Effect of native language on emoji interpretation

Although emoji interpretation has been widely studied, there is less that has provided a systematic investigation of how interpretation may be influenced by native language of the receiver. If emoji have key psycholinguistic functions (which we are pretty sure they do), it makes sense that their interpretation will be bound by linguistic and cultural influences.

Led by dissertation student Aleks Bogdeva, we replicated the work of Scheffler and Nenchev (2024) but specifically sought to compare English and Bulgarian speaking samples. As a Bulgarian native, Aleks had a passionate interest in these nuances, which was a significant drive for the research focus. In parallel, there was a related project collecting data on Italian samples which has given us three distinct native language groups to study. We focused on affective dimensions (perceptions relating to the pleasantness, clarity etc of emoji) as well as the semantic associations people afforded to emoji.

A particularly relevant theoretical framework for understanding why differences in affective and semantic interpretation of emoji between languages may emerge is Hall's (1976) distinction between high-context and low-context cultures. In low-context cultures, communication tends to be explicit and direct, with meaning conveyed primarily through verbal content. In high-context cultures, communication relies more heavily on implicit cues, shared context, and nonverbal signals – meaning that what is left unsaid can carry as much weight as what is stated.

Our native English speakers were primarily sourced from the United Kingdom; a widely classified low-context, individualist culture, scoring high on Hofstede's (2001) individualism dimension and low on power distance. Eastern European countries such as Bulgaria, by contrast, exhibit a profile more consistent with high-context communication: low individualism, high power distance, and high uncertainty avoidance (Hofstede, 2001). We know that these individualism–collectivism differences directly influence communication style, with individuals from collectivist cultures relying more heavily on implicit and indirect cues (Gudykunst et al., 1996). Given that emoji are inherently ambiguous, nonverbal, and context-dependent, it is plausible that individuals from high-context cultural backgrounds may engage with them, and interpret them differently to those from low-context cultures.

We are currently integrating our findings across our various samples to answer the following types of research questions:

1. To what extent are there differences in affective dimensions of emoji between native language groups?

2. To what extent are there different semantic associations of emoji between native language groups?

3. Does semantic variance between language groups explain any observed differences in affective perceptions of emoji?

To find out more, and to keep up to date with our findings from this project, you can discover more here

.