Psychological Test and Assessment Modeling, Volume 52, 2010 (1), 94-107

The fear of being laughed at, social

anxiety, and memories of being teased
during childhood
Kim R. Edwards
1
, Rod A. Martin
2
& David J. A. Dozois
2

Abstract
Using a sample of 207 undergraduate students, we investigated: (1) relations between gelotophobia
and memories of being the target of teasing during childhood and adolescence; and (2) associations
between gelotophobia and social and specific fears and anxieties. Regression analyses revealed that
higher gelotophobia scores were associated with a greater history of being teased about social
behavior and academic excellence, but not about family background, appearance, or performance.
Overall, gelotophobia was related to distress but not frequency of childhood teasing. Additional
regression analyses revealed that gelotophobia was strongly related to three measures of social
anxiety, but not to specific fears relating to death/illness/injury, animals, or situations. However,
significant associations between gelotophobia and a history of being teased remained even after
controlling for social anxiety. These results support Titzes (2009) view of gelotophobia as a syn-
drome that is related to, but distinct from, social phobia, which develops in part from repeated
experiences of being the target of teasing and ridicule relating particularly to anxiety-based social
skills deficits and interpersonal awkwardness.

Key words: gelotophobia, social skills, social phobia, anxiety, teasing

1
Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to: Kim Edwards, PhD, University of
Western Ontario, Department of Psychology, Westminster Hall, London, Ontario, Canada N6A 3K7;
email: [email protected]
2
University of Western Ontario, Canada
Gelotophobia, social anxiety, and teasing
95
Based on clinical case observations, Titze (2009) formulated the concept of gelotopho-
bia, or the pathological fear of being laughed at. Because of their profound sense of
shame and fear of being ridiculed by others, individuals with gelotophobia are said to be
characterized by high levels of anxiety, tend to be socially withdrawn, and are highly
sensitive to perceived slights from others.
According to Titze, the roots of gelotophobia can be traced to the development in early
childhood of a core identity marked by a profound sense of shame or defectiveness. This
shame-based self-concept develops as a result of being exposed to a punitive and critical
parenting style involving little display of affection and the use of shame and ridicule as a
method of discipline. As a consequence, the child develops low self-esteem, becomes
socially inhibited and anxious, and fails to develop appropriate social competencies,
instead developing an awkward, rigid, and unconventional style of social interaction.
Because of these anxiety-based social skills deficits, such individuals are perceived by
their peers to be unusual and odd, and they tend to be subjected to repeated experiences
of malicious teasing, ridicule, and bullying throughout childhood and adolescence. These
traumatic teasing experiences further intensify the feelings of shame, sense of self as an
object of ridicule, and tendency to become increasingly socially anxious, inhibited, and
withdrawn. Laughter, because of its association with ridicule and derision, becomes an
aversive stimulus for these individuals, and they tend to take on an agelotic (i.e., hu-
morless), serious, and cold demeanor.
Titze (2009) noted that gelotophobia is closely related to social phobia as defined in the
fourth edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-IV-
TR; American Psychiatric Association, 2000). Both gelotophobia and social phobia share
a preoccupation with fear of negative evaluation, humiliation, and embarrassment; a
tendency to avoid social situations; and anxiety-related symptoms of physiological
arousal. However, Titze argued that gelotophobia may be distinguished from social pho-
bia by the fact that, in gelotophobia, the primary focus is on ones self-identity and the
shameful conviction that ones self is fundamentally damaged and therefore ridiculous,
whereas in social phobia the primary focus is on specific embarrassing failures and
lapses in social situations which result in humiliation and self-reproach. Moreover, indi-
viduals with gelotophobia are more particularly characterized by a heightened sensitivity
to laughter, a misperception of even innocent laughter as a weapon of derision, and the
belief that one is a ridiculous object that others laugh at for good reason.
Ruch and Proyer (2008a) developed the GELOPH<15>, a 15-item self-report question-
naire to assess the core characteristics of gelotophobia. These researchers conceptualized
the trait measured by this scale as a dimension that varies across the general population,
with individuals with no fear of being laughed at falling at the low end, and those with a
pathological level of symptoms at the high end. Ruch and Proyer showed that scores on
this measure were significantly higher in a group of psychotherapy patients who were
clinically diagnosed as having gelotophobia, as compared to those of a group identified
as having shame-based depressive disorders but without gelotophobia. Scores for the
latter group in turn were significantly higher than those of a clinical group with non-
shame-based depression, which did not differ from those of a nonpsychiatric control
group.
K. R. Edwards, R. A. Martin & D. J. A. Dozois
96
The present study had two main objectives: (1) to investigate the hypothesis that geloto-
phobia originates in experiences of childhood teasing; and (2) to examine the relationship
between gelotophobia and social phobia and anxiety.
With regard to the first objective, although clinical case studies suggest that childhood
experiences of teasing and ridicule are an important element in the development of
gelotophobia (Titze, 2009), little previous empirical research has investigated this key
assumption. Proyer, Hempelmann, and Ruch (2009) asked participants to rate the fre-
quency and intensity of their experiences of being laughed at over the previous year. The
results revealed that the intensity, rather than the frequency, of reported experiences of
being laughed at distinguished individuals with gelotophobia from other groups. How-
ever, given that its focus was on experiences of being laughed at during the preceding
year, this study does not provide information about whether individuals high in geloto-
phobia are also more likely to report experiences of being teased and laughed at during
childhood and adolescence.
A more recent study reported elsewhere in the present issue is more relevant to the pre-
sent one. In an investigation of the putative causes of gelotophobia, Ruch, Proyer, and
Ventis (this issue) presented nonpsychiatric participants with four items asking them to
rate the degree to which they experienced childhood teasing, ridicule, and sarcastic
comments from peers, teachers, and parents, and the degree to which they avoided peers
in order to avoid being teased. Ruch et al. found sizable correlations between gelotopho-
bia scores and ratings on each of these items in a non-clinical sample and a sample of
psychotherapy patients with non-shame-based disorders. However, these correlations
were non-significant in clinical samples of patients with shame-based disorders and
patients diagnosed with gelotophobia. In addition, although patients with shame-based
disorders and those with gelotophobia obtained higher mean scores on these items than
did the non-patients and patients with non-shame-based disorders, these ratings did not
distinguish between the shame-based and gelotophobic patients. The authors concluded
that their results provide only partial support for the hypothesized causes of gelotopho-
bia, and suggested that further research is needed to examine a broader range of child-
hood teasing experiences.
Accordingly, in the present study we made use of a measure of childhood teasing in
which participants are asked to report the frequency and distress of recalled teasing ex-
periences during childhood on a list of 35 potential reasons for being teased (Storch et
al., 2004). Factor analyses by Storch et al. have found that these teasing items can be
categorized into five domains: performance (e.g., not being good at sports), academics
(e.g., being nerdy or the teachers pet), social behavior (e.g., being shy around other
kids), family background (e.g., having a funny name), and appearance (e.g., being over-
weight).
One of the goals of this study was to determine whether gelotophobia scores are more
strongly correlated with teasing in some domains than in others. In particular, based on
the etiological theory outlined above, one would predict that gelotophobia should be
particularly associated with recollections of being teased in the social behavior domain,
which has to do with social awkwardness, stuttering, shyness, nervousness, and so on. In
Gelotophobia, social anxiety, and teasing
97
contrast, teasing about performance, academics, family background, and appearance
would seem to be less relevant to the development of gelotophobia and should therefore
be less strongly correlated. In addition, we compared correlations between gelotophobia
and both the distress and frequency of overall recalled teasing, to determine whether
these recollections of childhood teasing would replicate the finding of Proyer et al (2009)
that gelotophobia was more strongly related to the intensity than to the frequency of
teasing experienced over the preceding year.
Our second main objective was to examine the relationship between gelotophobia and
social anxiety and phobias. As noted previously, Titze (2009) acknowledged some over-
lap between these conditions, but also claimed that they are distinct. Very little previous
research has investigated the similarities and differences between gelotophobia and social
anxiety, phobias, and anxiety disorders generally. Forabosco, Ruch, and Nucera (2009)
examined differences in mean gelotophobia scores in groups of psychiatric patients diag-
nosed with anxiety disorders, mood disorders, eating disorders, personality disorders, and
schizophrenia, as well as a group of non-patients. The patients with schizophrenia and
those with personality disorders scored significantly higher than did the other patient
groups and the non-patients. Somewhat surprisingly, there were no significant differ-
ences between the patients with anxiety disorders and the non-patient group. However, in
addition to social anxieties, the anxiety disorders included such conditions as obsessive-
compulsive disorder, panic disorder, and post-traumatic stress disorder, which are theo-
retically less likely to be related to gelotophobia. The sample of individuals with social
phobia was too small to compare this group separately.
In the present study, we employed three measures assessing different aspects of social
anxiety. These included measures of: the fear of negative evaluation (addressing cogni-
tive aspects); fear and avoidance of social interaction and performance situations (emo-
tional and behavioral aspects); and specific fears (including both social and nonsocial
fears). Because our participants were university students, our focus was on the normal
range of anxieties and fears, rather than clinically diagnosable phobias. Based on the
preceding discussion of the assumed overlap between gelotophobia and social phobia, we
expected that scores on the GELOPH<15> would be quite strongly correlated with the
fear of negative evaluation and with social anxiety and phobias, but less strongly related
to other specific phobias such as fears of situations and activities (e.g., thunderstorms,
flying in an airplane) or fears of death, illness, injury, or animals (e.g., spiders, snakes).
In addition, in view of the assumption that a history of being the target of teasing and
ridicule is particularly relevant to the development of gelotophobia, we expected that
recollections of childhood teasing, particularly in the social domain, would predict
gelotophobia scores even after controlling for scores on the social anxiety and fear of
negative evaluation measures. Such a finding would support the distinctness of geloto-
phobia relative to social anxieties more generally.



K. R. Edwards, R. A. Martin & D. J. A. Dozois
98
Method
Participants
The sample was comprised of 207 first-year undergraduate students (74 males, 133 fe-
males) enrolled in an introductory psychology course at the University of Western On-
tario. Participants were recruited through the department research participant pool and
were compensated with partial course credit. The mean age of participants was 18.7
years (SD = 2.86). With regard to ethnicity, 67.6 % identified themselves as being of
European origin, 8.2 % Asian, 4.8 % Latin American, 2.9 % African/Caribbean, 1.0 %
South Asian, 1.0 % Native Canadian, and 14.5 % other. Seventy-nine percent of partici-
pants were born in Canada and 86.5 % indicated that English was their first language.
Measures
Demographics: A brief demographic questionnaire was administered to provide general
information about participants age, gender, ethnicity, country of birth, and first language
spoken.
GELOPH<15> (Ruch & Proyer, 2008a), the standard instrument used to assess geloto-
phobia, consists of 15 items reflecting the experiential world of individuals with geloto-
phobia. In this study we employed the English version of this measure (with some minor
wording changes to improve comprehensibility) published by Platt, Proyer, and Ruch
(2009). The items, all positively keyed, are aimed at tapping into a persons typical or
usual behavior patterns. A sample item is It takes me very long to recover from being
laughed at. Participants are asked to rate the degree to which they agree with each
statement on a 4-point Likert-type scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 4 (strongly
agree). High scores indicate a stronger fear of being laughed at. GELOPH<15> has been
translated into over 40 different languages (Proyer, Ruch et al., 2009) and past research
has found the scale to be a valid and reliable unidimensional instrument for the assess-
ment of gelotophobia (see Ruch, 2009; Ruch & Proyer, 2008b). The internal consistency
(Cronbachs alpha) for the GELOPH<15> in the present sample was .87.
Teasing Questionnaire Revised (TQ-R; Storch et al., 2004) is comprised of 35 state-
ments and is intended to assess memories of being the target of childhood teasing. A
sample item is I was teased because I didnt do well in school. Participants are asked to
rate each statement on two scales: the degree to which they were teased about each topic
(Frequency) and how distressed they felt about being teased (Distress) using 5-point
Likert-type scales ranging from 0 (I was never teased about this) to 4 (I was always
teased about this) for frequency, and 0 (I did not feel upset about this at all) to 4 (I felt
extremely upset about this) for distress. Total teasing frequency and distress scores were
computed separately by summing the ratings across all 35 items.
Individual scores were also computed for five factors that have been found in previous
research with the TQ-R, assessing unique domains of teasing (Storch et al., 2004; Straw-
Gelotophobia, social anxiety, and teasing
99
ser, Storch, & Roberti, 2005). These domains include: performance (3 items; e.g., I was
teased because I was not good at sports), academic excellence (6 items; e.g., I was
teased because I excelled at school), social behavior (8 items; e.g., I was teased be-
cause I often looked nervous), family background (3 items; e.g., I was teased for hav-
ing a funny name), and appearance (14 items; e.g., I was teased about my weight).
Mean item scores (combining the frequency and distress ratings) were computed for each
of the five factors. Previous studies have found that the TQ-R has good psychometric
properties. In the current sample, internal consistency of the five factors revealed alpha
coefficients as follows: academic excellence (.89), social behavior (.84), appearance
(.83), performance (.70), and family background (.69).
Brief Fear of Negative Evaluation Scale (FNEB; Leary, 1983) is a commonly used 12-
item measure, based on Watson and Friends (1969) 30-item Fear of Negative Evaluation
scale, to assess the degree to which people are concerned with the possibility of being
evaluated unfavorably by others, an important component of social anxiety. Higher
scores indicate a greater social-evaluative anxiety. Participants are asked to rate the de-
gree to which each statement describes them on a 5-point Likert-type scale ranging from
1 (not at all characteristic of me) to 5 (extremely characteristic of me). A sample item is,
I worry about what kind of impression I am making on someone. Previous research
demonstrates that the FNEB exhibits good psychometric properties (Collins, Westra,
Dozois, & Stewart, 2005; Leary, 1983). The FNEB demonstrated high internal consis-
tency in the current study, = .95.
