PhD position - Laughing Across Differences: The Role of Humor in Pluralistic Social Cohesion.

Apply now
PhD

PhD position - Laughing Across Differences: The Role of Humor in Pluralistic Social Cohesion.

This interdisciplinary PhD project investigates whether humour can bridge divides between opposing social or ideological groups. It does so by combining social psychology with philosophy. The research theorizes humour as an interaction ritual that can foster pluralistic cohesion, valuing both solidarity and differences. The methods consist of a literature review, standardized experiments and philosophical analysis to develop and test a conceptual framework. The ideal candidate is a (near) master’s or research master’s graduate in social psychology or a related field, with strong quantitative skills and an affinity for philosophy. The project will produce both theoretical insights and practical guidelines for using humour in diverse societal settings.

University of Groningen
Apply no later than: 1 April 2026 23:59 Dutch local time
€3.059 - €3.881

PhD position - Laughing Across Differences: The Role of Humor in Pluralistic Social Cohesion.

Apply now
afbeelding van medewerker

What are you going to do?

  • Supervisors:

Hedy Greijdanus (University of Groningen)

Namkje Koudenburg (University of Groningen)

Lisa Bastian (Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam)

  • Aim of the project

The proposed project examines whether humour can bridge divides between opposing social or ideological groups by combining social-psychological experiments with philosophical analysis. The aim is to investigate when and how humour as an interaction ritual can result in more versus less valuable forms of social cohesion between individuals and groups in society. Although the main focus of this project is to contribute to theory development and provide conceptual insights, these outcomes should also be useful in practice to help foster cohesion in a range of social settings (e.g., citizen assemblies by regional or national governments concerning policy on topics such as migration or climate adaptation; interactions of the police with diverse groups of citizens).

  • Project description

Humour: Dividing or Bonding Opposed Groups?

Research on humour has largely focused on individuals, while studies at the group level tend to show that humour strengthens bonds within like-minded groups but deepens divides between opposing ones. This project instead examines whether humour can also serve as a bridge across group boundaries. Humour is a multifaceted phenomenon – ranging from cartoons and internet memes to everyday joking in conversation – and it can have both constructive and harmful effects. It can ‘break the ice’ by easing tension, signalling shared norms, creating a safe space for honesty, addressing norm violations in a tactful way and fostering connection through shared laughter. Humour can also function as a form of play that supports moral learning.

However, humour can also divide. Disparagement and satire may insult, entrench stereotypes and undermine trust. Effects depend on both target (out-group-directed jokes are funnier) and source (disparagement by outsiders is more offensive). Because jokes are harder to confront than overtly hostile remarks, disparaging humour can slip by uncorrected and thereby deepen social divides. Thus, humour effects are mainly positive within groups but negative between groups.

Theoretical Framework: Cohesion in Social Psychology and Philosophy

In social psychology, cohesion includes the cognitive idea of groupiness and the emotional energy that arises when being a part of a group (akin to what philosopher and sociologist Durkheim called ‘effervescence’). Cohesion can be developed top-down, by identifying similarities within groups that distinguish in-groups from out-groups, and bottom-up, based on interpersonal relations. Importantly, bottom-up cohesion is shaped not only by cognitive comparisons but also by lived interaction within the group, with experiences of interpersonal ‘flow’ acting as a signal of cohesion. This leaves room for individual differences, because cohesion is not based on similarity alone.

Thus, people who hold diverging views on issues such as migration or climate change may still experience social cohesion, because bottom-up processes not only allow for but actively value idiosyncratic individual contributions. We reason that the cohesion produced by these different processes is qualitatively distinct in the relations it affords a) between groups, b) between individuals and the group (e.g., between individual and general will in Rousseau’s sense or through social identification in Tajfel and Turner’s theorizing) and c) among (diverse) individuals (e.g., interdependence, Durkheim). One aim of the project is a philosophical normative evaluation of these top-down and bottom-up cohesion types. This evaluation examines when and why particular forms of humour can be considered more or less valuable, and for whom.

Humour’s Role in Shaping Cohesion

Humour fits naturally with experientially developed, bottom-up cohesion and can shape how people come to understand ‘us’ (Koudenburg et al., 2025). Specifically, humour can act as an interaction ritual (see Collins, 2005), generating emotional energy that connects people. Yet, the cohesion it produces can take different forms. In its negative form, humour enforces conformity to top-down group norms by ridiculing those who deviate from them. In its positive form, humour may foster pluralistic cohesion, which values both difference and solidarity and may arise bottom-up when individuals negotiate who ‘we’ are and which norms define the group.

