Kałowski et al., 2021). Comparing studies which used vignette-based tasks or open-ended questions may be even more difficult (e.g., Huang, Gino, & Galinsky, 2015;Milanowicz, 2013). Thus, it would be beneficial to systematize the issues of definition and operationalization in future studies. ...
... For example, intelligence has traditionally been associated with speaking ironically (Attardo, 2000;Kreuz, 2020). However, we identified only two studies pursuing this point (Milanowicz, 2013;Ruch, Heintz, Platt, Wagner, & Proyer, 2018), which yielded ambiguous results. It may be pertinent to examine it further in light of the results on irony/sarcasm use and creativity and cognitive flexibility (Huang, Gino, & Galinsky, 2015;Markowitz, 2007), as well as the observing aspects of mindfulness (Hofmann, Heintz, Pang, & Ruch, 2020). ...
We carried out a systematic review of psycholinguistic, empirical, quantitative studies on verbal irony use and individual differences (i.e. psychological, not demographic, traits that significantly differentiate individuals). Out of 5,967 publications screened, 29, comprising 35 studies in total, were included. Following a qualitative content analysis, six thematic clusters were identified, representing areas of research in individual differences in irony use: (a) psychological well-being, (b) personality traits, (c) humor-related traits, (d) cultural factors, (e) social skills, and (f) cognitive factors. The results of the studies in each cluster are summarized and conclusions for further research are presented. In particular, the systematic review suggests that irony and sarcasm should be clearly delineated as separate, yet related phenomena due to differing patterns of correlations with specific individual differences. Additionally, significant methodological heterogeneity between the studies suggests the need for greater standardization of irony use measures.
... One of the most difficult communication forms to understand is irony (Wilson and Sperber, 1981), therefore it has been proposed that it can be a useful indicator of pragmatic abilities (Caillies et al., 2014). Irony plays different roles during communication; it serves to indirectly convey feelings (Shamay-Tsoory et al., 2005), express courtesy, emotion, or humor, and enhance criticism (Milanowicz, 2013). It has been reported that ironic statements are used in approximately 7% of the conversational turns in everyday conversation (Tannen, 2005), and 8% during conversations with friends (Gibbs, 2000). ...
An ironic statement transmits the opposite meaning to its literal counterpart and is one of the most complex communicative acts. Thus, it has been proposed to be a good indicator of social communication ability. Prosody and facial expression are two crucial paralinguistic cues that can facilitate the understanding of ironic statements. The primary aim of this study was to create and evaluate a task of irony identification that could be used in neuroimaging studies. We independently evaluated three cues, contextual discrepancy, prosody and facial expression, and selected the best cue that would lead participants in fMRI studies to identify a stimulus as ironic in a reliable way. This process included the design, selection, and comparison of the three cues, all of which have been previously associated with irony detection. The secondary aim was to correlate irony comprehension with specific cognitive functions. Results showed that psycholinguistic properties could differentiate irony from other communicative acts. The contextual discrepancy, prosody, and facial expression were relevant cues that helped detect ironic statements; with contextual discrepancy being the cue that produced the highest classification accuracy and classification time. This task can be used successfully to test irony comprehension in Spanish speakers using the cue of interest. The correlation of irony comprehension with cognitive functions did not yield consistent results. A more heterogeneous sample of participants and a broader battery of tests may be needed to find reliable cognitive correlates of irony comprehension.
... Accordingly, contrast inherent in irony allows for using it to strengthen social bonds (Clark & Gerrig, 1984), but also to deliver criticism in a sociallyapproved way (e.g., Attardo, 2000;Kreuz et al., 1991). Depending on the situational context, irony may be used for social distance management by bringing speakers together when taking the form of shared play (Milanowicz, 2013) or targeting a third party (Gibbs, 2000). However, it can also widen the gap between the interlocutors by mocking, insulting, criticizing (Bowes & Katz, 2011), or displaying detachment (Attardo, 2000. ...