Liebowitz Social Anxiety Scale (LSAS; Liebowitz, 1987) is a 24-item questionnaire de-
signed to assess a variety of social interaction and performance situations that people
with social phobia may fear and/or avoid. Participants are asked, based on their actual
experience of the past week, to give each item one score for fear and one score for avoid-
ance on 4-point Likert-type scales ranging from 0 (None) to 3 (severe) for fear, and 0
(Never 0 %) to 3 (Usually, 67-100 %) for avoidance. Eleven statements pertain to social
interaction and 13 items concern performance situations. Sample items include Eating in
public places and Talking to people in authority. In the current study a total social
anxiety score was obtained by summing the scores for both fear and avoidance. Previous
research indicated that the LSAS had strong internal consistency as well as convergent
and discriminant validity (Heimberg et al., 1999). In the current study, internal consis-
tency was = .94.
Fear Survey Schedule-II (FSS-II; Geer, 1965) is designed to assess the degree to which
individuals experience fear in response to common phobic objects and situations. This
instrument consists of a list of 51 potentially fear-evoking stimuli and situations, includ-
ing such items as: hypodermic needles, snakes, speaking before a group, and driving a
car. Participants are instructed to rate the intensity of their discomfort or distress on a 7-
point Likert-type scale ranging from 0 (None) to 6 (Terror). Numerous factor analytic
studies have been conducted on the FSS-II with somewhat different patterns of results,
and no standardized set of subscales has been established (Antony, Orsillo, & Roemer,
2001). We therefore conducted a factor analysis on these items using Varimax rotation,
and found three factors based on the scree plot: (1) social fears (14 items; e.g., looking
foolish; meeting someone for the first time); (2) death, illness, injury, and animals (22
K. R. Edwards, R. A. Martin & D. J. A. Dozois
100
items; e.g., blood; cemeteries; spiders); and (3) situations/activities (15 items; e.g., being
a passenger in an airplane; heights; crowded places). The three factors together ac-
counted for 35.9 percent of the total variance, and had eigenvalues of 12.4, 3.5, and 2.5,
respectively. Factor loadings of items on their respective factors ranged from .25 to .78.
These factors are generally consistent with those found in several previous factor analy-
ses of this measure (e.g., Landy & Gaupp, 1971). Mean item scores were computed for
each of the three factors. Internal consistency analyses of the three factors revealed alpha
coefficients as follows: social fears (.90), death/illness/injury/animals (.88), and situa-
tions/activities (.80).
Procedure
Participants were tested in groups of 10 to 20. After signing an informed consent form,
they completed a package of self-report questionnaires in randomized order. After com-
pleting the measures, they were given a debriefing sheet describing the purpose of the
study. Any remaining questions they may have had were answered at this time. The
study took less than one hour to complete.
Results
Table 1 presents the means, standard deviations, and skewness of all the measures used
in this study, as well as the simple correlations between the GELOPH<15> and the re-
maining measures. With regard to our first objective, the results shown in Table 1 reveal
that scores on the gelotophobia measure were significantly correlated with both the fre-
quency and distress scores on the teasing questionnaire, as well as four of the five do-
mains of teasing (all ps < .05). The one exception was teasing in the family background
domain. Because the five teasing domains tended to be significantly correlated with each
other (mean r = .32, range = .04 to .44), we explored these associations further by con-
ducting a stepwise regression analysis, predicting gelotophobia scores from scores on the
five teasing domains. This approach examines the association between gelotophobia and
each teasing domain while controlling for the remaining domains. This analysis revealed
that the five teasing scores together were strongly predictive of gelotophobia scores, R =
.51, Adj R
2
= .24, F (5, 201) = 13.97, p < .05. The regression weights for individual
domains, which are presented in Table 2, show that, as predicted, childhood teasing in
the domain of social behavior remained a significant predictor of gelotophobia after
controlling for the other four teasing domains. Unexpectedly, teasing in the academic
excellence domain also remained a significant predictor. As expected, childhood teasing
with regard to appearance, performance, and family background were no longer signifi-
cantly associated with gelotophobia after controlling for each of the remaining domains.
To determine whether gelotophobia is more strongly associated with the distress of
childhood teasing than with the frequency, we conducted partial correlations between

Gelotophobia, social anxiety, and teasing
101
Table 1:
Pearson Product-Moment Correlations between GELOPH<15> and FNEB, LSAS, TQ-R, and
FSS-II, with Means, Standard Deviations, and Skewness

Measure: M SD Skewness Corr. with
GELOPH<15>
GELOPH<15> 1.92 0.53 0.44
TQ-R - Frequency 21.99 12.70 0.67 .37 *
TQ-R - Distress 17.58 13.99 1.01 .44 *
TQ-R - Academic Excellence 0.70 0.66 0.98 .30 *
TQ-R - Social Behavior 0.43 0.52 1.66 .45 *
TQ-R - Appearance 0.66 0.52 1.18 .28 *
TQ-R - Performance 0.64 0.59 0.95 .30 *
TQ-R - Family Background 0.47 0.56 1.33 .11
FNEB 33.97 11.60 0.22 .70 *
LSAS 42.51 21.40 0.29 .67 *
FSS-II - Social 2.07 0.95 0.33 .64 *
FSS-II - Death/Injury/Animals 2.31 0.89 0.28 .27 *
FSS-II - Situations/Activities 1.38 0.73 0.51 .37 *
* p < .05 (N = 207)
Note: TQ-R = Teasing Questionnaire Revised; FNEB = Brief Fear of Negative Evaluation Scale; LSAS
= Liebowitz Social Anxiety Scale; FSS-II = Fear Survey Schedule-II


Table 2:
Step-wise multiple regression analysis predicting gelotophobia (GELOPH<15>) from five
teasing domains (TQ-R)

Predictor Variable $ t p
TQ-R Academic Excellence .20 2.79 .006
TQ-R Social Behavior .39 5.59 .0001
TQ-R Appearance .04 0.57 ns
TQ-R Performance .06 0.80 ns
TQ-R Family Background -.06 -0.91 ns
Note: TQ-R = Teasing Questionnaire Revised
K. R. Edwards, R. A. Martin & D. J. A. Dozois
102
gelotophobia and each of these two scores, controlling for the other one. In support of
our prediction, the partial correlation between gelotophobia and teasing distress, control-
ling for frequency, was significant (partial r = .27, p < .05), whereas the partial correla-
tion between gelotophobia and teasing frequency, controlling for distress, was nonsig-
nificant (partial r = .06, ns).
With regard to the second main objective of this study, the results shown in Table 1
reveal that scores on the GELOPH<15> were significantly correlated with scores on the
FNEB, the LSAS, and all three factors of the FSS-II. Because these social anxiety and
fear measures tended to be significantly correlated with each other (mean r = .52, range =
.27 to .68), we explored these associations further by conducting a stepwise regression
analysis, predicting gelotophobia scores from scores on the FNEB, the LSAS, and all
three factors of the FSS-II. This analysis revealed that these anxiety and fear measures
together were strongly predictive of gelotophobia, R = .78, Adj R
2
= .60, F (5, 201) =
63.44, p < .05. As predicted, scores on the three measures pertaining to social anxiety
(i.e., FNEB, LSAS, and FSS-II-Social) continued to be significantly associated with
gelotophobia (see Table 3), whereas the measures of non-social fears (i.e., FSS-II-Death/
Illness/Injury/Animals; and FSS-II-Situations/Activities) were no longer significant.

Table 3:
Step-wise multiple regression analysis predicting gelotophobia (GELOPH<15>) from scores
on FNEB, LSAS, and three FSS-II factors

Predictor Variable $ t p
FNEB .41 6.82 .0001
LSAS .34 5.19 .0001
FSS-II - Social .21 2.89 .004
FSS-II - Death/Injury/Animals -.09 -1.42 ns
FSS-II - Situations/Activities -.02 -0.35 ns
Note: FNEB = Brief Fear of Negative Evaluation Scale; LSAS = Liebowitz Social Anxiety
Scale; FSS-II = Fear Survey Schedule-II

To test our prediction that childhood teasing would be related to gelotophobia even after
controlling for social anxiety and other fears, we computed partial correlations between
GELOPH<15> scores and the five teasing domains on the TQ-R, controlling for scores
on the FNEB, LSAS, and the three factors of the FSS-II. The results of these analyses,
which are presented in Table 4, revealed that, as predicted, gelotophobia is significantly
related to recollections of childhood teasing in the social behavior domain even after
controlling for other anxieties and fears (partial r = .18, p < .05). The partial correlation
between gelotophobia and teasing in the academic excellence domain was also signifi-
cant (partial r = .15, p < .05). As expected, partial correlations between gelotophobia and
teasing in the domains of appearance, performance, and family background were nonsig-
nificant.
