top of page
Search

The Brain Behind Laughter

  • neuroversecc
  • May 18
  • 9 min read

Laughter is a universal experience – it may seem simple and automatic, but within it lies a complex interplay of neural activity, social significance, cultural nuance and evolutionary history. In episode 86 of Neuroverse, co-hosts Clara and Carolina talk to Dr Sophie Scott, a cognitive neuroscientist specialising in laughter. Together, they unpack research on the science of laughter and how it functions across cultures and species.


Professor Sophie Scott, who joined Clara and Carolina on episode 86
Professor Sophie Scott, who joined Clara and Carolina on episode 86

What's Happening in The Brain When We Laugh?


Dr Scott highlights that laughter is not merely a response to humour, but is a social tool that

precedes spoken language – babies laugh before they know how to talk [1], and apes laugh during play. The neurobiological underpinnings of laughter reveal its influence on social bonding, emotional expression and stress regulation [2].


Within the human brain, laughter triggers a

varied network of regions involved in and essential for vocalization, social signalling and emotional processing. One of the key structures involved is the hypothalamus, which plays a role in controlling physiological processes such as hormonal activity, heart rate and breathing.


Another critical brain structure is the periaqueductal gray, a region that plays a role in pain modulation and emotional regulation, helping balance the emotional intensity of a situation [3]. This neural network is what allows laughter to function as a social and emotional tool, as a form of communication but also holds value in therapeutic settings. The mere act of laughing or hearing laughter has shown to lower stress hormones like cortisol and increase endorphins, the brain’s “feel-good chemicals” [4].


Dr Scott has also studied how the neurobiological systems supporting laughter in neurotypical and neurodivergent individuals, giving us more insight into understanding laughter both anatomically within the brain, as well as in larger social contexts. Autistic individuals often perceive and process social stimuli differently, and laughter is one such example. In neurotypical individuals, laughter activates brain regions governing social perception and emotional processing, such as the medial prefrontal cortex (mPFC), crucial for social cognition, particularly in understanding and attributing mental states. While all individuals may use laughter as a social sign to gauge emotional states, autistic individuals may have a reduced ability to differentiate between genuine and posed laughter [5]. The anterior cingulate cortex is a brain region that plays a significant role in emotional regulation, social decision making and empathy, in helping determine the emotional context and facilitating appropriate social responses. For individuals on the autism spectrum, the ACC may function differently, affecting the way individuals process social cues [6].


Another crucial system involved in understanding the nature of laughter is the mirror neuron system– these neurons fire when individuals observe others performing actions, and enable them to mimic similar behaviours and emotional responses. It is a crucial component to social cognition, promoting social synchrony through mirroring others’ emotions. Laughter is contagious, and a neural basis for the same can be attributed to the activity of such mirror neurons, helping individuals understand the emotional tone of the situation and respond accordingly [7].



In contrast to the regions known to be involved in involuntary laughter, systems underlying voluntary laughter are involved in more deliberate motor control and social behaviours. Voluntary laughter is more context dependent, and is used more as a tool for communication rather than emotional expression. Areas such as the lateral promotor cortex and supplemental motor area are involved in voluntary expressions of laughter, attuned to the rhythmic quality of spontaneous vocal expressions [8].


The distinction between genuine and posed laughter further illustrates complexities in interpreting intent. In 2021, Dr Scott's group found how autistic adults showed a reduced accuracy in identifying the difference between genuine and posed laughter, where they rated posed laughter as genuine as compared to other non-autistic individuals. While neurotypical individuals tend to rely on vocal cues, timing and emotional resonance, autistic individuals my process cues differently, placing more emphasis on features such as pitch or volume. This may also be associated with variations in connectivity and activation in the medial prefrontal cortex and temporal lobe, a brain region involved in auditory processing [9].



In conversation, individuals tend of shift between the two laughter systems, a dance between spontaneous emotion and social intention. This dance helps navigate the fluid yet unspoken rules of social interaction, reinforcing social bonds by balancing feelings of belonging and the desire to maintain harmony.


Cross Species Giggles


Researchers studying laughter in the animal kingdom have identified that laughter signals safety, social connection and emotional alignment. Laughter-like-vocalizations are not unique to just humans, but several species such as dogs, turtles, chimpanzees produce similar sounds in social contexts.


For instance, in primates such as chimpanzees, laughter-like-vocalizations are observed commonly during tickling and play. These sounds are rhythmic and breathy. During tickling, they tend to be more regular and stereotyped, occurring at high frequencies. However, during play they are more variable and complex [10]. In dogs, these sounds are more forced exhalations, resembling panting, but occurring in distinct patterns. Research has also shown that other behaviours, such as tail wagging, act as non-verbal and physical expressions of relaxation and increased playfulness or alertness [11].


Similar to humans, non-human primates have also shown increased activation in hypothalamus, periaqueductal gray, and the ventromedial pre-frontal cortex in generating such vocalizations. While cortical areas are more involved in laughter in humans, the core structures surrounding the limbic areas are conserved across species, further suggesting the evolution and usage of laughter emotional connection as occurring before that of language [12].



Moreover, laughter-like-behaviours also play a crucial role in parent-offspring dynamic, providing a means for reassurance and emotional bonding. In primate species, infant laughter triggers caregiving responses from parents – they are not merely playful, but also serve an adaptive function in ensuring that offspring receive the necessary support to facilitate social integration [13].


Cultural Codes of Laughter


Laughter is universal in nature, however the contexts within which it is used, may vary significantly over history and across cultures. The cultural codes surrounding laughter and acceptable behaviour play a crucial role in shaping its expression as well as its role in society.



Laughter is intimately connected to the theory of mind – the ability to understand and attribute mental states to others, such as emotions, desires and beliefs. This is a cognitive ability that allows one to recognize whether something may be funny or socially appropriate, and is fundamental to empathy and social communication. In many cases, laughter may be triggered by incongruity – the perception of something out of place, a deviation from norms. In such cases, cultural variability plays a great role. In some cultures, humour is primarily intellectual or subtle, while in others, laughter tends towards absurdity [14].


Moreover, the acceptability to laugh in social settings also change. In some East Asian cultures, for example, laughing in formal settings or in the presence of elders is considered disrespectful, unprofessional and rude. On the other hand, in some Western cultures, laughing in business meetings or public speeches may be used to break the ice and foster an approachable atmosphere. Such differences underscore the complexities of laughter in communication, as a signal of emotional and social dynamics [15].


In many cases, laughter is not always a reaction to humour; people often laugh when recounting traumatic experiences, and laughter serves a specific emotional function – to aid in self-regulation, helping individuals take control of their narrative and reframe their experiences. In such ways, laughter becomes a coping mechanism, individuals find the ability to laugh at adversity as empowering, helping face their challenges with resilience and a sense of emotional distance [16].



Laughter in social contexts is very potent – by creating a sense of social cohesion and shared experience, it promotes a sense of well-being and safety. It also helps disarm conflicts, offering a moment of relief. The ability to shift the tone of an interaction is what makes laughter a valuable tool in conflict resolution and help individuals cope with pain, anxiety and other overwhelming emotions. This is what makes it as fundamental and deeply ingrained in social behaviour.


A Personal Experience? How Personality Shapes Laughter


Increasingly, psychological research has shown that the style of humour we use is closely connected to our personalities [17]. Studies have used novel approaches such as network analysis to map out complex relationships between the Big Five Personality Traits and styles of humour, which has given rise to intriguing patterns. The Big Five personality theory has formed the basis of widely used psychological assessments attempting to characterise personalities across 5 dimensions – Openness to new experiences, Conscientiousness, Extraversion, Agreeableness, and Neuroticism [18].


It was found that emotional control, a facet of neuroticism has the strongest overall connection to other variables within the network, particularly to humour styles. Specifically, individuals with higher levels of emotional control were more likely to use self-enhancing humour, a style where individuals maintain a humorous outlook at the face of adversity, signifying resilience and adaptability. Adding to this evidence, it was negatively associated with self-defeating humour, supporting the idea that emotional regulation plays a protective role against humour styles that may erode self-esteem or signal weaknesses [19-21]. These insights have particular applications in clinical and organizational settings, ensuring

emotionally intelligent communication and minimising toxic interactions to improve well-being and productivity.



Laughter is a powerful social thread, as highlighted from research in neuroscience, psychology, social sciences and evolutionary biology. It is not simply an expression, but a vital tool to communicate and foster social cohesion. Studying positive emotions highlights the brain’s capacity for both complex social signalling, as well as its therapeutic utility in promoting social cohesion and ensuring well-being across cultures, enriching clinical applications as well as improving social insights.


To learn more, check out the podcast episode here.


This article was written by Purnima PB and edited by Clara Lenherr.



REFERENCES


  1. Wolff, P. H., & Ferber, R. (1979). The development of behavior in human infants, premature and newborn. Annual Review of Neuroscience, 2(1), 291–307. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.ne.02.030179.001451

  2. Scott, S. K., Lavan, N., Chen, S., & McGettigan, C. (2014). The social life of laughter. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 18(12), 618–620. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2014.09.002

  3. Parvizi, J. (2001). Pathological laughter and crying: A link to the cerebellum. Brain, 124(9),1708–1719. https://doi.org/10.1093/brain/124.9.1708

  4. Dunbar, R. I. M. (2012). Bridging the bonding gap: the transition from primates to humans. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B Biological Sciences, 367(1597), 1837–1846. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2011.0217

  5. Cai, C. Q., White, S. J., Chen, S. H. Y., Mueller, M. a. E., & Scott, S. K. (2024). Autistic adults perceive and experience laughter differently to non-autistic adults. Scientific Reports, 14(1). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-56903-8

  6. Zauli, F. M., Del Vecchio, M., Russo, S., Mariani, V., Pelliccia, V., D’Orio, P., Sartori, I., Avanzini, P., & Caruana, F. (2022a). The web of laughter: frontal and limbic projections of the anterior cingulate cortex revealed by cortico-cortical evoked potential from sites eliciting laughter. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B Biological Sciences, 377(1863). https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2021.0180

  7. Caruana, F., Avanzini, P., Pelliccia, V., Mariani, V., Zauli, F., Sartori, I., Del Vecchio, M., Lo Russo, G., & Rizzolatti, G. (2020). Mirroring other’s laughter. Cingulate, opercular and temporal contributions to laughter expression and observation. Cortex, 128, 35–48. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cortex.2020.02.023

  8. Wild, B., Rodden, F. A., Grodd, W., & Ruch, W. (2003). Neural correlates of laughter and humour. Brain, 126(10), 2121–2138. https://doi.org/10.1093/brain/awg226

  9. Kosilo, M., Costa, M., Nuttall, H. E., Ferreira, H., Scott, S., Menéres, S., Pestana, J., Jerónimo, R., & Prata, D. (2021). The neural basis of authenticity recognition in laughter and crying. Scientific Reports, 11(1). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-03131-z

  10. Palagi, E., Caruana, F., & De Waal, F. B. M. (2022). The naturalistic approach to laughter in humans and other animals: towards a unified theory. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society Biological Sciences, 377(1863). https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2021.0175

  11. Serpell, J. (2016). The domestic dog. In Cambridge University Press eBooks. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781139161800

  12. Nieder, A., & Mooney, R. (2019). The neurobiology of innate, volitional and learned vocalizations in mammals and birds. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B Biological Sciences, 375(1789),20190054. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2019.0054

  13. Davila-Ross, M., & Palagi, E. (2022). Laughter, play faces and mimicry in animals: evolution and social functions. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B Biological Sciences, 377(1863). https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2021.0177

  14. Bryant, G. A., & Bainbridge, C. M. (2022). Laughter and culture. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B Biological Sciences, 377(1863). https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2021.0179

  15. Yue, X., Jiang, F., Lu, S., & Hiranandani, N. (2016). To be or not to be humorous? Cross cultural perspectives on humor. Frontiers in Psychology, 7. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01495

  16. Menéndez-Aller, Á., Postigo, Á., Montes-Álvarez, P., González-Primo, F. J., & García-Cueto, E. (2019). Humor as a protective factor against anxiety and depression. International Journal of Clinical and Health Psychology, 20(1), 38–45. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijchp.2019.12.002

  17. Sense of humor and dimensions of personality. (1993a). PubMed. https://doi.org/10.1002/1097-4679(199311)49:6

  18. McCrae, R. R., & John, O. P. (1992). An introduction to the Five‐Factor model and its applications. Journal of Personality, 60(2), 175–215. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.1992.tb00970.x

  19. Di Fabio, A., Gori, A., & Svicher, A. (2023). Relationships between Humor Styles and the Big Five Personality Traits in Workers: A Network Analysis. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 20(2), 1008. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph20021008

  20. Plessen, C. Y., Franken, F. R., Ster, C., Schmid, R. R., Wolfmayr, C., Mayer, A., Sobisch, M., Kathofer, M., Rattner, K., Kotlyar, E., Maierwieser, R. J., & Tran, U. S. (2019). Humor styles and personality: A systematic review and meta-analysis on the relations between humor styles and the Big Five personality traits. Personality and Individual Differences, 154, 109676. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2019.109676

  21. Ford, T. E., Lappi, S. K., & Holden, C. J. (2016). Personality, humor styles and happiness: Happy people have positive humor styles. Europe’s Journal of Psychology, 12(3), 320–337. https://doi.org/10.5964/ejop.v12i3.1160

Comments

bottom of page