Study Says Comedians Have Psychotic Personality Traits—Here’s What Some Comedians Have To Say About That

<a href="http://www.shutterstock.com/pic-95544988/stock-photo-crazy-businessman-making-funny-faces.html?src=h7bbT5StQyoz6BTa0MXmSg-1-58">ollyy</a>/Shutterstock

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.


If you’ve ever seen footage of comedian Bill Hicks taking on a heckler, you might have thought to yourself, “Wow, that was pretty psychotic.”

Well, according to a recent study published in the British Journal of Psychiatry, you weren’t that far off. For the study, which is titled, “Psychotic traits in comedians,” researchers recruited 523 comedians (404 male and 119 female, most of whom were amateurs) from the United States, Australia, and the United Kingdom. The researchers determined that comedians scored significantly higher on four types of psychotic personality traits compared to a control group of individuals who had non-artistic jobs. The study focuses on two major categories of psychosis—bipolar disorder and schizophrenia—and examines impulsive non-conformity.

“The results of this study substantially confirmed our expectation that comedians would behave like other creative groups in showing a high level of psychotic personality traits,” the authors wrote. “They did so across all the domains sampled by the questionnaire we used, from schizoid and schizophrenic-like characteristics through to manic-depressive features.”

The 6-page report also highlights English comedian and actor Stephen Fry, who has been diagnosed with bipolar disorder and attempted suicide in 2012.

However, it’s important to point out that the authors of the study aren’t saying all famous or successful comedians are automatically pathologically bipolar or pathologically schizophrenic, or even that they necessarily require treatment. In other words, labeling someone’s personality traits as in the realm of “psychotic” may sound a bit scary—but it doesn’t mean that person is a psychopath or a menace to society.

Still, some professional comedians aren’t big fans of this. According to Steve Hofstetter, a former Sports Illustrated columnist and one of most booked comic acts on the American college circuit, a large number of comedians have been taking to social media to share and mock the study in the past couple of days. “The new study claiming comedians have psychotic personality traits was written by a troll who talks to me from inside my butthole,” Adam Newman wrote, for instance. Hofstetter has a much harsher take.

“The idea that it’s a news story that comedians are rebels is the equivalent of saying it’s a news story that people who spend their lives conducting studies never get laid,” the Los Angeles-based comedian says. “And if you look at the actual results of the study, it shows that actors were not that far off from comedians at all. So this was clearly a study conducted on the hypothesis that comedians have mental problems.”

Rob Delaney, the author and stand-up comedian who was named Mitt Romney’s “Twitter nemesis” during the 2012 election, was similarly critical of the comedians-are-psychotic study—but he was significantly less pissed about it.

“My honest opinion is that piece really has no effect on me,” Delaney wrote in an email. “Plus, [the study] defangs itself when it says, ‘we’re not saying they’re the dangerous kind of psychopath,’ so really I just think it’s an attention-grabber and not actually a substantive piece of information. Do you need a psychological kink of some kind to function as a comedian, particularly one that makes a living at it? Yes. Is that kink psychosis or close to psychosis? I don’t know and I don’t really care. But perhaps that means I’m a psychopath? Maybe. I know I brutally pursue my goals regardless of whatever the hell else is happening in the world and anticipate success in all my endeavors, even when that feeling is unfounded. So that’s what I think.”

(Lewis Black, Joan Rivers, and Gallagher did not respond to requests for comment.)

So whatever the researchers’ intentions, perhaps their new report hasn’t won them any new friends in the community of stand-up comics. Hell, at least they didn’t author a study telling comedians that they were going to drop dead at a young age.

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate