Abstract
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).
Funding statement: This work was in part supported by funds awarded by ‘MENSA ITALIA – The High I.Q. Society’ and ‘AISTAP Association’ to the Department of Human Sciences at the University of Verona, Italy. The founding sponsors had no role in the design of the study; in the collection, analyses, or interpretation of data; in the writing of the manuscript, and in the decision to publish the results.
Acknowledgments
We thank two anonymous reviewers whose observations have helped us to improve the quality of the paper, and Valerio Cori for his help in inventing the stories used in the study.
References
Ackerman, B. P. 1982. Contextual integration and utterance interpretation: The ability of children and adults to interpret sarcastic utterances. Child Development 53. 1075–1083. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8624.1982.tb01373.x.Search in Google Scholar
Ackerman, B. P. 1983. Form and function in children’s understanding of ironic utterances. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology 35(3). 487–508. doi:10.1016/0022-0965(83)90023-1.Search in Google Scholar
Akimoto, Y, S. Miyazawa & T. Muramoto. 2012. Comprehension processes of verbal irony: The effects of salience, egocentric context and allocentric theory of mind. Metaphor & Symbol 27. 217–242. doi:10.1080/10926488.2012.691750.Search in Google Scholar
Ameka, F. 1992. Interjections: The universal yet neglected part of speech. Journal of Pragmatics 18. 101–118. doi:10.1016/0378-2166(92)90048-G.Search in Google Scholar
Angeleri, R & G. Airenti. 2014. The development of joke and irony understanding: A study with 3- to 6-year-old children. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology 68(2). 133–146. doi:10.1037/cep0000011.Search in Google Scholar
Attardo, S. 2000. Irony markers and functions: Towards a goal-oriented theory of irony and its processing. Rask 12. 3–20.Search in Google Scholar
Attardo, S., J. Eisterhold, J. Hay & I. Poggi. 2003. Multimodal markers of irony and sarcasm. Humor. International Journal of Humor Research 16(2). 243–260. doi:10.1515/humr.2003.012.Search in Google Scholar
Augustinova, M. 2008. Falsification cueing in collective reasoning: Example of Wason selection task. European Journal of Social Psychology 38. 770–785. doi:10.1002/ejsp.532.Search in Google Scholar
Augustinova, M., D. Oberlé & G. L. Stasser. 2005. Differential access to information and anticipated group interaction: Impact on individual reasoning. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 88. 619–631. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.88.4.619.Search in Google Scholar
Banasik, N. 2013. Non-literal speech comprehension in preschool children- An example from a study on verbal irony. Psychology of Language and Communication 17(3). 309–323. doi:10.2478/plc-2013-0020.Search in Google Scholar
Bates, D., M. Maechler, B. Bolker & S. Walker. 2015. Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. Journal of Statistical Software 67(1). 1–48. doi:10.18637/jss.v067.i01.Search in Google Scholar
Bergen, D. 2009. Gifted children’s humor preferences, sense of humor, and comprehension of riddles. Humor. International Journal of Humor Research 22(4). 419–436. doi:10.1515/HUMR.2009.024.Search in Google Scholar
Bergen, D. 2014. Children’s humor and giftedness. In S. Attardo (ed.), Encyclopedia of humor studies, 120–121. Washington DC: Sage Publications.Search in Google Scholar
Bernstein, D. 1986. The development of humor: Implications for assessment and interventions. Topics and language Disorders 6. 65–71. doi:10.1097/00011363-198609000-00008.Search in Google Scholar
Bianchi, I., R. Burro, S. Torquati & U. Savardi. 2013. The middle of the road: Perceiving intermediates. Acta Psychologica 144(1). 121–135. doi:10.1016/j.actpsy.2013.05.005.Search in Google Scholar
Bianchi, I., U. Savardi, R. Burro & S. Torquati. 2011a. Negation and psychological dimensions. Journal of Cognitive Psychology 23. 275–301. doi:10.1080/20445911.2011.493154.Search in Google Scholar
Bianchi, I., U. Savardi & M. Kubovy. 2011b. Dimensions and their poles: A metric and topological approach to opposites. Language and Cognitive Processes 26. 1232–1265. doi:10.1080/01690965.2010.520943.Search in Google Scholar
Borenstein, M., L. V. Hedges, J. Higgins & H. R. Rothstein. 2009. Random-effects model. In Introduction to Meta-analysis, 69–75. Chichester: Wiley.10.1002/9780470743386.ch12Search in Google Scholar
Bosco, F. M. & M. Bucciarelli. 2008. Simple and complex deceits and ironies. Journal of Pragmatics 40(4). 583–607. doi:10.1016/j.pragma.2007.05.004.Search in Google Scholar
Bozzi, P. 1978. L’interosservazione come metodo per la fenomenologia sperimentale [Interobservation as method for the experimental phenomenology]. Giornale Italiano di Psicologia 5. 229–239.Search in Google Scholar
Bozzi, P. & L. Martinuzzi. 1989. Un esperimento di interosservazione [An inter-observational experiment]. Rivista di Psicologia 1. 1–46.Search in Google Scholar
Branchini, E., I. Bianchi, R. Burro, E. Capitani & U. Savardi. 2016. Can Contraries Prompt Intuition in Insight Problem Solving?. Frontiers in Psychology 7. 1962. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01962.Search in Google Scholar
Burgers, C., M. Van Mulken & P. J. Schellens. 2012. Type of evaluation and marking of irony: The role of perceived complexity and comprehension. Journal of Pragmatics 44(3). 231–242. doi:10.1016/j.pragma.2011.11.003.Search in Google Scholar
Burnett, D. L. 2015. Exploring the role of conventionality in children’s interpretation of ironic remarks. Journal of Child Language 42(6). 1–22. doi:10.1017/S0305000914000798.Search in Google Scholar
Calmus, A. & S. Caillies. 2014. Verbal irony processing: How do contrast and humour correlate?. International Journal of Psychology 49(1). 46–50. doi:10.1002/ijop.12003.Search in Google Scholar
Canestrari, C. & I. Bianchi. In press. Perceptual opposites and the modulation of contrast in irony. Review of Cognitive Linguistics.Search in Google Scholar
Canestrari, C., I. Bianchi & V. Cori. In press. De-polarizing verbal irony. Journal of Cognitive Psychology.Search in Google Scholar
Chung, D., K. Yun, J. H. Kim, B. Jang & J. Jeong. 2011. Different gain/loss sensitivity and social adaptation ability in gifted adolescents during a public goods game. PLoS ONE 6(2). e17044. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0017044.Search in Google Scholar
Cohen, J. 1988. Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences, 2nd edn. New York: Academic Press.Search in Google Scholar
Colston, H. L. 2002. Contrast and assimilation in verbal irony. Journal of Pragmatics 34. 111–142. doi:10.1016/S0378-2166(02)80008-X.Search in Google Scholar
Colston, H. L. & J. O’Brien. 2000a. Contrast of kind versus contrast of magnitude: The pragmatic of accomplishments of irony and hyperbole. Discourse Processes 30(2). 179–199. doi:10.1207/S15326950DP3002_05.Search in Google Scholar
Colston, H. L. & J. O’Brien. 2000b. Contrast and pragmatics in figurative language. Anything understatement can do, irony can do better. Journal of Pragmatics 32. 1557–1583. doi:10.1016/S0378-2166(99)00110-1.Search in Google Scholar
Cori, V., C. Canestrari & I. Bianchi. 2016. The perception of contrariety and the processing of verbal irony. Gestalt Theory – An International Multidisciplinary Journal 38(2-3). 253–266.Search in Google Scholar
Creusere, M. 2000. A developmental test of theoretical perspectives on the understanding of verbal irony: Children’s recognition of allusion and pragmatic insincerity. Metaphor and Symbol 15. 29–45. doi:10.1080/10926488.2000.9678863.Search in Google Scholar
