Ginés Navarro-Carrillo1, Jorge Torres-Marín2, José Manuel Corbacho-Lobato3, Hugo Carretero-Dios4. 1. Department of Social Psychology, Faculty of Psychology, Mind, Brain, and Behavior Research Center, University of Granada, Granada, Spain. 2. Department of Experimental Psychology, Faculty of Psychology, Mind, Brain, and Behavior Research Center, University of Granada, Granada, Spain. 3. San Cecilio University Hospital, Granada, Spain. 4. Faculty of Psychology, Mind, Brain, and Behavior Research Center, Research Methods in Behavioral Sciences, University of Granada, Granada, Spain.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Prior research has underlined the meaningful function of humour in nursing settings. Nonetheless, most of the empirical evidence on humour and nursing derives from approaches that mainly considered the potential beneficial effects of humour, neglecting potential detrimental effects of the dark side of humour. Moreover, little is known about whether the specific repercussions of humour on healthcare professionals' well-being would go beyond empathy-a construct robustly related to psychological well-being. AIMS: To examine whether distinctive humour styles (affiliative, self-enhancing, aggressive and self-defeating) are differentially associated with the psychological well-being of nursing professionals. Importantly, we also analysed whether these potential humour effects go over and above the influence of empathy-related traits (perspective-taking and personal distress). METHOD: A cross-sectional, descriptive correlational design was used. A convenience sample of 104 nursing professionals with a minimum work experience of one year was recruited. RESULTS: Our results revealed that a greater inclination to affiliative and self-enhancing humour styles was strongly related to higher scores on happiness, sociability, hope and life satisfaction among nursing professionals. Concerning maladaptive humour styles, aggressive humour was related to low life satisfaction and high nursing stress. By contrast, self-defeating humour-a theoretically detrimental humour style-was related to higher scores on health among these professionals. These effects emerged even after controlling for the influence of demographics (i.e., gender, age and years of experience), perspective-taking and personal distress. CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that adaptive humour styles may promote positive indicators of well-being, but they might not protect against negative indicators. Moreover, differential effects of maladaptive humour styles emerged. Whereas aggressive humoristic expressions can be interpreted as a sign of a poor psychological functioning, self-defeating humour may boost positive psychological outcomes among nursing professionals. These data can help to design more efficient humour-based intervention programmes aimed at minimising potential negative consequences of nursing activity.
BACKGROUND: Prior research has underlined the meaningful function of humour in nursing settings. Nonetheless, most of the empirical evidence on humour and nursing derives from approaches that mainly considered the potential beneficial effects of humour, neglecting potential detrimental effects of the dark side of humour. Moreover, little is known about whether the specific repercussions of humour on healthcare professionals' well-being would go beyond empathy-a construct robustly related to psychological well-being. AIMS: To examine whether distinctive humour styles (affiliative, self-enhancing, aggressive and self-defeating) are differentially associated with the psychological well-being of nursing professionals. Importantly, we also analysed whether these potential humour effects go over and above the influence of empathy-related traits (perspective-taking and personal distress). METHOD: A cross-sectional, descriptive correlational design was used. A convenience sample of 104 nursing professionals with a minimum work experience of one year was recruited. RESULTS: Our results revealed that a greater inclination to affiliative and self-enhancing humour styles was strongly related to higher scores on happiness, sociability, hope and life satisfaction among nursing professionals. Concerning maladaptive humour styles, aggressive humour was related to low life satisfaction and high nursing stress. By contrast, self-defeating humour-a theoretically detrimental humour style-was related to higher scores on health among these professionals. These effects emerged even after controlling for the influence of demographics (i.e., gender, age and years of experience), perspective-taking and personal distress. CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that adaptive humour styles may promote positive indicators of well-being, but they might not protect against negative indicators. Moreover, differential effects of maladaptive humour styles emerged. Whereas aggressive humoristic expressions can be interpreted as a sign of a poor psychological functioning, self-defeating humour may boost positive psychological outcomes among nursing professionals. These data can help to design more efficient humour-based intervention programmes aimed at minimising potential negative consequences of nursing activity.