Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
This multi-experiment study builds upon extant political entertainment theory, testing whether satire type (horatian versus juvenalian) cues varying processing mechanisms (message discounting versus resource allocation), and if consequential differences to argument scrutiny levels or message persuasiveness result. Using novel stimuli (e.g., animated cartoons, study one) and real-world late-night political satire (The Daily Show and The Colbert Report, study two), results suggest that satire type was a key antecedent in political humor message processing. Additionally, the varying mechanisms had differential effects on political argument scrutiny levels and message persuasiveness.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
LaMarre et al. (2014) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: