Skip to main content
NCBI home page
Sage Choice logoLink to Sage Choice
. 2022 Mar 2;89(2):514–529. doi: 10.1177/00302228221075276

Humor: A Grief Trigger and Also a Way to Manage or Live With Your Grief

Donna M Wilson 1,✉, Michelle Knox 2, Gilbert Banamwana 1, Cary A Brown 3, Begoña Errasti-Ibarrondo 4
PMCID: PMC11100260  PMID: 35235471

Abstract

In 2020–2021, a qualitative study was undertaken using an interpretive description methodology to identify what triggers grief in the first 2 years following the death of a beloved family member, and to gain other helpful insights about grief triggers from bereaved Canadian adult volunteers. In that study, a purposive sampling method was used to select 10 bereaved Canadian adult volunteers for in-depth, semi-structured interviews. This paper reports on the humor findings, as revealed to be a particularly complex grief trigger for many participants, as well as a periodic way for most to manage or live with their grief. Participant quotes and an extended discussion are included to illustrate the importance of these humor findings in relation to grief, and to inform bereaved people, bereavement service providers, and the general public about both helpful aspects and some cautionary considerations about humor.

Keywords: grief, bereavement, grief trigger, humor, research, qualitative

When a beloved family member or friend dies, the resultant grief is typically very severe and long lasting, but it normally resolves over time, although significant grief episodes or grief waves will still occur with grief triggers (Breen & O'Connor, 2007; 2011; Nielsen et al., 2019; Wilson et al., 2018; 2020). Grief triggers is an under-appreciated and under-researched topic, with a recent broad-based scoping literature review finding only six research articles published on this subject in the last 20 years (Wilson et al., 2021). In 2020–21, a qualitative study was undertaken to identify what triggers grief in the first 2 years following the death of a beloved family member and to gain helpful insights about grief triggers from bereaved Canadian adult volunteers. That study revealed four themes that highlighted an individualized, unscheduled, and ultimately uncertain process of grief recovery: (a) my whole life is grief, (b) frequently hit by “hard-grief” triggers, (c) reaching a balance with grief and grief triggers to absorb the losses and reshape life, and (d) shifting to good and welcome memories, ones that keep the person alive. That study and its thematic findings are reported in a separate paper (manuscript in review).

This paper focuses on another significant finding from that study—the experience and impact of humor. Humor was revealed as a grief trigger for many participants, as well as a periodic way for most to cope with their grief. As humor is not often associated with grief, these humor findings were unexpected and therefore warranted additional focused attention. Consequently, a bereavement humor literature review was conducted and, using an iterative process, the interview protocol was revised to include additional questions on humor for all subsequent participants. The humor findings are presented below after an overview of the study and a description of the research methods are presented. Participant quotes are included to illustrate the meaning and relevance of these findings, and for informing bereaved people, bereavement service providers, and the general public about both helpful aspects of humor and some cautionary considerations.

Grief Trigger Background

Grief Trigger Literature Base

As indicated above, only six research articles published in the last 20 years that focused in whole or in part on grief triggers were found through searching multiple academic library databases (Wilson et al., 2021). These articles were helpful as they revealed that grief triggers are commonly experienced by bereaved people, they vary considerably from one person to another, and they are typically impactful for 1 year or more following the death (Carr et al., 2014; Hinton et al., 2013; Maguire et al., 2015; Meyer-Lee et al., 2020; Smith et al., 2020; Waldrop, 2007). This literature search also identified some non-research articles that focused on practical considerations, such as bereaved people consciously planning to avoid untimely grief triggers, and that people need to be prepared to support mourners who are experiencing a triggered grief wave (Bateson et al., 2020; Boddez, 2018; Cohen & Mannarino, 2011; Durst, 2003; Kinzie, 2001; Moayedoddin & Markowitz, 2015). Humor was not identified as a grief trigger in any of these research or non-research articles, nor was it identified as a method that could be used by grieving people to avoid, live with, or otherwise manage their grief. Moreover, none indicated that humor could be deliberately used by friends and family members or bereavement service providers as a way to help grieving people.

Research Methods

As described elsewhere (manuscript in review), a study was conducted in 2021 using an interpretive descriptive research design, which is an exploratory-descriptive qualitative inquiry method “designed to create ways of understanding clinical phenomena that yield applications implications” (Thorne et al., 2004, p. 1). The objective of interpretive descriptive studies “is a coherent conceptual description that taps thematic patterns and commonalities believed to characterize the phenomenon that is being studied and also accounts for the inevitable individual variations within them” (Thorne et al., 2004, p. 1).

