Sign in to use this feature.

Years

Between: -

Subjects

remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline

Journals

Article Types

Countries / Regions

Search Results (1)

Search Parameters:
Keywords = gelotophilia

Order results
Result details
Results per page
Select all
Export citation of selected articles as:
21 pages, 1099 KB  
Article
Cultural Differences in How People Deal with Ridicule and Laughter: Differential Item Functioning between the Taiwanese Chinese and Canadian English Versions of the PhoPhiKat-45
by Chloe Lau, Taylor Swindall, Francesca Chiesi, Lena C. Quilty, Hsueh-Chih Chen, Yu-Chen Chan, Willibald Ruch, René Proyer, Francesco Bruno, Donald H. Saklofske and Jorge Torres-Marín
Eur. J. Investig. Health Psychol. Educ. 2023, 13(2), 238-258; https://doi.org/10.3390/ejihpe13020019 - 20 Jan 2023
Cited by 5 | Viewed by 5531
Abstract
The PhoPhiKat-45 measures three dispositions toward ridicule and laughter, including gelotophobia (i.e., the fear of being laughed at), gelotophilia (i.e., the joy of being laughed at), and katagelasticism (i.e., the joy of laughing at others). Despite numerous cultural adaptations, there is a paucity [...] Read more.
The PhoPhiKat-45 measures three dispositions toward ridicule and laughter, including gelotophobia (i.e., the fear of being laughed at), gelotophilia (i.e., the joy of being laughed at), and katagelasticism (i.e., the joy of laughing at others). Despite numerous cultural adaptations, there is a paucity of cross-cultural studies investigating measurement invariance of this measure. Undergraduate students from a Canadian university (N = 1467; 71.4% females) and 14 universities in Taiwan (N = 1274; 64.6% females) completed the English and Chinese PhoPhiKat-45 measures, respectively. Item response theory and differential item functioning analyses demonstrated that most items were well-distributed across the latent continuum. Five of 45 items were flagged for DIF, but all values had negligible effect sizes (McFadden’s pseudo R2 < 0.13). The Canadian sample was further subdivided into subsamples who identified as European White born in Canada (n = 567) and Chinese born in China, Hong Kong, or Taiwan (n = 180). In the subgroup analyses, no evidence of DIF was found. Findings support the utility of this measure across these languages and samples. Full article
Show Figures

Figure 1

Back to TopTop