↓ Skip to main content

Studying Irony Detection Beyond Ironic Criticism: Let's Include Ironic Praise

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, April 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (77th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (66th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
11 X users
reddit
1 Redditor

Citations

dimensions_citation
32 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
46 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Studying Irony Detection Beyond Ironic Criticism: Let's Include Ironic Praise
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, April 2017
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00606
Pubmed ID
Authors

Richard Bruntsch, Willibald Ruch

Abstract

Studies of irony detection have commonly used ironic criticisms (i.e., mock positive evaluation of negative circumstances) as stimulus materials. Another basic type of verbal irony, ironic praise (i.e., mock negative evaluation of positive circumstances) is largely absent from studies on individuals' aptitude to detect verbal irony. However, it can be argued that ironic praise needs to be considered in order to investigate the detection of irony in the variety of its facets. To explore whether the detection ironic praise has a benefit beyond ironic criticism, three studies were conducted. In Study 1, an instrument (Test of Verbal Irony Detection Aptitude; TOVIDA) was constructed and its factorial structure was tested using N = 311 subjects. The TOVIDA contains 26 scenario-based items and contains two scales for the detection of ironic criticism vs. ironic praise. To validate the measurement method, the two scales of the TOVIDA were experimentally evaluated with N = 154 subjects in Study 2. In Study 3, N = 183 subjects were tested to explore personality and ability correlates of the two TOVIDA scales. Results indicate that the co-variance between the ironic TOVIDA items was organized by two inter-correlated but distinct factors: one representing ironic praise detection aptitude and one representing ironic criticism detection aptitude. Experimental validation showed that the TOVIDA items truly contain irony and that item scores reflect irony detection. Trait bad mood and benevolent humor (as a facet of the sense of humor) were found as joint correlates for both ironic criticism and ironic praise detection scores. In contrast, intelligence, trait cheerfulness, and corrective humor were found as unique correlates of ironic praise detection scores, even when statistically controlling for the aptitude to detect ironic criticism. Our results indicate that the aptitude to detect ironic praise can be seen as distinct from the aptitude to detect ironic criticism. Generating unique variance in irony detection, ironic praise can be postulated as worthwhile to include in future studies-especially when studying the role of mental ability, personality, and humor in irony detection.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 11 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 46 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 46 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 24%
Student > Master 9 20%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 9%
Student > Bachelor 3 7%
Other 3 7%
Other 7 15%
Unknown 9 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 15 33%
Linguistics 4 9%
Computer Science 4 9%
Neuroscience 3 7%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 7%
Other 8 17%
Unknown 9 20%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 06 June 2023.
All research outputs
#4,830,523
of 26,459,924 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#8,147
of 35,437 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#75,043
of 327,917 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#191
of 579 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,459,924 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 81st percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 35,437 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.8. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 327,917 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 579 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% of its contemporaries.