... For example, Lampert and Ervin-Tripp (2006) found that male-male conversations are characterized by more teasing than female-female conversations (e.g., Guiller & Durndell, 2006, on similar results in an online context), but in mixed-gender conversations, men used self-deprecating jokes and women used more teasing. Moreover, men (a) rate themselves as more likely to use irony than do women (Ivanko et al., 2004;Milanowicz, 2013), (b) rate irony as funnier than women, who more often report it as critical (Jorgensen, 1996;Milanowicz, 2013;Milanowicz & Bokus, 2020), (c) are perceived as more ironic than women, by both genders (Pexman, 2005), and (d) use irony more often in conversations (Colston & Lee, 2004;Gibbs, 2000). Milanowicz et al. (2017) and Milanowicz and Bokus (2020) also found that both genders were more likely to respond with irony to ironic comments made by men in general, and with irony to ironic criticism (i.e., nonliteral reproach) coming from men and ironic praise (i.e., nonliteral compliments) coming from women in particular. ...
... For example, Lampert and Ervin-Tripp (2006) found that male-male conversations are characterized by more teasing than female-female conversations (e.g., Guiller & Durndell, 2006, on similar results in an online context), but in mixed-gender conversations, men used self-deprecating jokes and women used more teasing. Moreover, men (a) rate themselves as more likely to use irony than do women (Ivanko et al., 2004;Milanowicz, 2013), (b) rate irony as funnier than women, who more often report it as critical (Jorgensen, 1996;Milanowicz, 2013;Milanowicz & Bokus, 2020), (c) are perceived as more ironic than women, by both genders (Pexman, 2005), and (d) use irony more often in conversations (Colston & Lee, 2004;Gibbs, 2000). Milanowicz et al. (2017) and Milanowicz and Bokus (2020) also found that both genders were more likely to respond with irony to ironic comments made by men in general, and with irony to ironic criticism (i.e., nonliteral reproach) coming from men and ironic praise (i.e., nonliteral compliments) coming from women in particular. ...
including irony (Gibbs 2000). Efficient irony use can serve a wide range of pragmatic goals, while deficits in irony comprehension can have negative social consequences. Whereas a large body of psycholinguistic research has been produced on irony use and understanding by adults, little attention has been paid to the socio-cultural characteristics of this phenomenon so far. Some individual factors that have been identified as correlates of irony use include personality of the speaker, gender, age, or speaking a second language. In this article, we argue that it is necessary to bring the aspects of socio-cultural variables and individual characteristics together in the further study of irony across national cultures. To this end, we present a narrative review of theoretical and quantitative empirical literature from the field of psycholinguistics on both national cultural and individual/psychological factors impacting the use and understanding of verbal irony in communication. Based on the review, we suggest a theoretical model that could guide future quantitative studies on irony use such that both contextual factors (including national cultural dimensions) and individual differences between the speakers are clearly defined and related to one another in terms of their influence.
... En su estudio, Taylor (2017) descubre que los hablantes en general tienden a relacionar el sarcasmo más con el comportamiento masculino que con el femenino. A su vez, los estudios de Milanowicz (2013y Milanowicz et al. 2017) en poblaciones polacas, señalan que los varones usan la ironía para burlarse, para divertir y ser vistos como graciosos, en tanto que las mujeres prefieren emplear los enunciados irónicos para expresar desaprobación, ira o maldad, en situaciones donde deben guardar las apariencias. Además, la percepción que tienen los hablantes sobre la ironía concuerda con su uso: los hombres tienden a percibir las expresiones irónicas como bien intencionadas, en tanto que las mujeres las consideran con mala intención. ...
... En cambio, cuando una mujer emite un comentario irónico, este tiende a interpretarse como una mentira prosocial, pues socialmente se espera que las mujeres sean corteses y cooperativas y que, por tanto, no empleen expresiones agresivas y críticas como la ironía. Los resultados de nuestro estudio con respecto a las diferencias debidas al género de los interlocutores de un evento irónico también coinciden con los datos encontrados en investigaciones similares con adultos (Bowes y Katz, 2011;Colston y Lee, 2004;Ivanko et al. 2004;Kondratowicz 2021;Milanowicz 2013;Milanowicz et al. 2017;Rockwell y Theriot 2001;Taylor 2017). ...