Gelotophobia, social anxiety, and teasing
103
Table 4:
Partial correlations between GELOPH<15> and five TQ-R domains controlling for scores on
FNEB, LSAS, and FSS-Social

Partial r
TQ-R Academic Excellence .15 *
TQ-R Social Behavior .18 *
TQ-R Appearance .06
TQ-R Performance .03
TQ-R Family Background -.06
* p < .05
Note: FNEB = Brief Fear of Negative Evaluation
Scale; LSAS = Liebowitz Social Anxiety Scale; TQ-R
= Teasing Questionnaire Revised; FSS-II = Fear
Survey Schedule-II
Discussion
This study had two main objectives. The first of these was to explore the hypothesized
link between gelotophobia and childhood experiences of being teased. According to
Titzes (2009) theoretical model based on clinical case studies, gelotophobia results in
part from repeated experiences of being maliciously teased and ridiculed during child-
hood and adolescence because of poor social skills and awkward, odd, and rigid social
behavior patterns. This pattern of social behavior in turn was seen as being a conse-
quence of earlier experiences of parental shame-based criticism and ridicule, resulting in
the development of a profound sense of shame or defectiveness. Based on this etiological
model, we expected that individuals who are higher on gelotophobia would particularly
recall more frequent and distressing experiences of being teased about anxiety-based
deficits in social skills and awkward social behavior.
In support of this prediction, in our multiple regression analysis we found that geloto-
phobia was significantly associated with scores on the social behavior domain of the TQ-
R. This domain includes recollections of being teased because of looking nervous (blush-
ing, having shaky hands, etc.), not being very good at initiating and maintaining conver-
sations with others, being shy around other children, crying easily or acting like a baby,
and speech problems such as stuttering. These items seem to reflect particularly the types
of unconventional interpersonal behaviors described by Titze. It is easy to see how a
vicious cycle could develop, in which being teased and ridiculed because of these sorts of
anxiety-based interpersonal difficulties further intensifies feelings of anxiety and inhibi-
tion, leading to even greater interpersonal awkwardness and more teasing.
As expected, our regression analysis showed that gelotophobia is not related to a history
of being teased about ones appearance (e.g., being overweight, wearing glasses, hair
color), family background (e.g., skin color, ethnic or cultural differences, name), or poor
performance (e.g., not being good at sports or music). The fact that gelotophobia is re-
K. R. Edwards, R. A. Martin & D. J. A. Dozois
104
lated to being the target of teasing in some domains and not others further supports
Titzes theory that it has to do particularly with experiencing ridicule related to shame-
and anxiety-based unconventional interpersonal behavior rather than simply being
laughed at for a variety of reasons.
An unexpected finding, however, was that gelotophobia was also related to a history of
being teased in the domain of academic excellence (e.g., excelling in school, being
nerdy, being the teachers pet, caring more about schoolwork than sports or other
activities). It is difficult to know how to explain this finding. Perhaps individuals with a
vulnerability to gelotophobia, due to faulty early parenting, tend to compensate by seek-
ing to excel academically in a way that alienates them from their peers and results in
excessive teasing. It must be noted that the present sample consisted of university stu-
dents who, as a group, likely tended to be high achievers academically throughout their
school years. Thus, it may be that individuals with high scores on gelotophobia are
teased by peers during earlier school years not merely because of their academic
achievement orientation, but because of the way this is presented to peers. For example,
they may tend to be particularly serious and socially isolated in their pursuit of academic
success. Further research is needed with other populations to determine whether this
finding is generalizable beyond university students.
Another possible explanation for the association between being teased about academic
excellence and the development of gelotophobia pertains to the idea that ones sense of
achievement, like the interpersonal realm, is important to self-definition. Freud, for ex-
ample, is credited with stating that love and work are the cornerstones of our human-
ness. Beck (1995) contended that maladaptive core beliefs that make individuals vulner-
able to depression and anxiety disorders typically fall into the two domains of achieve-
ment (e.g., helplessness/incompetence) and interpersonal (e.g., unlovability). Moreover,
research has demonstrated that failures in the achievement domain also tend to be inter-
preted as having interpersonal ramifications (e.g., Frewen & Dozois, 2006). Thus, teas-
ing related to academic achievement, like teasing about social behavior, might impinge
on the shame-based core identity of individuals who are vulnerable to developing geloto-
phobia.
Consistent with Proyer et al (2009), who found that gelotophobia was more strongly
related to the reported intensity than to the frequency of being laughed at over the pre-
ceding year, our results showed that a significant correlation between gelotophobia and
the distress associated with childhood teasing remained even after controlling for teasing
frequency, whereas the correlation between gelotophobia and teasing frequency became
nonsignificant after controlling for distress. Thus, individuals with gelotophobia seem to
be distinguished from others not so much by the frequency with which they recall being
teased by peers during childhood, but by the distress associated with such teasing, per-
haps due to a greater intensity or maliciousness of the teasing.
The second major objective of this study was to explore the relationship between geloto-
phobia and other types of fears and anxieties. At a clinical level, gelotophobia seems
quite similar to social phobia, one of the anxiety disorders identified in the DSM-IV-TR
(American Psychiatric Association, 2000). As described in DSM-IV-TR, social phobia is
Gelotophobia, social anxiety, and teasing
105
characterized by a marked and persistent fear of social or performance situations in
which embarrassment may occur (p. 456). Social phobia may be specific to particular
situations in which the individual fears embarrassment (e.g., public speaking, eating in
restaurants, attending parties), or it may be generalized to most social and performance
situations. Given that it involves a wide range of situations, gelotophobia seems most
related to the generalized type of social phobia. A question arises as to whether geloto-
phobia is a unique syndrome or whether it is merely a characteristic or symptom that
commonly occurs in individuals with generalized social phobia. Indeed, some of the
items on the GELOPH<15> appear to be ones that would be endorsed by individuals
with social phobia generally (e.g., If I did not fear making a fool of myself I would
speak much more in public). As noted previously, Titze (2009) acknowledged an over-
lap between the two, but argued that gelotophobia should be considered a distinct syn-
drome.
An alternative possibility would be to view gelotophobia as a type of specific phobia,
which is described in the DSM-IV-TR as marked and persistent fear of clearly discerni-
ble, circumscribed objects or situations (p. 443). These can involve a wide range of
stimuli such as particular animals (e.g., snakes), objects in the natural environment (e.g.,
storms), situations (e.g., elevators), blood, injury, and so on. If gelotophobia is viewed as
a persistent fear of laughter, this could perhaps be considered a type of specific phobia.
To explore these questions, we examined the correlations between gelotophobia and
scores on several measures relating to dimensions of social phobia (including cognitive,
emotional, and behavioral aspects) and specific phobias (although, given that we studied
a nonclinical sample, it is more appropriate to refer to these as fears and anxieties rather
than phobias). As expected, gelotophobia was highly correlated with the measures of
social fears and anxiety (the FNEB, LSAS, FSS-II-Social), with simple correlations in
the .60 to .70 range. Simple correlations with specific fears (FSS-II-Death/Injury/Ani-
mals and FSS-II-Situations/ Activities) were in the moderate range (.27 and .37). Our
multiple regression analysis revealed that, when the other fear and anxiety measures are
controlled statistically, the social anxiety measures continue to contribute strongly to the
prediction of gelotophobia, whereas the specific fear measures are no longer significant
predictors. These results support the view that gelotophobia is closely related to social
anxiety (and, at the clinical level, to social phobia), but not to specific fears (or phobias).
To begin to address the question of whether gelotophobia is unique from social anxiety
in general, we examined whether it is significantly associated with childhood experiences
of teasing even after controlling for other types of fears and anxieties. This was based on
Titzes view that a history of repeated experiences of teasing and ridicule is particularly
relevant to gelotophobia, more so than social phobia in general. Our partial correlations
revealed that, as predicted, gelotophobia continued to be significantly (although weakly)
correlated with childhood teasing in the domains of social behavior and academic excel-
lence, even after controlling for the other measures of social and specific fears and anxi-
ety. These findings provide support for the view that, although gelotophobia is closely
related to social anxiety generally, it does seem to have some unique characteristics that
distinguish it from other anxieties. At a clinical level, perhaps it is best viewed as a spe-
cific subtype of social phobia. Further research is needed to explore this question in
K. R. Edwards, R. A. Martin & D. J. A. Dozois
106
greater detail, examining for example the degree to which gelotophobia is uniquely asso-
ciated with particular etiological factors and responsive to particular treatment ap-
proaches.
An important limitation of this study is the fact that it was conducted with a nonclinical
sample of university students. Further research using patient samples is needed to deter-
mine whether these findings may be generalized to clinically significant levels of geloto-
phobia, or whether they are limited to the variations in this trait within the normal range.
In particular, a stringent test of Titzes model would be to determine whether patients
diagnosed with gelotophobia differ from those diagnosed with other shame-based disor-
ders but without gelotophobia (cf. Ruch et al., this issue). Another limitation of this study
is that the assessment of childhood teasing was necessarily retrospective in nature and
may have been prone to memory biases. For instance, it is possible that individuals with
a fear of being laughed at recall greater experiences of mood-congruent childhood
memories because of availability or accessibility heuristic biases. Notwithstanding these
limitations, the findings do help to elucidate the relationships among gelotophobia,
childhood teasing, and social anxiety.
References
American Psychiatric Association. (2000). Diagnostic and statistical manual (4
th
Edition Text
Revised). Washington: Author.
Antony, M. M., Orsillo, S. M., & Roemer, L. (2001). Practitioners guide to empirically
based measures of anxiety. New York: Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers.
Beck, J. S. (1995). Cognitive therapy: Basics and beyond. New York: Guilford.
Collins, K. A., Westra, H. A., Dozois, D. J. A., & Stewart, S. H. (2005). The validity of the
brief version of the Fear of Negative Evaluation Scale. Journal of Anxiety Disorders,
19(3), 345-359.
Forabosco, G., Ruch, W., & Nucera, P. (2009). The fear of being laughed at among psychiat-
ric patients. Humor: International Journal of Humor Research, 22(1-2), 233-251.
Frewen, P. A., & Dozois, D. J. A. (2006). Social, achievement, and control dimensions of
personality-life event vulnerability to depression. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 30(1),
1-17.
Geer, J. H. (1965). The development of a scale to measure fear. Behaviour Research and
Therapy, 3(1), 45-53.
Heimberg, R. G., Horner, K. J., Juster, H. R., Safren, S. A., Brown, E. J., Schneier, F. R., et
al. (1999). Psychometric properties of the Liebowitz Social Anxiety Scale. Psychological
Medicine, 29(1), 199-212.
Landy, F. J., & Gaupp, L. A. (1971). A factor analysis of the fear survey schedule-III. Behav-
iour Research and Therapy, 9(2), 89-93.
Leary, M. R. (1983). A brief version of the Fear of Negative Evaluation Scale. Personality
and Social Psychology Bulletin, 9(3), 371-375.
Gelotophobia, social anxiety, and teasing
107
Liebowitz, M. R. (1987). Social phobia. Modern Problems of Pharmacopsychiatry, 22, 141-
173.
Platt, T., Proyer, R. T., & Ruch, W. (2009). Gelotophobia and bullying: The assessment of
the fear of being laughed at and its application among bullying victims. Psychological
Science Quarterly, 51(2), 135-147.
Proyer, R. T., Hempelmann, C. F., & Ruch, W. (2009). Were they really laughed at? That
much? Gelotophobes and their history of perceived derisibility. Humor: International
Journal of Humor Research, 22(1-2), 213-231.
Proyer, R. T., Ruch, W., Ali, N. S., Al-Olimat, H. S., Amemiya, T., Adal, T. A., et al. (2009).
Breaking ground in cross-cultural research on the fear of being laughed at (gelotophobia):
A multinational study involving 73 countries. Humor: International Journal of Humor
Research, 22(1-2), 253-279.
Ruch, W. (2009). Fearing humor? Gelotophobia: The fear of being laughed at: Introduction
and overview. Humor: International Journal of Humor Research, 22(1-2), 1-25.
Ruch, W., & Proyer, R. T. (2008a). Who is gelotophobic? Assessment criteria for the fear of
being laughed at. Swiss Journal of Psychology, 67(1), 19-27.
Ruch, W., & Proyer, R. T. (2008b). The fear of being laughed at: Individual and group differ-
ences in gelotophobia. Humor: International Journal of Humor Research, 21(1), 47-67.
Ruch, W., Proyer, R. T., & Ventis, W. L. (in press). The relationship of teasing in childhood
to the expression of gelotophobia in adults. Psychological Test and Assessment Modeling.
Storch, E. A., Roth, D. A., Coles, M. E., Heimberg, R. G., Bravata, E. A., & Moser, J. (2004).
The measurement and impact of childhood teasing in a sample of young adults. Journal
of Anxiety Disorders, 18(5), 681-694.
Strawser, M. S., Storch, E. A., & Roberti, J. W. (2005). The Teasing Questionnaire-Revised:
Measurement of childhood teasing in adults. Journal of Anxiety Disorders, 19(7), 780-
792.
Titze, M. (2009). Gelotophobia: The fear of being laughed at. Humor: International Journal
of Humor Research, 22(1-2), 27-48.
Watson, D., & Friend, R. (1969). Measurement of social-evaluative anxiety. Journal of Con-
sulting and Clinical Psychology, 33(4), 448-457.
Acknowledgements
This research was supported by a grant from the Social Sciences and Humanities Re-
search Council of Canada to the third author. This funding is gratefully acknowledged.
The authors also wish to thank Nathan Finucci and Pauline Leung for their help with data
collection.