Humour may facilitate such collective negotiation in diverse groups. Laughter can signal that an expectancy or norm violation is benign and non-threatening rather than something that must be policed by ridicule. Indeed, in humans and other animals, laughter (or the use of similar vocalizations) in response to something unexpected signals playfulness and safety, highlighting humour’s role in social regulation and de-escalation. This implies that humour and laughter can pave the way for accepting more diversity in who ‘we’ are – pluralistic social cohesion.

In this project, we examine how humour as an interaction ritual affects the stability of intergroup distinctions and their meaning within the larger social system, as well as the forms of cohesion that result from this. By combining the emotional energy with the distinct meanings attached to it – whether divisive or cohesive – humour provides a unique tool to understand and maintain different types of cohesion.

Project Approach

These complexities call for careful empirical study grounded in clear conceptual distinctions. We aim to identify which humour likely promotes which cohesion and through which mechanisms. Our approach combines social psychology (intergroup dynamics, bottom-up emergence of social cohesion) with philosophy (social epistemology, ethics, philosophy of language).

Project Deliverables

  • Conceptual framework: a taxonomy of humour types and social cohesion.
  • Empirical, experimental evidence on the taxonomy and humour’s potential to foster pluralistic cohesion.
  • A theoretical model explaining humour’s role in interpersonal and intergroup cohesion.
  • Practice guidelines on using humour to support constructive, cross-ideological dialogue in diverse settings.

Connection to Social Cohesion

Cluster 6 concerns questions about the value of cohesion and the norms supporting it. Together, the projects investigate social contracts, shared responsibility and (in this project) humour as a normative ritual as foundations for cohesion. This project primarily contributes to understanding group boundaries, focusing on individual- and group-level humour effects around societal challenges (migration, climate).

  • Research design

The proposed design involves three phases, using mixed methods (a standardized literature review, a philosophical analysis and standardized experiments). The research design will be further concretized in collaboration with the PhD student.

Phase 1: From Humour to Social Cohesion

The method combines a systematic literature review and philosophical analysis. This phase investigates a) which types of humour are identified in philosophy and social psychology and b) how these relate to cohesion and division (polarization) at both the interpersonal and intergroup levels. The aim is to develop a taxonomy that links types and mechanisms of humour to their expected interpersonal and intergroup outcomes. Standardized experiments will then test the extent to which this taxonomy can be empirically validated.

Phase 2: From Humour in Diverse Groups to Pluralistic Social Cohesion

This phase again combines literature review and philosophical (normative) analysis to explore existing types of social cohesion and their ethical status. For instance, we distinguish between conformity-based cohesion, which relies on enforcing norms and sanctioning deviation, and pluralistic cohesion, which values both connection and difference among individuals and groups. From a normative perspective, pluralistic cohesion appears more desirable than conformity-based cohesion.

Standardized experiments further investigate which humour types and contexts promote normatively valuable (versus less valuable) forms of cohesion. These studies will also examine the mechanisms through which humour facilitates intergroup rapprochement or instead fuels polarization and ideological entrenchment.

Phase 3: Theoretical Integration and Practical Application

The final phase focuses on conceptual integration. Empirical findings from the experiments are incorporated into a theoretical framework (building on the taxonomy developed in Phase 1) that specifies how and when different humour types and mechanisms can give rise to pluralistic (or otherwise normatively valuable) forms of cohesion. Alongside this theoretical contribution, Phase 3 also translates these insights into practical guidelines for the responsible and effective use of humour in settings with diverse or opposing groups.

  • Core readings

Collins, R. (2005). Emotional energy and the transient emotions. In Interaction ritual chains (pp. 102–140). Princeton University Press. https://doi.org/10.1515/9781400851744-006

Koudenburg, N., Greijdanus, H., & Angelini, C. (2026). The individual and social benefits of confronting sexism with humour. PsyArXiv. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/vf3ja_v1

Who are you?