Verbal irony is the type of non-literal language of latest acquisition, as it requires a profound knowledge of social relationships between those who ironize, such as those imposed by gender. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to analyze children and adolescents’ metalinguistic reflections on verbal irony in situations where the gender of the speakers was a variable. The participants were 18 children aged 9 and 19 adolescents aged 15, who were presented with four ironic stories in which the speakers were of different genders; they were questioned on the meaning of the ironic sentence and whether the gender of the speaker was important. The results show significant differences by age but not by gender of participants. Also, they show that the interpretation of irony is favored or obstructed by the gender of the
ironist or the victim. The conclusion is that social and cultural environment is an essential factor for the development of verbal irony in individuals.
... Further, it may be a tool for distance management between interlocutors, as according to the context of usage, it can bring speakers together when taking the form of shared play or targeting a third party (Gibbs 2000) or widen the gap between interlocutors by insulting or displaying detachment (Attardo 2000). Irony is closely related to humour: both build affiliation (Milanowicz 2013), but can also mock and criticise (Bowes and Katz 2011). It can be used to compliment, add humour to a conversation, be playful or silly, or engage in social hedging (whether in terms of being modest or saving face) (Dews, Kaplan, and Winner 1995). ...
Children find verbal irony difficult to understand. Yet they need to
acquire the skill of comprehending it in order to become proficient
communicators and to master deep reading. Graphic novels and
comics can expose children to non-literal expressions, including
verbal irony. In the paper, I argue that graphic novels and comics
may be used as a powerful tool for teaching irony to children, using
Phoebe and her Unicorn by Dana Simpson as an example of a literary
source of children’s exposure to ironic language. While I analyse
chosen instances of irony used in the comic, I postulate that in
consideration of recent studies on figurative language comprehension, irony should be taught to children.
... Irony, on the other hand, serves various social communicative functions. Based on its linguistic dichotomy or discrepancy it can serve to express politeness, display emotion or humor, or even enhance criticism (Milanowicz, 2013). ...
Irony is a type of figurative language in which the literal meaning of the expression is the opposite of what the speaker intends to communicate. Even though schizophrenic patients are known as typically impaired in irony comprehension and in the underlying neural functions, to date no one has explored the neural correlates of figurative language comprehension in first-degree relatives of schizophrenic patients. In the present study, we examined the neural correlates of irony understanding in schizophrenic patients and in unaffected first-degree relatives of patients compared to healthy adults with functional MRI. Our aim was to investigate if possible alterations of the neural circuits supporting irony comprehension in first-degree relatives of patients with schizophrenia would fulfill the familiality criterion of an endophenotype. We examined 12 schizophrenic patients, 12 first-degree relatives of schizophrenia patients and 12 healthy controls with functional MRI while they were performing irony and control tasks. Different phases of irony processing were examined, such as context processing and ironic statement comprehension. Patients had significantly more difficulty understanding irony than controls or relatives. Patients also showed markedly different neural activation pattern compared to controls in both stages of irony processing. Although no significant differences were found in the performance of the irony tasks between the control group and the relative group, during the fMRI analysis, the relatives showed stronger brain activity in the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex during the context processing phase of irony tasks than the control group. However, the controls demonstrated higher activations in the left dorsomedial prefrontal cortex and in the right inferior frontal gyrus during the ironic statement phase of the irony tasks than the relative group. Our results show that despite good task performance, first-degree relatives of schizophrenia patients had alterations in the neural circuits during irony processing. Thus, we suggest that neural alteration of irony comprehension could be a potential endophenotypic marker of schizophrenia.
... However, differences in irony perception might also result from the simple fact that we differ in how we see the world, what we like about it and how we describe it; this may explain why there is systematic variance in irony detection performance (Bruntsch et al., 2016). Previous research by Milanowicz (2013) showed that that men would use irony with the aim to amuse others, to make fun, and to be perceived as funny, but women would rather use ironic comments to show their disapproval and smuggle in more anger and meanness. Seeing clearly the variability in the load of ironic comments, we agree with Jorgensen (1996) that in order to see how irony can be used as an effective tool for communication, we should look into the perceptions of ironic instances. ...
... Recchia et al. (2010) showed that in family conversations at Canadian homes, mothers were likely to ask rhetorical questions and use ironic language in conflictual contexts, while fathers used hyperbole and understatement as frequently as rhetorical questions, and employed ironic language in both positive and conflictual contexts. Kałowski (2017) introduced audiovisual stimuli (recordings of women and men making ironic statements directed at the participant) and collected data in the form of recordings of utterances, and their analysis was consistent with previous research showing that males feel more positive about using irony (Jorgensen, 1996;Colston and Lee, 2004;Milanowicz, 2013). Self-stereotype activation yielded higher humor ratings of irony than non-irony used by male (but not female) actors in the stimulus videos. ...
