Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39165767›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in psychology2024

Is there an intergenerational discrepancy in the comprehension and aesthetic preference regarding emoji usage? Evidence from WeChat.

Donghang Wu, Xinxiu Zhang, Xinjia Zhang

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Donghang WuSchool of Fine Arts, Northeast Normal University, Changchun, China.
Xinxiu ZhangSchool of Design and Art, Jingdezhen Ceramic University, Jingdezhen, China.
Xinjia ZhangSchool of Arts and Design, Yanshan University, Qinhuangdao, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Emojis are widely used on social media, blogs, and instant messaging to express users' feelings. However, in everyday interactions, the same emoji often has different interpretations and aesthetic preferences among different age groups. This can lead to communication barriers and misunderstandings. Based on social identity theory, this study uses WeChat, a social platform popular in China, to analyze intergenerational differences in emoji understanding and preferences through a questionnaire survey. The results indicate: (1) There are significant intergenerational differences in the usage habits, interpretation, and aesthetic preferences of emojis. (2) Middle-aged and elderly tend to interpret goodbye emoji symbols as simple emotional expressions, such as "goodbye" or "see you later," while younger-age groups lean towards more complex emotions and social intentions, such as "speechlessness" and "end of friendship." (3) Younger-age groups use emojis frequently and with a wide variety, whereas middle-aged and elderly groups use emojis less frequently and with limited variety. Younger individuals' aesthetic preferences for emojis lean towards humor, conflict, and narrative, whereas middle-aged and elderly groups prefer emojis with bright colors and everyday greetings typical of their generation. Based on research findings, we believe that social identity theory provides a framework for understanding how individuals establish their identities through interactions with specific social groups. This study is beneficial for identifying the comprehension and aesthetic biases in emoji usage across generations, sheds light on the broader implications of social identity theory in digital communication contexts, and promotes friendly social interactions in real-time communication applications.

Indexed as

aesthetic preferencescomprehension biasesemojisgenerational interactionWeChat

Identifiers

PMID39165767
PMCPMC11333970

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.