The aim of our research study was to gain insight into the grief triggers experienced by adults over the first 2 years following the death of a beloved family member. Research ethics approval was gained from the lead researcher’s university research ethics board to seek and interview volunteers through advertisements placed in Canadian hospice/palliative and bereavement organizational websites. Thorne (2016) suggested that a purposive sampling method could be used in interpretive description to select key informants that may range between 5 and 30 in number. In total, 10 adults were each interviewed once after they were screened and found appropriate for this study. The interviews took place after a verbal consent for anonymous involvement was provided, with each person able to drop out of the study at any time before their interview transcript was assessed for findings. All participants reported severe initial grief and multiple grief triggers associated with the death of a beloved family member.

Anonymity was maintained throughout the verbal consent process, data gathering, and transcript analysis phases as identifying information was deleted by the Principal Investigator from the transcripts before anyone on the research team other than the Principal Investigator (who conducted the interviews) gained access to them. A semi-structured interview guide containing four questions was initially used to gather grief trigger data:

  • 1. What has triggered grief for you, so that you felt grief or had a wave of grief?

  • 2. How often have these grief episodes or waves happened, and have they become less or more common as time passed?

  • 3. What do you do, or have you done, about the episodes or waves of triggered grief when they happened?

  • 4. What have you done, if anything, to prevent or reduce grief triggers, or reduce the impact of your grief triggers?

Moreover, each participant was asked to talk about the person who had died and their relationship with that person, as well as the dying process and after-death activities. This step is in keeping with the wholistic orientation and broad contextual basis of interpretive description research (Thorne et al., 2004); and what we considered critical for gaining an understanding of their grief triggers. We tested this preliminary interview design with the first two participants, with the aim of refining our study if needed. During these first two interviews, the participants described the person who died as having had a good sense of humor or that they had enjoyed jokes and laughed a lot. Humor was also identified by these participants as being a grief trigger for them, as encountered humor reminded them of their now-deceased loved one, and this caused a grief episode or wave of grief to occur. These two participants indicated that they used humor at times to escape their grief, with short-term relief obtained through humorous television shows or other things that would be funny and could make them laugh. Consequently, recognizing that bereavement humor appeared to offer rich insights on the subject of grief triggers and grief in general, and consistent with the iterative process of this qualitative study, we took the following steps to ensure the phenomena of humor was included in the study.

Firstly, we carried out a scoping literature review of all published research articles on the topic of bereavement humor across multiple academic library databases. To learn what was generally known about bereavement humor, our search aimed to identify research reports that focused in whole or in part on the relationship between humor and bereavement (manuscript in review). In light of our preliminary findings from the first two interviews and what we gained from the 11 research articles retrieved in the scoping review, all subsequent interviews were modified to gain insights on bereavement humor, in addition to the originally sought information on grief triggers.

More specifically, if the topic of bereavement humor was not raised by the participants themselves, we asked three open-ended questions. Participants were specifically asked if the person who died had enjoyed or used humor, if humor was a grief trigger for the participant, and if they ever used humor to manage their grief. Select findings gained through the bereavement humor research literature review were also shared with these participants to capture their reactions to or thoughts on what these other studies had revealed about bereavement humor.

Data Analysis

To analyze the data, a constant comparative analysis method was applied to determine the meaning of data, identify codes, categories, and themes, using open coding to sort data (Teodoro et al., 2018; Thorne, 2016). The first two interviews also served in part to refine the interview questions and interview process. For those and each subsequent interview, the transcript was obtained, normally within a day of the interview, and following repeated deep reading, the interviews were coded by the interviewer, a manual process noting what appeared to be key concepts and any relationships among or between them. No computer software was used to aid this analysis. As each additional transcript was similarly obtained and manually assessed, select codes and their relationships were confirmed, with these codes grouped into categories and then themes. This interview and data assessment process continued until data saturation appeared to have been reached after eight participants were interviewed, with another two persons then interviewed to confirm the findings and state of data saturation.

A draft report of consolidated findings and the raw (anonymous) transcripts were then provided to a second senior member of the research team, with the coding and categorized findings mutually accepted after some wording revisions. Following this, junior members of the team were asked to assess and approve the consolidated findings and agree that data saturation had been reached. Data saturation is commonly determined to be the point when no new findings are being identified and no additional understandings of the collected data are occurring.

The initial primary analysis of interview data noted but did not feature humor as a distinct category or theme, in large part because humor was identified as only one of many possible individually-specific grief triggers. However, the secondary data analysis focused exclusively on the humor findings revealed findings that could be grouped into one of two pre-determined categorizations: (a) if humor was a grief trigger, and how or why it was a grief trigger, and (b) if humor was used by them to manage or live with their grief, and how or why it was used as such. As such, the secondary analysis was not inductive, but confirmatory of information that had not been anticipated from the background literature reviewed prior to the original study. To that end, the Principal Investigator and second senior researcher carried out a review of the interview transcripts seeking all findings of relevance for these two categories, and identifying quotes that would clarify or explain bereavement humor as a grief trigger or as a way of managing and living with grief.