... Analogously, "not meaning well when using irony" might be an element of a female stereotype. These results also suggest that men and women might use irony for different reasons (Milanowicz, 2013;Milanowicz and Kałowski, 2016;Kałowski, 2017). ...
This article approaches the question of mocking compliments and ironic praise from an interactional gender perspective. A statement such as “You're a real genius!” could easily be interpreted as a literal compliment, as playful humor or as an offensive insult. We investigate this thin line in the use of irony among adult men and women. The research introduces an interactional approach to irony, through the lens of gender stereotype bias. The main question concerns the impact of individual differences and gender effect on the perception and production of ironic comments. Irony Processing Task (IPT), developed by Milanowicz (2016), was applied in order to study the production and perception of ironic criticism and ironic praise in adult males and females. It is a rare case of a study measuring the ability to create irony because, unlike most of known irony research, it is not a multiple choice test where participants are given the response options. The IPT was also used to assess the asymmetry of affect (humor vs. malice) and impact of gender effect in the perception of ironic comments. Results are analyzed in relation to the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI) scores. The findings reveal the interactional relationship between gender and response to irony. Male responses were consistently more ironic than female's, across all experimental conditions, and female responses varied more. Both, men and women used more irony in response to male ironic criticism but female ironic praise. Anxiety proved to be a moderate predictor of irony comprehension and willingness to use irony. Data, collected in control and two gender stereotype activation conditions, also corroborates the assumption that the detection of compliments and the detection of criticism can be moderated by the attitude activation effect. The results are interpreted within the framework of linguistic intergroup bias (LIB) and natural selection strategies.
... There is evidence that producing and understanding verbal irony are related to many abilities which fall under the general term "intelligence." For example, non-verbal intelligence is positively correlated to the degree to which adults perceive themselves as ironic (Milanowicz 2013), emotional intelligence plays an important role in the detection of an ironic interpretation of an utterance (Jacob et al. 2016) and theories of the mind are related to both understanding irony and intelligence (e.g. Akimoto et al. 2012;Angeleri and Airenti 2014). ...
This study adds to the existing literature on the ability to understand irony of typically developing versus gifted students (aged 12–15). In addition to the canonical condition of polarized statements applied to oppositely polarized situations, we also considered the case of intermediate statements and situations. The results showed a significant difference between the two groups of participants. Both groups recognized an ironic interpretation in the more usual condition of a polarized statement applied to a clearly oppositely polarized situation and they also grasped the idea that the bigger the contrast, the more ironic the message. However, gifted students demonstrated greater mastery, with regard to both polarized and intermediate statements. They also demonstrated greater ability compared with their non-gifted peers in the task which required them to explain the “rule” underlying the conditions which applied to the comments they had judged as ironic and to then produce ironic stories demonstrating the specificity of irony (not to be confused with generic humor).
... shared variance) to self-reported use of irony as assessed with one item (Milanowicz, 2013). ...
Being the first to ask the question whether (a) systematic interindividual differences in irony performance can be found and (b) whether this interindividual variance can be explained by personality and ability variables, the present thesis aims to paint a clearer picture of who is able or inclined to detect or use irony. The aim in dealing with these questions is to open up a new field of study for both personality and irony research by conceptualizing irony detection as an aptitude and irony use as an enduring tendency. The results support these expectations by demonstrably (a) linking the aptitude to detect irony to general mental ability and personality traits, and (b) linking the tendency to use irony to personality traits. More broadly, the results support the central claims in that they indicate (a) that there is systematic and measurable interindividual variance in irony detection and use, and (b) that a substantial amount of this interindividual variance can be explained by variables from the realm of ability and personality as two central domains of individual differences. Furthermore, the present thesis introduces a new means of assessing irony detection performance (i.e., including ironic praise as a previously neglected category of stimuli). As a secondary result, the present thesis also supports pre-existing assumptions about the role of humor in irony behaviors. The findings have implications for different fields of irony and humor research.
http://opac.nebis.ch/ediss/20183223.pdf