Cukierkorn, J. R., F. A. Karnes, S. J. Manning, H. Houston & K. Besnoy. 2008. Recognizing giftedness: Defining high ability in young children. Dimensions of Early Childhood 36(2). 3–13.Search in Google Scholar
Dews, S., J. Caplan & E. Winner. 1995. Why not say it directly? The social functions of irony. Discourse Processes 19. 347–367. doi:10.1080/01638539509544922.Search in Google Scholar
Dews, S., H. Winner, J. Kaplan, E. Rosenblatt, M. Hunt, K. Lim & B. Smarsh. 1996. Children’s understanding of the meaning and functions of verbal irony. Child Development 67. 3071–3085. doi:10.2307/1131767.Search in Google Scholar
Dynel, M. 2014. Isn’t it ironic? Defining the scope of humorous irony. Humor. International Journal of Humor Research 27(4). 619–639. doi:10.1515/humor-2014-0096.Search in Google Scholar
Filippova, E. & J. W. Astington. 2008. Further development in social reasoning revealed in discourse irony understanding. Child Development 79. 126–138. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8624.2007.01115.x.Search in Google Scholar
Filippova, E. & J. W. Astington. 2010. Children’s understanding of social-cognitive and social-communicative aspects of discourse irony. Child Development 81(3). 913–928. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8624.2010.01442.x.Search in Google Scholar
Gibbs, R. W. 2000. Irony in talk among friends. Metaphor and Symbol 15(1–2). 5–27. doi:10.1080/10926488.2000.9678862.Search in Google Scholar
Gibbs, R. W., Jr., G. A. Bryant & H. L. Colston. 2014. Where is the humor in verbal irony?. Humor. International Journal of Humor Research 27(4). 575–595. doi:10.1515/humor-2014-0106.Search in Google Scholar
Giora, R. 1995. On irony and negation. Discourse Processes 19(2). 239–264. doi:10.1080/01638539509544916.Search in Google Scholar
Giora, R., O. Fein, J. Ganzi, N. A. Levi & H. Sabah. 2005. On negation as mitigation: The case of negative irony. Discourse Processes 39(1). 81–100. doi:10.1207/s15326950dp3901_3.Search in Google Scholar
Giora, R., S. Givoni & O. Fein. 2015. Defaultness reigns: The case of sarcasm. Metaphor and Symbol 30(4). 290–313. doi:10.1080/10926488.2015.1074804.Search in Google Scholar
Giora, R., S. Givoni, V. Heruti & O. Fein. 2017. The role of defaultness in affecting pleasure: The optimal innovation hypothesis revisited. Metaphor and Symbol 32(1). 1–18. doi:10.1080/10926488.2017.1272934.Search in Google Scholar
Glenwright, M., J. M. Parackel, K. J. Cheung & E. Nilsen. 2013. Intonation influences how children and adults interpret sarcasm. Journal of Child Language 41(2). 472–484. doi:10.1017/S0305000912000773.Search in Google Scholar
Glenwright, M. & P. M. Pexman. 2010. Development of children’s ability to distinguish sarcasm and verbal irony. Journal of Child Language 37. 429–451. doi:10.1017/S0305000909009520.Search in Google Scholar
Gottfredson, L. S. 1997. Why g matters: The complexity of everyday life. Intelligence 24(1). 79–132. doi:10.1016/S0160-2896(97)90014-3.Search in Google Scholar
Gross, M. 1999. Small poppies: Highly gifted children in the early years. Roeper Review 21(3). 207–214. doi:10.1080/02783199909553963.Search in Google Scholar
Hancock, J. T., P. J. Dunham & K. Purdy. 2000. Children’s comprehension of critical and complimentary forms of verbal irony. Journal of Cognition and Development 1(2). 227–248. doi:10.1207/S15327647JCD010204.Search in Google Scholar
Harris, M. & P.M. Pexman. 2003. Children’s perception of the social functions of verbal irony. Discourse Processes 36(3). 147–165. doi:10.1207/S15326950DP3603_1.Search in Google Scholar
Haverkate, H. 1990. A speech act analysis of irony. Journal of Pragmatics 14. 77–109. doi:10.1016/0378-2166(90)90065-L.Search in Google Scholar