Bereavement Humor Research Findings

As indicated in the primary grief trigger study report (manuscript in review), a total of eight women and two men were interviewed. These people were 45–81 years of age, and they lived in urban and rural places across Canada. The circumstances of death and dying that they described varied considerably; with two grieving a sister or brother’s death, 6 a father or mother’s death, and 2 a spousal death. These deaths occurred 6 months to nearly 2 years before the interview, and none of the participants (including those who were nearing the 2-year time point) reported that their grief had ended. All were still grieving, but each described a current state of periodic grief, as grief triggers would spark a grief episode or wave of grief.

As indicated above, humor was identified as a grief trigger by the first two interviewed participants. In addition to other grief triggers, their grief was triggered whenever they thought about or encountered humor, as this reminded them of their deceased loved one. Among the eight people subsequently interviewed, five more identified humor as being a grief trigger. Humor was also found to be a periodic method by which 8 of the 10 participants managed, temporarily avoided or escaped from, or otherwise lived with their grief. These humor findings are described below, with participant quotes to illustrate the significance and relevance of this information for providing direction in relation to informing bereaved people and bereavement service providers about some helpful aspects of humor and some cautionary considerations as well. Participants are identified as P1 through P10 for anonymity purposes, with other measures taken to ensure no participant can be identified.

Humor as a Trigger for Grief

Four participants stated, without prompting, that their family member had enjoyed humor, such as in relation to enjoying jokes, as well as their ability and propensity to share humorous stories. Three additional participants reported, when prompted, that their loved one had often laughed, was funny, and/or had enjoyed fun. This personal characteristic of their deceased loved one was among the most remembered, if not the most prized, characteristic according to these seven participants. For instance, one said, “She was a wonderful, warm, and funny person; what better way to remember her?” (P1). Another noted, “She was joyful and liked to have fun; that should be on her headstone” (P9). A third said:

“He was fun. We all miss him as he was a fun person to have around, he added to every family gathering. He is talked about now as a fun person but also one who was careful in how he used humor; that is part of his legacy, he was very positive and thoughtful in his approach to people, and he was really liked and appreciated for that” (P10).

However, humor was not universal and it appears that contextual factors related to both the decreased and the participant mediated the phenomenon. Specifically, the remaining three participants did not identify humor as a personal characteristic of their now-deceased family member. In one case, a daughter reported that her Mom had been so ill for so long with Alzheimer’s Disease that she could not remember what she was like before those long years of “watching and waiting for her to slowly and painfully die, she was not herself” (P6). Another participant, whose brother had died of cancer and had not lived with or near her for many years, indicated that her memories of him are as an older sister to a much younger brother; she did not know him well as an adult, and therefore, she could not comment on his ability to use or appreciate humor (P4). One of the participants was still too shocked by her mother’s sudden death 6 months before to focus on humor or anything other than the devastating sense of loss associated with this death (P8).

All of the seven participants who talked about humor being a personal characteristic of the deceased indicated that humor could trigger a grief episode or wave of grief. For instance, one participant reported that hearing a joke on the radio or when told a joke by friends in the first year after the death of her Mother would result in “really tough grief for me, it made me remember how she loved a good joke” (P3). Another participant said, “My husband really liked to tell funny stories and hear them too. When he died, I missed his funny ways; for a while, I would have a major grief spike whenever I thought about how much I missed our fun times together” (P10). Another participant who was grieving the death of his sister 18 months ago asserted:

“I never knew until she died, how much I appreciated her ability to laugh and make fun of things. We would always laugh on the phone or whenever we visited. She could tell outrageous stories. After she died, all I had to do was think about that and I would get a major wave of grief. I still get grief waves when I think of her and how much she made life fun for me” (P1).

These grief episodes or waves of grief arising with humor were initially very painful. However, for all but one of the seven participants, the humor they encountered, remembered, or thought about in their time of grief was not identified as distasteful, insensitive, or otherwise unwelcome. Six participants spoke instead about how helpful humor was to them personally in their time of grief. For instance, one participant who was grieving the death of her husband nearly 2 years ago declared:

“Humor is what made it possible for me to live, I looked forward to the times I could laugh or smile; I could get a break from my grief. I even started searching for humor, every day I looked for funny stories or cartoon jokes, so each day I could laugh and be lifted out of my grief” (P10).

Another said, “Mom died and I miss her terribly still. I know she is up there smiling down on me and telling me to go out and have fun; we had a lot of fun together and so I know she wants me to have fun and to live my life now without chronic sorrow” (P9).

In contrast, one of the seven participants who reported on humor said she experienced “inappropriate” humor in the first year following her husband’s death, with this humor triggering significant “avoidable” grief (P2). Describing her husband as “someone much less serious than me” (P2), she explained that she did not like people to use humor in her presence after his death:

“(Humor) reminded me of him, as he liked to joke around, and I am in hard grief. Too much is reminding me of him, and I have to live here in our house but without him now. I have to accept he is dead. Life moves on. No one can help us. Grief is something you go through alone” (P2).

She recognized that her friends and family members had been trying to help her by telling her funny stories and by advising her to watch comedies on television because they “cared about me and thought that would help me, but I was not ready to laugh or be happy” (P2). She reported that although her husband had been funny, she did not use humor much herself. She did not feel like having fun over the past year. She did not want to laugh or be happy; she said she was grieving “as expected” in the first year following his death, and that this year was supposed to be a time of “hard grief” (P2) for her.

Another difference among the seven participants who reported that humor triggered grief, is that three of them identified humor as having become a positive memory trigger, although it had been a painful grief trigger earlier in their grief trajectory. All three were nearing the second anniversary of the death of their loved one, and they indicated that they could recall the deceased person now without this always sparking painful grief episodes. For instance, one said that humorous movies or stories told now by friends cause her to think about her deceased mother without pain, as she “loved to have fun, she was a lot of fun. So it is nice to hear a joke, as I think Mom would like that one, and I can remember how much she liked a joke” (P3). Another participant, whose Mother had died, reported that:

“(She) had been a funny person who laughed a lot until she became ill and life got to be very tough for her. Now when I hear a joke or see something funny, I can remember and appreciate Mom as she once was, and be happy that her suffering is over and that for most of her life, her life was good. She got a lot out of life. She was the one who made her life enjoyable; a good lesson for us all” (P7).

The third participant who experienced “overwhelming” (P1) grief at first, reported that he was beginning to experience positive memory triggers 18 months after his sister died:

“Hearing a laugh often triggered tough grief. But I am finding now that good memories, happy memories, and good thoughts about her are instead being triggered. I so loved to hear her laugh and to laugh with her. Laughing is a wonderful way to remember her. It honors her life and respects her. Laughing is what defined her. I can live with that and I can take comfort in that” (P1).

Humor as a Method of Managing Grief

Among all 10 participants, eight indicated that humor could temporarily lift them out of their grief, distract them from their grief, or otherwise help them in beneficial ways. Of these, five deliberately used humor or actively sought humor to reduce their grief and often also to reduce the grief of others, such as one participant who got others to laugh to “lighten the mood” (P1). Another participant talked about finding something funny to “bring joy” into her life, so that she could smile and “feel warm” when thinking of her brother, a “very special person” (P4). In her case, in addition to other humorous matters, every time she noticed a plane overhead, she would remember and laugh over fun times on a holiday they had together (P4). Another participant sought to have fun every day, with this consciously done because she wanted to ensure she did not continually feel sad and become “stuck” in serious grief over her mother’s death (P9). She shared that her mother had always liked jokes and liked to have fun, and hence, when she was having fun now she can recall her Mother without the painful memories of her last days when she was suffering and dying from cancer (P9). This daughter said that she often remembers the fun trips they had and the enjoyable times playing cards or doing other pleasant things together (P9). She thought her mother had helped her to be a happy person. Humor was not only a way for her to escape grief, but a way of recalling her mother with fondness and appreciation (P9).

Similarly, another participant said that her mother was “a silly, funny, upbeat person all her life” and that humor in the house before she died was “common” (P3). She described planning a party for her mother’s last night alive, a party with good friends and family present, with songs and good stories being told, and with much humor shared among all those present (P3). This last-night party was possible because she died with Medical Assistance in Dying (MAiD), and hence, the timing and circumstances of her death were known, allowing them to plan ahead for her death. Her mother was actively involved in planning this party, described by this participant as:

“(A) great party. This was the right thing to do, it honored her as it was a fun party, as that was normal for her, and she enjoyed it. It allowed us to be happy with her, and that helped us the next day (when MAiD occurred) and afterward” (P3).

This daughter has since appreciated humor as she finds humor is “uplifting; it can raise my spirits” (P3). Parties with friends and family are now planned as a way to reduce her “sad grief,” with humor seen by her as a way of “recovering” from her grief (P3).

Another of the five participants who deliberately used humor said that she actively seeks funny cartoons or funny pictures every day, as they make her laugh and lighten her mood (P10). This participant advised that she learned how helpful humor was when 3 months had passed following her husband’s sudden death and someone emailed her a cartoon joke (P10). She noted that she could not remember what the joke was about, but it had made her laugh out loud, and thereafter, she often sought and sent funny cartoons to her friends and family members. She explained that she did this because she knew they were also grieving her husband’s death. The time spent in finding cartoon jokes to send to others meant that she would often laugh out loud during that process, giving herself a “break” from her grief (P10). Over time, she realized that this activity of searching for and sending out cartoon jokes also reassured her friends and family that she was “surviving and not downing” in her grief (P10). Moreover, sending jokes also meant that other people would reciprocate by sending her funny stories and jokes, which she really appreciated and enjoyed. Furthermore, she was able to recall after the first anniversary of her husband’s death that he had been “a jolly, happy, fun person to be around,” which encouraged her to continue using humor to provoke positive memories of him (P10). At the time of the interview, she was approaching the second anniversary of his death, and planning to do some fun-filled or enjoyable activities on that day, as she felt that “he would not want me to stay sad or be beaten down by his death” (P10).

Some of the participants also shared that they appreciated it when humorous occasions or events occurred spontaneously or “out of the blue, so you are caught off guard and you can just laugh” (P9). Not only did these participants recognize humor when it occurred, but they also knew that they would obtain some benefit from engaging in it. They could use it to escape their grief, even if that break would offer only temporary respite. For instance, one participant claimed that in the first year following his sister’s death, “humor was a great distraction, it could get me out of grief” (P1). When asked to elaborate, he said:

“I think humor is a good short-term distraction, but it has to be spontaneous, I could not make it happen. Even now, nearing two years after her death, I appreciate hearing something funny as that reminds me of her and it distracts me from my grief” (P1).

Another participant talked about his father being “the ultimate prankster” and “the ultimate jokester,” with jokes welcome from others now, but he also noted that he did not personally plan to tell any jokes himself as he did not want to be thought of as belittling his father (P5). He pointed out that he especially welcomed jokes about dogs, as his father had always had dogs and “they were always doing something funny and Dad was always telling funny stories about them” (P5). Any dog-related jokes now would provoke a smile or laugh, and some good memories about his Dad; however, he cautioned that “humor is okay, but you can’t make it happen” (P5). Moreover, he acknowledged that:

“Seeing dogs, particularly big dogs as Dad had big dogs, can trigger sad grief, but grief triggers can be good for us, they can cause us to remember the other person when we have tried to move on and forget them. They help us grieve, a normal and natural thing” (P5).

In his case, big dog sightings and dog-related humor were sad grief triggers at times and good or happy memory triggers at other times, with this difference said to be depending on how soon it was after his father had died and what kind of a day he was having. Humor could be hurtful or helpful; but both were important to him as indicated by this comment about humor helping to “move me along the grief recovery journey. You can’t escape grief; you have to live through it and with it” (P5).

Some other participants also did not use humor to escape their grief, but instead to trigger and feel painful grief. For instance, one participant deliberately thought of something funny or chose to watch a funny movie (his sister enjoyed both) to provoke a hard grief episode at home in the first year after his sister’s death, as that grief episode would occur at the right place and right time (P1). He consciously triggered a “hard grief spell” when he was alone, so he could “safely” cry and not have to talk to anyone or be seen by anyone (P1). This timing was important, as he had gone back to work and he did not want to cry at work or be seen by others there as being upset and perhaps incapable of doing his work (P1). Another participant said that she never tried to escape her grief or avoid hard grief triggers, as she wanted to “keep (her) Mom alive” (P7). Humor was capable of triggering her grief, with humor and other triggers described as a “punch in the gut” (P7). She spoke of her mother’s birthday, which had occurred only a few days before the interview, and recalled that her mother often did “happy dances” on her birthday, laughing as she danced. This participant said she did a happy dance on her mother’s birthday, even as it caused her significant pain, but it also brought back welcome memories of her “happy, dancing, and laughing Mom” (P7).

Discussion of Findings

Humor as a Grief Trigger

This qualitative study involving interviews of grieving mid to later life adults, revealed humor was identified by the majority of them as being a grief trigger. Our secondary analysis of transcripts revealed they experienced grief episodes whenever they thought about humor or encountered humor, as this remembrance or exposure served to recall their deceased loved one to them and this recall sparked a grief episode. This finding was not unexpected, as any attribute that a person was defined by before their death could be used after their death as a remembrance of them. One could say then that humor should be expected to trigger grief whenever the deceased was known for having been humorous or for having enjoying humor. Furthermore, when past humorous activities that were enjoyed with the deceased person are recalled, one should expect grief to be triggered.

However, as indicated above, none of the previously published grief trigger evidence-based reports identified humor as a grief trigger. We speculate that there are several possible explanations for this shortfall, including the possibility that humor was not identified because only six research reports published in the last 20 years were found for review (Wilson et al., 2021). Moreover, few reports described qualitative studies, ones featuring an emic or participant viewpoint, where personal perspectives and lived experiences would have been captured and understood without bias by the research team. Past research teams may also have been comprised of younger people and others who have never felt significant grief; a distinct possibility, as older people are much more likely to have felt major bereavement grief at least once, if not multiple times (Wilson et al., 2018). Moreover, the commonly held view of grief as being a difficult and painful, if not morbidly or mortally serious, condition could have influenced past research plans that did not include efforts to identify bereavement humor. It is also likely that this view may have led to humor-related findings being disregarded if discovered over the course of a research study.

Humor as a Method to Manage or Live with Grief

The second major finding is that humor was a periodic way for most participants to temporarily escape from or otherwise manage their grief. This finding was not entirely surprising, given that humor has long been recognized as a common and important social activity; accepted across all peoples, cultures, and historical periods (Michel, 2017; Warren & McGraw, 2016). Humor has also been found to be a healthy activity, as it can reduce stress (Nezu et al., 1988), lift the spirits of ill people (Beach & Prickett, 2017), and speed healing or enhance recovery (Baik & Lee, 2014). Moreover, the bereavement literature review identified four studies, conducted in highly developed and Westernized countries, that found bereaved people often use humor in their time of grief and for a wide variety of reasons (Cadell, 2007; Donnelly, 1999; Lund et al., 2009; Ong et al., 2004). Yet, humor does not appear to have been recognized as a possible self-help technique for bereaved people to use as a viable means of coping with their grief. Nor has it been seen as an appropriate supportive measure to help someone who is experiencing acute or resolving grief. However, humor is highly contextual and so great care must be taken as individual people view humor differently, rendering it inappropriate at times, and some forms of humor may not be funny or entertaining. However, this secondary analysis reveals it is clear that the phenomenon of bereavement humor should be studied and potentially considered as a grief support or grief reduction measure.

Limitations

One major limitation of this study is that our research participants were English-speaking (and thus primarily Anglophone), middle-aged and older Canadians, who volunteered to be interviewed about the grief triggers they experienced or encountered within the first 2 years following the death of a beloved family member. While recall issues should not be present, cultural and age-based factors pertaining to the social acceptance of and attitudes toward humor are likely to be reflected in these findings. The bereavement humor literature review revealed differences across English, American, Australian, and Canadian grieving people in their use of or views about humor, differences that appear to reflect societal norms and expectations (manuscript in review). In some countries, bereavement humor is more likely to be used and appreciated, over other countries where it is less acceptable and therefore less likely to be used. Moreover, it may be more socially acceptable and expected for younger grieving people to continue to enjoy life and have fun, while older grieving people may be more socially constrained in relation to humor. In short, it should be anticipated that the attitudes and behaviors of grieving adults and those attempting to support them, will be impacted by societal if not also family-specific views of humor.

The use of humor also appears to have temporal considerations, as one participant did not think humor was appropriate in the first year following the death of her husband. Social customs around grief have often emphasized time-related milestones, such as not dating or remarrying in the first year following a spouse’s death. However, as this study revealed other participants appreciated humor in the first year, personal preferences need to be considered. One participant recognized that she was not a light-hearted or naturally humorous person, and humor was not something that she would normally use or appreciate being used in her presence. Moreover, some other participants indicated that humor was a way, not to lighten their grief or temporarily escape from their grief, but instead to trigger a hard grief episode. These findings demonstrate that humor is highly idiosyncratic and so great care must be taken in advising grieving people and people around them about humor.

Of particular note is that bereavement humor may not seem appropriate or even possible to people who have never experienced major grief, as commonly held societal views of grief do not typically include humor. Indeed, this study found some grieving people do not appreciate humor or find humor appropriate in their time of grief. This viewpoint of grief, essentially a time of intense sorrow and personal suffering, is likely to be a research barrier to gaining an informed understanding of how people use humor to help them live with their grief after the death of a beloved person. Moreover, it could be a barrier to considering humor as a form of therapy by and for grieving people. This is not an inconsequential matter, as deaths are increasing in number worldwide. For instance, nearly 300,000 annual deaths occur now in Canada (Statistics, 2020), a substantial increase over past years and with continued increases expected with population growth and population aging. Further, it is crucially important to recognize that 10 people on average grieve each death (Irish Hospice Foundation, n. d.). The number of people who are impacted by grief is therefore high now and will continue to rise in the future, emphasizing the importance of understanding grief triggers and appropriate strategies such as humor to mitigate them.

Conclusion

This qualitative research investigation, focused on exploring and describing grief triggers, identified humor as being a grief trigger for most participants. Many participants recounted how the person who died was remembered as having often enjoyed or used humor. Most participants also indicated that they periodically used humor to manage, escape, or otherwise live with their grief. These findings highlight the phenomenon of humor as being both a grief trigger and a possible form of therapy for and by grieving people. Although humor should be considered a potential common component of self-help grief therapy or formal and informal grief support, some cautionary considerations about humor were also discovered. Humor may be untimely and unwelcome. Moreover, humor can trigger painful grief episodes. Humor is therefore not a simple remedy to apply or to advise grieving people to use, despite some evidence of its benefits. Further research is needed to understand its role and its potential in grief management or resolution.

Acknowledgments

The authors appreciate the research reports and other articles written on the topic of grief and humor.

Author Biographies

Donna M. Wilson is a full professor who studies aging and end-of-life topics, including bereavement.

Michelle Knox is a PhD student whose research interests lie in patient-centred health systems and end-of-life studies, including assisted dying services.

Gilbert Banamwana is an assistant lecturer at the University of Rwanda, College of Medicine and Health Sciences, School of Nursing and Midwifery. He is also a Ph.D. student at the University of Alberta, Faculty of Nursing. His research areas include nursing empowerment, quality nursing care, and mental health.

Cary A. Brown is a full professor who has practiced clinically and taught in Canada, the United Kingdom and Saudi Arabia. Her research areas include pain meaning construction, knowledge translation, non-pharmacological interventions for sleep and the human-animal bond in relation to health.

Begoña Errasti-Ibarrondo is an associate professor in the Faculty of Nursing, University of Navarra. She teaches courses on pathophysiology and the nurse-patient relationship at the end of life. Her research interests are focused on person-centred care, palliative care, and the phenomenology of practice.

Footnotes

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding: The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

ORCID iDs

Donna M. Wilson https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4860-8440

Michelle Knox https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8771-6287

Cary A. Brown https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5282-4170

Begoña Errasti-Ibarrondo https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1359-3330

References

  1. Baik S., Lee D.-Y. (2014). The effects of laughter therapy on perceived health status and helplessness in the elderly. International Journal of Applied Engineering Research, 9(21), 8399-8406. PMID: 25553332. [Google Scholar]
  2. Bateson K., Lees J., Proctor G., Shloim N. (2020. published online June 1). Fear of losing it: An auto-ethnographic case study exploring re-triggered loss experiences during psychotherapy training. British Journal of Guidance & Counselling, 49(5), 689–700. 10.1080/03069885.2020.1772461 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  3. Beach W. A., Prickett E. (2017). Laughter, humor, and cancer: Delicate moments and poignant interactional circumstances. Journal of Health Communication, 32(7), 791–802. 10.1080/10410236.2016.1172291 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Boddez Y. (2018). The presence of your absence: A conditioning theory of grief. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 106(July), 18-27. 10.1016/j.brat.2018.04.006. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Breen L. J., O’Connor M. (2007). The fundamental paradox in the grief literature: A critical reflection. OMEGA-Journal of Death and Dying, 55(3), 199–218. 10.2190/OM.55.3.c [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Breen L. J., O’Connor M. (2011). Family and social networks after bereavement: Experiences of support, change and isolation. Journal of Family Therapy, 33(1), 98–120. 10.1111/j.1467-6427.2010.00495.x [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  7. Cadell S. (2007). The sun always comes out after it rains: Understanding posttraumatic growth in HIV caregivers. Health & Social Work, 32(3), 169–176. 10.1093/hsw/32.3.169 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Carr D., Sonnega J., Nesse R. M., House J. S. (2014). Do special occasions trigger psychological distress among older bereaved spouses? An empirical assessment of clinical wisdom. The Journals of Gerontology: Series B, Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences, 69(1), 113–122. 10.1093/geronb/gbt061 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Cohen J. A., Mannarino A. P. (2011). Supporting children with traumatic grief: What educators need to know. School Psychology International, 32(2), 117–131. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F0143034311400827 [Google Scholar]
  10. Donnelly S. (1999). Folklore associated with dying in the west of Ireland. Palliative Medicine, 13(1), 57–62. 10.1191/026921699675359029 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Durst N. (2003). Child-survivors of the holocaust: Age-specific traumatization and the consequences for therapy. American Journal of Psychotherapy, 57(4), 499–518. 10.1176/appi.psychotherapy.2003.57.4.499 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Hinton D. E., Peou S., Joshi S., Nickerson A., Simon N. M. (2013). Normal grief and complicated bereavement among traumatized Cambodian refugees: Cultural context and the central role of dreams of the dead. Culture, Medicine, and Psychiatry, 37(3), 427–464. 10.1007/s11013-013-9324-0 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Irish Hospice Foundation . (2020). Grieving the death of someone close. https://hospicefoundation.ie/bereavement-2-2/coping-with-loss/grieving-the-death-of-someone-close/ [Google Scholar]
  14. Kinzie J. D. (2001). Psychotherapy for massively traumatized refugees: The therapist variable. American Journal of Psychotherapy, 55(4), 475–490. 10.1176/appi.psychotherapy.2001.55.4.475 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. Lund D. A., Utz R., Caserta M. S., De Vries B. (2009). Humor, laughter, and happiness in the daily lives of recently bereaved spouses. OMEGA-Journal of Death and Dying, 58(2), 87–105. 10.2190/OM.58.2.a [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. Maguire M., Light A., Kuppermann M., Dalton V. K., Steinauer J. E., Kerns J. L. (2015). Grief after second-trimester termination for fetal anomaly: A qualitative study. Contraception, 91(3), 234–239. 10.1016/j.contraception.2014.11.015 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  17. Meyer-Lee C. B., Jackson J. B., Gutierrez N. S. (2020). Long-term experiencing of parental death during childhood: A qualitative analysis. The Family Journal, 28(3), 247–256. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F1066480720926582 [Google Scholar]
  18. Michel A. (2017). The science of humor is no laughing matter. APS Observer, 30(4). https://www.psychologicalscience.org/observer/the-science-of-humor-is-no-laughing-matter [Google Scholar]
  19. Moayedoddin B., Markowitz J. C. (2015). Abnormal grief: Should we consider a more patient-centered approach? American Journal of Psychotherapy, 69(4), 361–378. 10.1176/appi.psychotherapy.2015.69.4.361 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  20. Nezu A. M., Nezu C. M., Blissett S. E. (1988). Sense of humor as a moderator of the relation between stressful events and psychological distress: A prospective analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54(3), 520–525. 10.1037//0022-3514.54.3.520 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  21. Nielsen M. K., Carlsen A. H., Neergaard M. A., Bidstrup P. E., Guldin M. B. (2019). Looking beyond the mean in grief trajectories: A prospective, population-based cohort study. Social Science & Medicine, 232(July), 460-469. 10.1016/j.socscimed.2018.10.007. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  22. Ong A. D., Bergeman C. S., Bisconti T. L. (2004). The role of daily positive emotions during conjugal bereavement. The Journals of Gerontology: Series B, Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences, 59(4), P168–P176. 10.1093/geronb/59.4.p168 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  23. Smith K. V., Rankin H., Ehlers A. (2020). A qualitative analysis of loss-related memories after cancer loss: A comparison of bereaved people with and without prolonged grief disorder. European Journal of Psychotraumatology, 11(1), 1789325. 10.1080/20008198.2020.1789325 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  24. Statistics Canada. (2020, November 26). Deaths, by age group and sex. https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/t1/tbl1/en/tv.action?pid=1310070901.
  25. Teodoro I. P. P., Rebouças V. C., Thorne S. E., de Souza L. S. A., Alencar A. M. P. G. (2018). Interpretive description: A viable methodological approach for nursing research. Escola Anna Nery, 22(3), Article e20170287. 10.1590/2177-9465-ean-2017-0287. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  26. Thorne S. E. (2016). Interpretive description: Qualitative research for applied practice (2nd ed.). Routledge. [Google Scholar]
  27. Thorne S., Kirkham S. R., O'Flynn-Magee K. (2004). The analytic challenge in interpretive description. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 3(1), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F160940690400300101 [Google Scholar]
  28. Waldrop D. P. (2007). Caregiver grief in terminal illness and bereavement: A mixed-methods study. Health & Social Work, 32(3), 197–206. 10.1093/hsw/32.3.197 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  29. Warren C., McGraw A. P. (2016). Differentiating what is humorous from what is not. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 110(3), 407–430. 10.1037/pspi0000041 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  30. Wilson D. M., Cohen J., MacLeod R., Houttekier D. (2018). Bereavement grief: A population-based foundational evidence study. Death Studies, 42(7), 463–469. 10.1080/07481187.2017.1382609 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  31. Wilson D. M., Darko E. M., Kusi-Appiah E., Roh S. J., Ramic A., Errasti-Ibarrondo B. (2020). What exactly is “complicated” grief? A scoping research literature review to understand its risk factors and prevalence. OMEGA-Journal of Death and Dying, December, 0030222820977305, 10.1177/0030222820977305. 33259275 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  32. Wilson D. M., Underwood L., Errasti-Ibarrondo B. (2021). A scoping research literature review to map the evidence on grief triggers. Social Science & Medicine, 282(August), 114109. 10.1016/j.socscimed.2021.114109. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Omega are provided here courtesy of SAGE Publications

RESOURCES