  • MA/MSc degree in social psychology; interest in, and ideally some familiarity with philosophy
  • Interest in the topic of social cohesion and in collaborating in a broad research consortium with academic and non-academic stakeholders
  • Strong interest in interdisciplinary research, including analytical and theoretical dimensions
  • Professional competence in English 
  • Competence in Dutch is a plus 
  • Solid training in quantitative methods and statistics
  • Motivation and ability to teach in undergraduate (social) psychology courses 
  • Clear interest in conceptual and theory development
  • We look for team players who want to play an active role in an inter- and transdisciplinary research community and training programme
  • Demonstrates competencies such as conceptual ability, presentation, planning, and monitoring progress.

*Interview dates:

  • 1st round: 7-8 April (online)
  • 2nd round: 15- April (in person if possible)
  • Final round: 6 May (online)

What can you expect from us?

  • In accordance with the collective labor agreement for Dutch universities, we offer a salary of at least € 3.059 up to a maximum of € 3.881 (promovendus) gross per month for a full-time employment contract.
  • 232 vacation hours per year, based on a 38-hour workweek (1.0 FTE). You can also work more or fewer hours in exchange for more or fewer free hours. For example, with a 40-hour workweek, you save 96 extra free hours, and with a 36-hour workweek, you lose 96 hours.
  • End-of-year bonus of 8.3% and 8% holiday allowance.
  • Extensive opportunities for personal and professional development.
  • A temporary employment of 1.0 FTE for a period of four years. You will first receive temporary employment for the period of one year. After a positive Results and Development Interview, the contract will be extended for the remaining period of three years.
afbeelding van medewerker

Where will you be working?

At the University of Groningen (UG), researchers from all fields of academia and technology are working on academic challenges and societal questions. Lecturers prepare their students for meaningful careers within or outside the academic world. Interdisciplinary research and teaching, sharing of knowledge, collaboration with businesses, government institutions, and societal organizations are aspects that are of the utmost importance to this European top university. The UG aims to be an open academic community with an inclusive and safe working climate that invites you to add your value.

This PhD project is part of the SOCION consortium. SOCION addresses a pressing challenge of our time: fragmentation in societies. Social cohesion is society’s fabric and is key to sustainable societies and citizens’ well-being. However, it is increasingly undermined by erosion and polarization between communities, factions, and groups. In this project, psychologists, social historians, demographers, philosophers, and sociologists collaborate with civic organizations to generate and integrate insights into how connections between individuals, groups, and institutions contribute to new pathways to and forms of social cohesion.

The Faculty of Behavioural and Social Sciences is strong in research and teaching on human behaviour, thinking, learning, and coexistence. We work on social issues and problems that people experience in everyday life. Individual and societal resilience and how to increase it are central to our work. We focus on the topics of migration, environment and climate, health, parenting and education, the protection of vulnerable minorities, and sustainable partnerships. Over 650 employees work at the Faculty of Behavioural and Social Sciences.

More information about the faculty can be found at the link https://www.rug.nl/gmw/.

Application procedure

Step 1: Your application

After submitting your application, you will receive a confirmation by email.

Step 2: Selection

The selection committee assesses your application and you will be notified as soon as possible whether you are invited for an interview.

Step 3: First interview

We would like to get to know each other better in a first interview, which can take place either online or on location.

Step 4: Second interview and possible assessment or guest lecture

We may schedule a second interview with you. Depending on the position, this interview can be complemented with an assessment or guest lecture.

Step 5: Terms of employment meeting

After a positive interview, we will discuss the terms of employment together. When everything is completed, we are happy to welcome you at the University of Groningen!

Interested?

Does this vacancy appeal to you? If so, click on the button below and apply straightaway.

Please add the following documents to your application:

  • CV
  • Motivation letter
  • Writing Sample
  • Grade sheet of master or research master program
afbeelding van medewerker

Do you have any questions or need more information?

  • Questions about the content of the job?

    Namkje Koudenburg

    Associate Professor

    N.Koudenburg@rug.nl
  • Questions about your application process?

    Alinda Veldman

    Human Resources Adviser

    A.H.Veldman@rug.nl

Information about applying

When scheduling meetings, we will take your schedule into account as much as possible.

The University of Groningen considers social safety important. We strive to be a university where staff and students feel respected and at home, regardless of differences in background, experiences, perspectives, and identity. For more information, see also our page about our diversity policy.

Acquisition is not appreciated.

Onze selectieprocedure volgt de richtlijnen van de NVP Sollicitatiecode

Read document