Herrero Ruiz, J. 2009. Understanding tropes. At the crossroads between pragmatics and cognition. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.Search in Google Scholar
Hoh, P. S. 2005. The linguistic advantage of the intellectually gifted child: An empirical study of spontaneous speech. Roeper Review 27(3). 178–185. doi:10.1080/02783190509554313.Search in Google Scholar
Holt, D. G. & C. W. Holt. 1995. An exploration of the relationship between humor and giftedness in students. Humor. International Journal of Humor Research 8(3). 257–271. doi:10.1515/humr.1995.8.3.257.Search in Google Scholar
Jacob, H., B. Kreifelts, S. Nizielski, A. Schütz & D. Wildgruber. 2016. Effects of emotional intelligence on the impression of irony created by the mismatch between verbal and nonverbal cues. PLoS ONE 11(10). e0163211. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0163211.Search in Google Scholar
Klavir, R. & M. Gorodetsky. 2001. The processing of analogous problems in the verbal and visual-humorous (cartoons) modalities by gifted/average children. Gifted Child Quarterly 45(3). 205–215. doi:10.1177/001698620104500305.Search in Google Scholar
Kubovy, M. 2002. Phenomenology, cognitive. In L. Nadel (ed.), Encyclopedia of cognitive science, 579–586. London, UK: Nature Publishing Group.Search in Google Scholar
Kuznetsova, A., B. P. Bruun & B. C. R. Haubo. 2016. lmerTest: Tests in linear mixed effects models. R package version 2.0-32, https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=lmerTestSearch in Google Scholar
Larson, J. R. & C. Christensen. 1993. Groups as problem solving units: Toward a new meaning of social cognition. British Journal of Social Psychology 32. 5–30. doi:10.1111/j.2044-8309.1993.tb00983.x.Search in Google Scholar
Lenth, R. V. 2016. Least-squares means: The R package lsmeans. Journal of Statistical Software 69(1). 1–33. doi:10.18637/jss.v069.i01.Search in Google Scholar
Loukusa, S. & E. Leinonen. 2008. Development of comprehension of ironic utterances in 3- to 9-year old Finnish-speaking children. Psychology of Language and Communication 12(1). 55–69. doi:10.2478/v10057-008-0003-0.Search in Google Scholar
Matthews, J. K., J. T. Hancock & P. Dunham. 2006. The roles of politeness and humor in the asymmetry of affect in verbal irony. Discourse Processes 41(1). 3–24. doi:10.1207/s15326950dp4101_2.Search in Google Scholar
Mercier, H. & D. Sperber. 2011. Why do humans reasons? Arguments for an argumentative theory. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 34. 57–111. doi:10.1017/S0140525£10000968.Search in Google Scholar
Milanowicz, A. 2013. Irony as a means of perception through communication channels. Emotions, attitude and IQ related to irony across gender. Psychology of Language and Communication 17(2). 115–132. doi:10.2478/plc-2013-0008.Search in Google Scholar
Nakagawa, S. & H. Schielzeth. 2013. A general and simple method for obtaining R2 from generalized linear mixed-effects models. Methods in Ecology and Evolution 4. 133–142. doi:10.1111/j.2041-210x.2012.00261.x.Search in Google Scholar
Nicholson, A., J.M. Whalen & P.M. Pexman. 2013. Children’s processing of emotion in ironic language. Frontiers in Psychology 4. 691. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2013.0069.Search in Google Scholar
Orsini, A., L. Pezzuti & L. Picone. 2012. Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children-IV (Italian edition). Firenze, IT: Giunti.10.1037/t74943-000Search in Google Scholar
Pennington, N. & R. Hastie. 1993. Reasoning in explanation-based decision making. Cognition 49. 123–163. doi:10.1016/0010-0277(93)90038-W.Search in Google Scholar
Pexman, P. M. & M. Glenwright. 2007. How do typically developing children grasp the meaning of verbal irony?. Journal of Neurolinguistics 20(2). 178–196. doi:10.1016/j.jneuroling.2006.06.001.Search in Google Scholar
Pexman, P. M., M. Glenwright, A. Krol & J. Tammy. 2005. An acquired taste: Children’s perceptions of humor and teasing in verbal irony. Discourse Processes 40(3). 259–288. doi:10.1207/s15326950dp4003_5.Search in Google Scholar
Pexman, P.M., L. Zdrazilova, D. McConnachie, K. Deater-Deckard & S.A. Petrill. 2009. “That was smooth, Mom”: Children’s production of verbal and gestural irony. Metaphor and Symbol 24. 237–248. doi:10.1080/10926480903310286.Search in Google Scholar
Pieternel, D., D. Barelds, R. Sieuwke & A. Nauta. 2011. Humor Styles and their Relationship to Well-Being among the Gifted. Gifted & Talented International 26(1-2). 89–98. doi:10.1080/15332276.2011.11673592.Search in Google Scholar
Raven, J., J. C. Raven & J. H. Court. 2000. Standard progressive matrices. Oxford: Psychology Press.Search in Google Scholar
Recchia, H. E., N. Howe, S. H. Ross & S. Alexander. 2010. Children’s understanding and production of verbal irony in family conversations. British Journal of Developmental Psychology 28. 255–274. doi:10.1348/026151008X401903.Search in Google Scholar
Reis, S. M. & J. S. Renzulli. 2009. Myth 1: The gifted and talented constitute one single homogeneous group and giftedness is a way of being that stays in the person over time and experiences. The Gifted Child Quarterly 53(4). 233–235. doi:10.1177/0016986209346824.Search in Google Scholar
Shade, R. 1991. Verbal humor in gifted students and students in the general population: Comparison of spontaneous mirth and comprehension. Journal for the Education of the Gifted 14(2). 134–150. doi:10.1177/016235329101400203.Search in Google Scholar
Sharifi, H. & M. Sharifi. 2014. Comparing emotional intelligence and humor in gifted and nongifted students. Indian Journal of Scientific Research 7(1). 1319–1324.Search in Google Scholar
Shi, J., T. Tao, W. Chen, L. Cheng, L. Wang & X. Zhang. 2013. Sustained attention in intellectually gifted children assessed using a continuous performance test. PLoS ONE 8(2). e57417. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0057417.Search in Google Scholar
Subotnik, R. F., P. Olszewski-Kubilius & F. Worrell. 2011. Rethinking giftedness and gifted education. A proposed direction forward based on psychological science. Psychological Science in the Public Interest 12(1). 3–54. doi:10.1177/1529100611418056.Search in Google Scholar
Thompson, V. A., J. St. B. T. Evans & S. J. Handley. 2005. Persuading and dissuading by conditional argument. Journal of Memory and Language 53. 238–257. doi:10.1016/j.jml.2005.03.001.Search in Google Scholar
Tindale, R. S. & T. Kameda. 2000. ‘Social sharedness’ as a unifying theme for information processing in groups. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations 3. 123–140. doi:10.1177/1368430200003002002.Search in Google Scholar
Tindale, R. S., H. M. Meisenhelder, A. A. Dykema-Engblade & M. A. Hogg. 2001. Shared cognitions in small groups. In M. A. Hogg & R. S. Tindale (eds.), Blackwell handbook in social psychology: Group processes, 1–30. Oxford: Blackwell.10.1002/9780470998458Search in Google Scholar
Wilson, D. & D. Sperber. 1992. On verbal irony. Lingua 87. 53–76. doi:10.1016/0024-3841(92)90025-E.Search in Google Scholar
Wittenbaum, G. M. & G. Stasser. 1996. Management of information in small groups. In J. L. Nye & A. M. Brower (eds.), What’s social about social cognition, 3–28. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.10.4135/9781483327648.n1Search in Google Scholar
Ziv, A. & O. Gadish. 1990. Humor and giftedness. Journal for the Education of the Gifted 13(4). 332–345. doi:10.1177/016235329001300404.Search in Google Scholar
© 2017 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston
