{"id":{"repo_id":"wlv","oai_identifier":"oai:wlv.openrepository.com:2436/624050"},"canonical_url":"https://search.dev.ndltd.org/etd/wlv/oai:wlv.openrepository.com:2436/624050","repository":{"repo_id":"wlv","name":"University of Wolverhampton","base_url":"https://wlv.openrepository.com/server/oai/request"},"display":{"title":"Can the empathic underpinning of counselling psychologists detect gelotophobic responses to expressions of joy above non-counselling psychologists and psychology others?","abstract":"Gelotophobes have a negative attribution bias skewing appraisal of laughter meaning expressions of joy negatively affect interpersonal interactions and could be a barrier to positive outcomes in therapy. This study investigated participants’ perceptions of gelotophobes and non-gelotophobes responding to expressions of joy and examined whether the empathic underpinnings of counselling psychology afforded greater empathy and was a predictive factor in correctly identifying facial affect. This study was a quasi-experimental design employing a quantitative method. Participants (N = 144) consisted of counselling psychologists (CP) (n = 44), non-psychologists (NP) (n = 54), and psychology other (PO) (n = 46). Participants were shown emotional stimuli, pre-coded using Facial Action Coding System (FACS), depicting gelotophobes and non-gelotophobes responding to expressions of joy and asked to identify the emotion from a choice of seven basic emotions. Participants also completed the Interpersonal Reactivity Index (IRI) and the Empathy Quotient (EQ) questionnaires to discern affective and cognitive empathy levels. Results found significant differences in the correct identification, and perception, of non-gelotophobes’ and gelotophobes’ facial affect. CP had significantly higher levels of cognitive empathy and identified significantly more gelotophobe emotional states than NP, but differences with the PO were non-significant. There was also a positive correlation between cognitive empathy and number of emotions correctly identified. Cognitive empathy, however, did not mediate between participant group and correctly identifying gelotophobes’ facial affect; as such, further research is needed to understand these findings. There were also no significant differences in affective empathy. Research highlights factors contributing to gelotophobes’ interpersonal difficulties, a factor in the development of gelotophobia, as well as factors that will facilitate positive therapeutic outcomes.","abstract_html":"Gelotophobes have a negative attribution bias skewing appraisal of laughter meaning expressions of joy negatively affect interpersonal interactions and could be a barrier to positive outcomes in therapy. This study investigated participants’ perceptions of gelotophobes and non-gelotophobes responding to expressions of joy and examined whether the empathic underpinnings of counselling psychology afforded greater empathy and was a predictive factor in correctly identifying facial affect. This study was a quasi-experimental design employing a quantitative method. Participants (N = 144) consisted of counselling psychologists (CP) (n = 44), non-psychologists (NP) (n = 54), and psychology other (PO) (n = 46). Participants were shown emotional stimuli, pre-coded using Facial Action Coding System (FACS), depicting gelotophobes and non-gelotophobes responding to expressions of joy and asked to identify the emotion from a choice of seven basic emotions. Participants also completed the Interpersonal Reactivity Index (IRI) and the Empathy Quotient (EQ) questionnaires to discern affective and cognitive empathy levels. Results found significant differences in the correct identification, and perception, of non-gelotophobes’ and gelotophobes’ facial affect. CP had significantly higher levels of cognitive empathy and identified significantly more gelotophobe emotional states than NP, but differences with the PO were non-significant. There was also a positive correlation between cognitive empathy and number of emotions correctly identified. Cognitive empathy, however, did not mediate between participant group and correctly identifying gelotophobes’ facial affect; as such, further research is needed to understand these findings. There were also no significant differences in affective empathy. Research highlights factors contributing to gelotophobes’ interpersonal difficulties, a factor in the development of gelotophobia, as well as factors that will facilitate positive therapeutic outcomes.","abstract_has_math":false,"creators":["Flowers, Trevor A."],"institution":"University of Wolverhampton","degree_name":"Professional Doctorate in Counselling Psychology","degree_level":"Doctoral","degree_discipline":null,"degree_department":null,"school":null,"contributors":[],"advisors":["Danny Hinton","Tracey Platt"],"committee_chairs":[],"committee_members":[],"year":2021,"date_issued":"2021","date_published":"2021","updated_at":"2026-07-24T06:09:17Z","subjects":["gelotophobia","counselling psychology","cognitive empathy","affective empathy","facial affect","Facial Action Coding System"],"languages":[],"rights":["Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International"],"rights_urls":["https://wlv.dspace7.openrepository.com/bitstreams/443c6cb5-7b54-4e3a-bd24-f941ace475a1/download"],"identifier_entries":[]},"links":{"outbound_url":null,"outbound_label":null,"outbound_source":null},"metadata_groups":[{"id":"people","label":"People","entries":[{"key":"dc:contributor.advisor","label":"Advisor","values":["Danny Hinton","Tracey Platt"]},{"key":"dc:creator","label":"Author","values":["Flowers, Trevor A."]}]},{"id":"academic_context","label":"Academic Context","entries":[{"key":"dc:date.issued","label":"Date","values":["2021"]},{"key":"dc:publisher.institution","label":"Dc Publisher Institution","values":["University of Wolverhampton"]},{"key":"dc:relation.isreferencedby","label":"Dc Relation Isreferencedby","values":["http://hdl.handle.net/2436/624050"]},{"key":"dc:type","label":"Dc Type","values":["Thesis or dissertation"]},{"key":"dc:type.qualificationlevel","label":"Dc Type Qualificationlevel","values":["Doctoral"]},{"key":"dc:type.qualificationname","label":"Dc Type Qualificationname","values":["Professional Doctorate in Counselling Psychology"]}]},{"id":"subjects_keywords","label":"Subjects and Keywords","entries":[{"key":"dc:subject","label":"Dc Subject","values":["gelotophobia","counselling psychology","cognitive empathy","affective empathy","facial affect","Facial Action Coding System"]}]},{"id":"language_rights","label":"Language and Rights","entries":[{"key":"dc:rights","label":"Dc Rights","values":["https://wlv.dspace7.openrepository.com/bitstreams/443c6cb5-7b54-4e3a-bd24-f941ace475a1/download","Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International"]}]},{"id":"identifiers","label":"Identifiers","entries":[{"key":"dc:identifier.uri","label":"Identifier URI","values":["https://wlv.dspace7.openrepository.com/bitstreams/003d7c15-4413-43cd-ba35-184689518e70/download","https://wlv.dspace7.openrepository.com/bitstreams/1f23030b-b071-4997-a68c-28ca2cbed7a4/download"]}]},{"id":"additional","label":"Additional Metadata","entries":[{"key":"dc:description.abstract","label":"Abstract","values":["Gelotophobes have a negative attribution bias skewing appraisal of laughter meaning expressions of joy negatively affect interpersonal interactions and could be a barrier to positive outcomes in therapy. This study investigated participants’ perceptions of gelotophobes and non-gelotophobes responding to expressions of joy and examined whether the empathic underpinnings of counselling psychology afforded greater empathy and was a predictive factor in correctly identifying facial affect. This study was a quasi-experimental design employing a quantitative method. Participants (N = 144) consisted of counselling psychologists (CP) (n = 44), non-psychologists (NP) (n = 54), and psychology other (PO) (n = 46). Participants were shown emotional stimuli, pre-coded using Facial Action Coding System (FACS), depicting gelotophobes and non-gelotophobes responding to expressions of joy and asked to identify the emotion from a choice of seven basic emotions. Participants also completed the Interpersonal Reactivity Index (IRI) and the Empathy Quotient (EQ) questionnaires to discern affective and cognitive empathy levels. Results found significant differences in the correct identification, and perception, of non-gelotophobes’ and gelotophobes’ facial affect. CP had significantly higher levels of cognitive empathy and identified significantly more gelotophobe emotional states than NP, but differences with the PO were non-significant. There was also a positive correlation between cognitive empathy and number of emotions correctly identified. Cognitive empathy, however, did not mediate between participant group and correctly identifying gelotophobes’ facial affect; as such, further research is needed to understand these findings. There were also no significant differences in affective empathy. Research highlights factors contributing to gelotophobes’ interpersonal difficulties, a factor in the development of gelotophobia, as well as factors that will facilitate positive therapeutic outcomes."]},{"key":"dc:format.checksum.md5","label":"Dc Format Checksum Md5","values":["ed256410f9d52390a9e750bb5685281e","3a3f54721b3a35b3cfd277c66a1c6d2c","8a4605be74aa9ea9d79846c1fba20a33","8aa2d5585e442a963426e3da2ea367e2","d828d379001db51c7e5295732c20343d"]},{"key":"dc:title","label":"Title","values":["Can the empathic underpinning of counselling psychologists detect gelotophobic responses to expressions of joy above non-counselling psychologists and psychology others?"]}]}],"canonical_facts":{"dc:contributor.advisor":["Danny Hinton","Tracey Platt"],"dc:creator":["Flowers, Trevor A."],"dc:date.issued":["2021"],"dc:description.abstract":["Gelotophobes have a negative attribution bias skewing appraisal of laughter meaning expressions of joy negatively affect interpersonal interactions and could be a barrier to positive outcomes in therapy. This study investigated participants’ perceptions of gelotophobes and non-gelotophobes responding to expressions of joy and examined whether the empathic underpinnings of counselling psychology afforded greater empathy and was a predictive factor in correctly identifying facial affect. This study was a quasi-experimental design employing a quantitative method. Participants (N = 144) consisted of counselling psychologists (CP) (n = 44), non-psychologists (NP) (n = 54), and psychology other (PO) (n = 46). Participants were shown emotional stimuli, pre-coded using Facial Action Coding System (FACS), depicting gelotophobes and non-gelotophobes responding to expressions of joy and asked to identify the emotion from a choice of seven basic emotions. Participants also completed the Interpersonal Reactivity Index (IRI) and the Empathy Quotient (EQ) questionnaires to discern affective and cognitive empathy levels. Results found significant differences in the correct identification, and perception, of non-gelotophobes’ and gelotophobes’ facial affect. CP had significantly higher levels of cognitive empathy and identified significantly more gelotophobe emotional states than NP, but differences with the PO were non-significant. There was also a positive correlation between cognitive empathy and number of emotions correctly identified. Cognitive empathy, however, did not mediate between participant group and correctly identifying gelotophobes’ facial affect; as such, further research is needed to understand these findings. There were also no significant differences in affective empathy. Research highlights factors contributing to gelotophobes’ interpersonal difficulties, a factor in the development of gelotophobia, as well as factors that will facilitate positive therapeutic outcomes."],"dc:format.checksum.md5":["ed256410f9d52390a9e750bb5685281e","3a3f54721b3a35b3cfd277c66a1c6d2c","8a4605be74aa9ea9d79846c1fba20a33","8aa2d5585e442a963426e3da2ea367e2","d828d379001db51c7e5295732c20343d"],"dc:identifier.uri":["https://wlv.dspace7.openrepository.com/bitstreams/003d7c15-4413-43cd-ba35-184689518e70/download","https://wlv.dspace7.openrepository.com/bitstreams/1f23030b-b071-4997-a68c-28ca2cbed7a4/download"],"dc:publisher.institution":["University of Wolverhampton"],"dc:relation.isreferencedby":["http://hdl.handle.net/2436/624050"],"dc:rights":["https://wlv.dspace7.openrepository.com/bitstreams/443c6cb5-7b54-4e3a-bd24-f941ace475a1/download","Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International"],"dc:subject":["gelotophobia","counselling psychology","cognitive empathy","affective empathy","facial affect","Facial Action Coding System"],"dc:title":["Can the empathic underpinning of counselling psychologists detect gelotophobic responses to expressions of joy above non-counselling psychologists and psychology others?"],"dc:type":["Thesis or dissertation"],"dc:type.qualificationlevel":["Doctoral"],"dc:type.qualificationname":["Professional Doctorate in Counselling Psychology"]},"updated_at":"2026-07-24T06:09:17Z"}