幽默是人類獨有且為高層次的認知能力，真正能引起幽默的愉悅感受是幽默刺激所使用的技巧，而非其指涉的內容。本研究旨在透過眼球追蹤技術比較不同笑話技巧（歧義與推論）的認知和情感歷程。本研究分為兩個實驗，為受試者內設計，68位參與者。實驗一探討歧義笑話技巧，獨變項為二：刺激類型（語音歧義、語意歧義、語法歧義）及好笑與否（笑話、非笑話），依變項為客觀眼動指標，包括首次凝視時間、總凝視時間、平均凝視次數、回視次數及平均瞳孔大小；以及主觀的理解程度與好笑程度為依變項。實驗一結果顯示，參與者閱讀笑話與非笑話在營造句之首次凝視時間並無顯著差異，符合本研究假設。在笑話認知歷程，「語音歧義笑話」相較於「語法歧義笑話」，在總凝視時間最短及回視次數最少。實驗二比較推論笑話與歧義笑話的眼動軌跡，獨變項為二：刺激類型（語意歧義、橋界推論、推敲推論）及好笑與否（笑話、非笑話）。實驗二結果顯示，推論笑話（橋界與推敲）在總凝視時間、回視次數與平均瞳孔大小皆顯著大於「語意歧義笑話」。推論笑話的認知理解歷程比語意歧義笑話來得久且較深層處理，其認知涉入較多而產生較高的愉悅感受。Berlyne（1972）提出倒U型理論，認為難度適中的幽默刺激，所激發的愉悅情緒感受會最高，但本研究發現除了笑話的難度適中條件外，笑話技巧也是影響好笑程度之關鍵。未來可進一步使用fMRI技術比較推論笑話與歧義笑話的認知、情感與笑反應的腦神經機制，亦可透過不同笑話技巧進行幽默創造的訓練課程。

Humor is a high level cognitive ability. In jokes, it is the humor skill and not the content which generates amusement. The present study aimed to compare the cognitive and affective processes associated with the distinct humor skills brought into play by ambiguous jokes and inferential jokes, using an eye-tracking study. Sixty-eight participants took part in two experiments with within-subjects designs. Experiment 1 investigated different categories of ambiguous jokes, using stimulus category (phonological, semantic, and syntactic) and ‘funny-or-not’ (jokes and non-jokes) as independent variables and both objective eye-movement indices (first past gaze duration, total viewing time, average fixation counts, regression counts, and average pupil size) and subjective indices (comprehensibility and funniness) as dependent variables. Results supported the hypothesis that first past gaze durations for setup lines would not differ significantly between jokes and non-jokes. Additionally, total viewing time and regression counts were less while reading phonologically ambiguous jokes than for syntactic ones. Experiment 2 compared the effects of semantically inferential and semantically ambiguous jokes. The experimental design was the same as in experiment 1 except that the stimulus category were bridging inferential jokes, elaborative inferential jokes and semantically ambiguous jokes. Results showed that total viewing time was longer, regression counts were more, and average pupil size was bigger for inferential jokes (bridging inferential jokes and elaborative inferential jokes) than for ambiguous jokes. It was concluded that the cognitive processing of inferential joke takes more time and is more complicated than that of semantically ambiguous jokes, and it consequently results in deeper involvement and amusement. Berlyne (1972) proposed an inverted-U shaped theory in which the greatest pleasure is associated with a moderate amount of arousal (not to high and not too low), whereas the present study revealed that the greatest pleasure accompanies this optimal level but that joke skills also play an important role. Future research might use fMRI techniques to further investigate the neural correlates of cognition, affective, and laughter processing between inferential and ambiguous jokes, as well as to design the training courses of joke skills.

目錄
中文摘要 i
英文摘要 iii
致謝辭 v
目錄 vii
表目錄 vii
圖目錄 xi
研究動機與目的 1
文獻探討 5
幽默和語文笑話 5
歧義與推論笑話技巧 6
幽默認知理論與生理激發理論 10
幽默之眼動研究 15
前導研究 21
一、參與者 21
二、實驗設計 21
三、實驗材料 21
四、實驗程序 22
五、實驗設備 22
六、實驗結果 22
實驗一：不同歧義笑話之認知與情感歷程 27
研究目的 27
研究假設 27
研究方法 28
參與者 28
實驗設計 28
實驗材料 28
實驗程序 29
實驗設備 30
資料分析 30
結果與討論 32
描述統計 32
眼動資料分析結果 34
討論 43
眼動軌跡圖與凝視點熱圖 44
實驗二：語意歧義笑話與推論笑話之比較 47
研究目的 47
研究假設 47
研究方法 48
參與者 48
實驗設計 48
實驗材料 48
實驗程序 49
實驗設備 49
資料分析 49
實驗結果 50
描述統計 50
眼動資料分析結果 52
討論 60
眼動軌跡圖與凝視點熱圖 62
綜合討論與建議 65
笑話認知歷程之比較 65
笑話欣賞之比較 67
研究限制 69
研究貢獻 69
未來研究建議 71
參考文獻 73
附錄 81

邱發忠、陳學志、卓淑玲（2003）。幽默創造訓練之課程設計暨實徵效果評估。教育心理學報，34(2)，179-198。
柯華葳、陳明蕾、廖家寧（2005）。詞頻、詞彙類型與眼球運動型態：來自篇章閱讀的證據。中華心理學刊，47(4)，381-398。
陳明蕾、柯華葳（2013）。學習障礙兒童線上閱讀歷程：來自眼球移動的證據。特殊教育研究學刊，38(3)，81-103。
陳學志、徐芝君（2006）幽默創意課程對教師幽默感及創造力的影響。師大學報：教育類（創造力特刊），51，71-93。
陳學志、鄭昭明、卓淑玲（2001）。笑話中幽默因子的訊息整合歷程研究。中華心理學刊，43(2)，137-153。
陳學志、賴惠德、邱發忠（2010）。眼球追蹤技術在學習與教育上的應用。教育科學研究期刊，55(4)，39-68。
楊立行、陳學志（1995）。中文斷詞歧義語句的閱讀歷程研究。應用心理學報，4，135-168。
詹雨臻（2012）。笑話中的歧義與好笑成分之交互作用的腦神經機制：以fMRI為工具。行政院國家科學委員會專題研究計畫（NSC 102-2410-H-007-072），未出版。
詹雨臻（2015）。幽默的腦神經機制。教育與心理研究期刊，38(3)。
蔡介立、顏妙璇、汪勁安（2005）。 眼球移動測量及在中文閱讀研究之應用。應用心理研究，28，91-104
鄭昭明、陳學志、詹雨臻、蘇雅靜、曾千芝（2013）。台灣地區華人情緒與相關心理生相關心理生理資料庫─中文笑話評定常模。中華心理期刊，55(4)，555-569。
蘇雅靜、鄭昭明、陳學志（2014）。笑話的逆溯推論歷程：以眼動資料為證。中華心理期刊，56(1)，83-95。
中文詞知識庫小組（2014）。「CKIP 中文自動斷詞系統 1.0 版」。台北市:中央研究院。
Apte, M. L. (1985). Humor and laughter: An anthropological approach. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
Attardo, S. (1994). The Liner Organization of the Joke. Linguistic theories of humor (pp.60-107) . Berlin / New York: Walter de Gruyter
Attardo, S., Attardo, D. H., Baltes, P., & Petray, M. J. (1994). The linear organization of jokes: Analysis of two thousand texts. Humor-International Journal of Humor Research, 7(1), 27-54.
Attardo, S. (1997). The semantic foundations of cognitive theories of humor. Humor, 10(4), 395-420.
Bai, X., Yan, G., Liversedge, S. P., Zang, C., & Rayner, K. (2008). Reading spaced and unspaced Chinese text: Evidence from eye movements. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Human Perception and Performance, 34(5), 1277-1287
Bartolo, A., Benuzzi, F., Nocetti, L., Baraldi, P., & Nichelli, P. (2006). Humor Comprehension and Appreciation: An fMRI Study. Journal Of Cognitive Neuroscience, 18(11), 1789-1798.
Bekinschtein, T. A., Davis, M. H., Rodd, J. M., & Owen, A. M. (2011). Why clowns taste funny: The relationship between humor and semantic ambiguity. The Journal of Neuroscience, 31(26), 9665-9671.

Berlyne, D. E. (1971). Pleasure, reward, hedonic value(pp. 75-95). Aesthetics and Psychobiology. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.
Berlyne, D. E. (1972). Humor and its kin. In J. H. Goldstein, & P. E. McGhee (Eds.), The Psychology of humor (pp.43-63). New York and London: Academic Press.
Bornkessel-Schlesewsky, I., & Schlesewsky, M. (2009). Processing syntax and morphology: A neurocognitive perspective. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Bucaria, C. (2004). Lexical and syntactic ambiguity as a source of humor: The case of newspaper headlines. Humor, 17(3), 279-310.
Calvo, M. G. (2001). Working memory and inferences: Evidence from eye fixations during reading. Memory, 9(4-6), 365-381.
Cann, A., Calhoun, L. G., & Nance, J. T. (2000). Exposure to humor before and after unpleasant stimulus: Humor as a preventative or a cure. Humor: International Journal of Humor Research, 13(2), 177-191.
Chan, Y. C., Chou, T. L., Chen, H. C., & Liang, K. C. (2012). Segregating the comprehension and elaboration processing of verbal jokes: An fMRI study. NeuroImage, 61(4), 899-906.
Chan, Y. C., Chou, T. L., Chen, H. C., Yeh, Y. C., Lavallee J. P., Liang K. C., & Chang K.E. (2013). Towards a neural circuit model of verbal humor processing: An fMRI study of the neural substrates of incongruity detection and resolution. NeuroImage, 66(1),169-176.
Chan, Y. C. (2014). Emotional structure of jokes: A corpus-based investigation. Bio-Medical Materials and Engineering, 24(6), 3083-3090.
Chen, M. & Ko, H. (2011). Exploring the eye movement patterns as Chinese children reading texts: A developmental perspective. Journal of Research in Reading, 34(2), 232-246.
Corbett, A. T., & Dosher, B. A. (1978). Instrument inferences in sentence encoding. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 17(4), 479-491.
Coulson, S., Urbach, T. P., & Kutas, M. (2006). Looking back: Joke comprehension and the space structuring model. Humor, 19(3), 229-250.
Duffy, S. A., Morris, R. K., & Rayner, K. (1988). Lexical ambiguity and fixation times in reading. Journal of memory and language, 27(4), 429-446.
Foster, T. E., Ardoin, S. P., & Binder, K. S. (2013). Underlying changes in repeated reading: An eye movement study. School Psychology Review, 42(2), 140-156.
Frazier, L., & Rayner, K. (1982). Making and correcting errors during sentence comprehension: Eye movements in the analysis of structurally ambiguous sentences. Cognitive psychology, 14(2), 178-210.
Frazier, L., & Rayner, K. (1990). Taking on semantic commitments: Processing multiple meanings vs. multiple senses. Journal of Memory and Language, 29(2), 181-200.
George, M. S., Mannes, S., & Hoffman, J. E. (1997). Individual differences in inference generation: An ERP analysis. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 9(6), 776-787.
Godkewitsch, M. (1976). Physiological and verbal indices of arousal in rated humour. In A. J. Chapman & H. C. Foot (Eds.), Humor and laughter: Theory, research and applications (pp. 117-138). London, UK: Wiley.
Graesser, A. C., Singer, M., & Trabasso, T. (1994). Constructing inferences during narrative text comprehension. Psychological review, 101(3), 371-395.
Hannus, M., & Hyönä, J. (1999). Utilization of illustrations during learning of science textbook passages among low-and high-ability children. Contemporary educational psychology, 24(2), 95-123.
Jian, Y. C., Chen, M. L., & Ko, H. W. (2013). Context Effects in Processing of Chinese Academic Words: An Eye‐Tracking Investigation. Reading Research Quarterly,48(4), 403-413.
Lefcourt, H. M., & Thomas, S. (1998). Humor and stress revisited. In W. Ruch (Ed.), The sense of humor: Explorations of a personality characteristic (pp. 179-202). Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.
Lefcourt, H. M. (2001). Humor: The psychology of living buoyantly. New York: Kluwer Academic.
Lew, R. (1996). An ambiguity-based theory of the linguistic verbal joke in English. (Unpublished Ph. D. dissertation). Adam Mickiewicz University, Poznań, Poland.
Lew, R. (1997). Towards a taxonomy of linguistic joke. Studia Anglica Posnaniensia,31, 123–152.
Nerhardt, G. (1970). Humor and inclination to laugh: Emotional reactions to stimuli of different divergence from a range of expectancy. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 11(1), 185-195.
Nerhardt, G. (1972). Incongruity and Funniness: Towards a New Descriptive Model. In A J. Chapman and H. C. Foot (Eds.) Humor and Laughter: Theory, Research, and Applications. NY: Wiley and Sons. (pp. 55-62). London, UK: Wiley.
Oaks, D. D. (1994). Creating structural ambiguities in humor: Getting English grammar to cooperate. Humor: International Journal of Humor Research, 7(4), 377-401.
Pickering, M.J. (1999). Sentence comprehension. In S.C. Garrod, & M.J. Pickering (Eds.) Language processing (pp. 123-153). Hove: Psychology Press.
Rayner, K. (1998).Eye movements in reading and information processing: 20 Years of research. Psychological Bulletin,24,372-422.

Rayner, K., Chace, K. H., Slattery, T. J., & Ashby, J. (2006). Eye movements as reflections of comprehension processes in reading. Scientific Studies of Reading, 10(3), 241-255.
Reichle, E. D., Pollatsek, A., Fisher, D. L., & Rayner, K. (1998). Toward a model of eye movement control in reading. Psychological review, 105(1), 125-157.
Samson, A. C., & Hegenloh, M. (2010). Stimulus characteristics affect humor processing in individuals with Asperger syndrome. Journal of autism and developmental disorders, 40(4), 438-447.
Sanders, M. S., & McCormick, E. J. (1987). Human factors in engineering and design. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Schmalhofer, F., McDaniel, M. A., & Keefe, D. (2002). A unified model for predictive and bridging inferences. Discourse Processes, 33(2), 105-132.
Shultz, T. R., & Pilon, R. (1973). Development of the ability to detect linguistic ambiguity. Child Development, 44(4), 728-733.
Schultz, T. R., & Horibe, F. (1974). Development of the appreciation of verbal jokes. Developmental Psychology, 10(1), 13-20.
Singer, M., & Ferreira, F. (1983). Inferring consequences in story comprehension. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 22(4), 437-448.
Singer, M. (1994).Discourse inference processes. In Gernsbacher, Morton Ann (Ed), Handbook of psycholinguistics (pp. 479-515). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Suls, J. M. (1972). A two-stage model for the appreciation of jokes and cartoons: An information-processing analysis. In J. H. Goldstein & P. E. McGhee (Eds.), The psychology of humor: Theoretical perspectives and empirical issues (pp. 81–99). New York: Academic Press.
Suoqiao, Q. (2007). Translating humor into Chinese culture. Humor: International Journal of Humor Research, 20(3), 277-295.
Vaid, J., Hull, R., Heredia, R., Gerkens, D., & Martinez, F. (2003). Getting a joke: The time course of meaning activation in verbal humor. Journal of Pragmatics, 35,1431-1449.
Wang, H.C., Pomplun, M., Chen, M., Ko, H., Rayner, K. (2010). Estimating the Effect of Word Predictability on Eye Movements in Chinese Reading using Latent Semantic Analysis and Transitional Probability. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 63(7),1374-1386.
Wu, C. L., Tseng, L. P., An, C. P., Chen, H. C., Chan, Y. C., Shih, C. I., & Zhuo, S. L. (2014). Do individuals with autism lack a sense of humor? A study of humor comprehension, appreciation, and styles among high school students with autism. Research in Autism Spectrum Disorders, 8(10), 1386-1393.
Wyer, R. S., & Collins, J. E. (1992). A theory of humor elicitation. Psychological review, 99(4), 663-688.
Yen, M. H., Tsai, J. L., Tzeng, O. J. L., & Hung, D. L. (2008). Eye movements and parafoveal word processing in reading Chinese sentences. Memory and Cognition,36, 1033-1045.