Punchline with(out) purpose
Integrating research on instructional humour and seductive details
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 21297100 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Lisa Bender (0000-0002-8972-6558, University of Freiburg Freiburg Germany, corresponding author), Alexander Renkl (0000-0001-7971-0619, University of Freiburg Freiburg Germany), Tobias Endres (0000-0003-3334-4064, University of Freiburg Freiburg Germany), Tino Endres (University of Freiburg Freiburg Germany) |
| Year | 2026 |
| Publication date | 2026-03-29 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | British Journal of Educational Psychology (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0007-0998 • E-ISSN: 2044-8279 |
| Publisher | Wiley (PUBLISHER • GB) |
| DOI | 10.1111/bjep.70080 |
| PMID | 41906388 |
| OpenAlex | W7143426711 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 1 |
| References cited | 58 |
INTRODUCTION: We integrated research on instructional humour and seductive details to investigate when affiliative course-related humour is effective or rather ineffective for learning. We assumed that instructional humour without a cognitive function (irrelevant humour) would have detrimental effects on learning performance resembling the seductive details effect, whereas humour with a cognitive function (e.g., humorous analogies illustrating the learning content) would foster performance. METHODS: = 12.21). In both studies, participants learned from a narrated slideshow in one of four conditions: the slideshow either contained irrelevant humour, relevant humour, relevant (non-humorous) examples or no additional elements (control). We then assessed learning performance, cognitive load and affective-motivational aspects. RESULTS: In study 1, the relevant-humour group indeed outperformed the irrelevant-humour group in terms of transfer. We replicated this effect in study 2 for recall performance. Our comparison to the control group without additional elements was less conclusive: The irrelevant-humour group scored worse than the control group in study 1 (i.e., seductive details effect), but not in study 2. Moreover, the relevant-humour group did not clearly outperform the control group in either of the studies. CONCLUSION: It may be safer to avoid irrelevant instructional humour (even when course-related) because of the risk of a detrimental seductive details effect. Further research is needed with respect to the cognitive and affective-motivational effectiveness of relevant instructional humour.
Cognition · Instructional design · SAFER · Teaching method · Communication in Education and Healthcare · Humor Studies and Applications · Language, Discourse, Communication Strategies
Cognitive Load Theory
A Review of Humor in Educational Settings
The Social Psychology of Humor
Emotional design in multimedia learning.
Development and Validation of Two Instruments Measuring Intrinsic, Extraneous, and Germane Cognitive Load
Benefits of emotional design in multimedia instruction
An Explanation of the Relationship between Instructor Humor and Student Learning
G*Power 3
The Four-Phase Model of Interest Development
The impact of teacher humour on teaching quality and student learning
Making an Effort Versus Experiencing Load
Like it or learn from it
Sustaining focus when It's hardest
Seductive details do their damage also in longer learning sessions – When the details are perceived as relevant
When and why does emotional design foster learning? Evidence for situational interest as a mediator of increased persistence
Does triggering learners’ interest make them overconfident
| Unique citing works | 1 |
|---|---|
| Citations per year | 1 |
| Citation span | 2026 - 2026 (1) |
| Citation velocity | current |
| Highly cited | No |
| Citation types | Neutral: 1 |