鈥淥ne of my colleagues has pointed out that I laugh a lot, even when no one鈥檚 joking,鈥� a reader writes. 鈥淚鈥檇 never really noticed this before, but his comments have made me worry that my laughter is damaging my credibility at work.鈥�
No, this reader isn鈥檛 Kamala Harris, though I can鈥檛 help wonder if she has been inspired by the discourse around the Veep鈥檚 habit of chuckling her way through interviews. Titles like and have speculated about the impact this may have on her presidential campaign, but what does science have to say?
Let鈥檚 first address our reader鈥檚 worry about the appropriateness of her behaviour. One analysis of 70 hours of recorded meetings that laughter comprises around 10 per cent of our vocalisations in conversations. This will vary from person to person, but it might be considered unnatural 鈥� or 鈥渨eird鈥� 鈥� not to laugh regularly in a working day.
Advertisement
According to developed by Adrienne Wood and Paula Niedenthal, then both at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, our laughter has three main functions. The first is reward: it signals our appreciation of the other person and helps reinforce the behaviour they have just performed.
The second is affiliation: a laugh can help smooth over any potential awkwardness in a conversation and demonstrate our wish to keep it playful. It shows we don鈥檛 wish to be seen as a threat.
The third motive is dominance. By using this non-verbal cue, we can signal our disapproval without engaging in an open confrontation. It may not be taken kindly, but it might avoid the fight that could arise if we put our feelings into words.
These distinctions are critical when we consider concerns about the appropriateness of our laughter, particularly if we are in a position of power. In a , David Cheng at the Australian National University and his colleagues asked participants to watch leaders counter difficult interview questions. They found that perceptions of the leaders鈥� laughter largely depended on how the questioners reacted. If they joined in the laughter, then it enhanced the leader鈥檚 perceived warmth, which in turn enhanced judgements of their effectiveness.
We can imagine here that the laughter was taken as a sign of affiliation. If the questioner didn鈥檛 reciprocate, then the laughter diminished the leader鈥檚 perceived warmth and effectiveness 鈥� it seems to have been interpreted as an attempt to assert dominance, which makes them less appealing.
Provided her intentions are benevolent and she is sensitive to reactions, I see no reason why our reader should curb her cackles. Let her colleagues live in stern solemnity: after all, she who laughs loudest, laughs longest.
Resources
If you find yourself troubled by others鈥� laughter, you may consider treatment for your 鈥済elotophobia鈥� 鈥� a fear of being laughed at 鈥� as this : bps.org.uk/psychologist/fearing-laughter
David Robson is an award-winning science writer and聽author of The Laws of Connection: 13 social strategies that will transform your life
For other projects visit newscientist.com/maker
