Emojis, as emerging paralinguistic cues in computer-mediated communication, are increasingly integrated into daily digital interactions and are known to be efficiently stored as targets in working memory (WM). Despite their pervasive use, the cognitive mechanisms underlying the filtering of emojis as distractors remains unclear. The present study combined behavioral measures and event-related potentials to investigate how emojis are filtered in WM. Participants performed a WM task in which emojis served as distractors. The results showed that emojis, compared with other types of distractors, could be efficiently filtered, as evidenced by reduced unnecessary storage (US) and lower contralateral delay activity (CDA) amplitudes. Moreover, a positive correlation between US and CDA emerged only in the emoji distractor condition, especially among high-frequency emoji users (r = 0.517, p = 0.023), suggesting that prior experience with emojis modulates the link between behavioral and neural indices of filtering. These findings provide preliminary evidence that emojis can be effectively filtered in WM and underscore the modulatory role of usage experience in shaping cognitive processing during digital communication.
DresnerE, HerringSC. Functions of the nonverbal in CMC: Emoticons and illocutionary force. Commun Theory2010;20(3):249–268; doi: 10.1111/j.1468-2885.2010.01362.x
2.
KerslakeL, WegerifR. The semiotics of emoji: The rise of visual language in the age of the internet. MaC2017;5(4):75–78; doi: 10.17645/mac.v5i4.1041
3.
Dalle NogareL, CerriA, ProverbioAM. Emojis are comprehended better than facial expressions, by male participants. Behav Sci (Basel)2023;13(3):278; doi: 10.3390/bs13030278
4.
KayeLK, Rodriguez-CuadradoS, MaloneSA, et al.How emotional are emoji?: Exploring the effect of emotional valence on the processing of emoji stimuli. Comput Hum Behav2021;116:106648; doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2020.106648
5.
KayeLK, DarkerGM, Rodriguez-CuadradoS, et al.The emoji spatial stroop task: Exploring the impact of vertical positioning of emoji on emotional processing. Comput Hum Behav2022;132:107267; doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2022.107267
6.
PavalanathanU, EisensteinJ. More emojis, less :) the competition for paralinguistic function in microblog writing. FM2016; doi: 10.5210/fm.v21i11.6879
7.
ChatzichristosC, MoranteM, AndreadisN, et al.Emojis influence autobiographical memory retrieval from reading words: An fMRI-based study. PLoS One2020;15(7):e0234104; doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0234104
8.
JinY, DengC, WuP, et al.Emoji image symbol’s social function and application. Adv Psychol Sci2022;30(5):1062–1077; doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1042.2022.01062
9.
LiY, ZhangD, LiuX, et al.Processing facial emojis as social information: Evidence from visual working memory for facial emojis, simple shapes, human faces, and their relations to theory of mind. Comput Hum Behav2024;153:108106; doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2023.108106
10.
ChevallierC, KohlsG, TroianiV, et al.The social motivation theory of autism. Trends Cogn Sci2012;16(4):231–239; doi: 10.1016/j.tics.2012.02.007
11.
LiuH, GaoB, WangX. An empirical study on the communication and usage psychology of emoji in Wechat. OBM Neurobiol2022;06(04):1–18; doi: 10.21926/obm.neurobiol.2204142
12.
GeorgeDAS, GeorgeASH, BaskarDT. Emoji unite: Examining the rise of emoji as an international language bridging cultural and generational divides. Partn Univers Int Innov J2023;1(4):183–204; doi: 10.5281/zenodo.8280356
13.
BaiQ, DanQ, MuZ, et al.A systematic review of emoji: Current research and future perspectives. Front Psychol2019;10:2221; doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2019.02221
14.
WeissmanB, TannerD. A strong wink between verbal and emoji-based irony: How the brain processes ironic emojis during language comprehension. PLoS One2018;13(8):e0201727; doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0201727
15.
KutsuzawaG, UmemuraH, EtoK, et al.Classification of 74 facial emoji’s emotional states on the valence-arousal axes. Sci Rep2022;12(1):398; doi: 10.1038/s41598-021-04357-7
16.
DaiY, GaoX, LengW, et al.Congruent or conflicting? The interaction between emoji and textual sentence is not that simple!. Heliyon2024;10(12):e32984; doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e32984
17.
KhalidM, BukhariSF, MaqsoodM. The impact of emojis on text perception: A descriptive analysis of WhatsApp users. Pak Lang Humanit Rev2024;8(3):326–338; doi: 10.47205/plhr.2024(8-III)30
18.
NguyenGBH. How to Be Impolite with Emojis: A Corpus Analysis of Vietnamese Social Media Posts. PhD Thesis. Purdue University Graduate School; 2023.
19.
Dalle NogareL, ProverbioAM. Emojis vs. facial expressions: An electrical neuroimaging study on perceptual recognition. Soc Neurosci2023;18(1):46–64; doi: 10.1080/17470919.2023.2203949
20.
KeiferCM, DichterGS, McPartlandJC, et al.Social motivation in autism: Gaps and directions for measurement of a putative core construct. Behav Brain Sci2019;42:e95; doi: 10.1017/S0140525X18002418
21.
LogieR.Working memory: Beyond Baddeley and Hitch. SAGE Publications; 2015; pp. 86–104
22.
BaddeleyA. Working memory: Looking back and looking forward. Nat Rev Neurosci2003;4(10):829–839; doi: 10.1038/nrn1201
23.
VogelEK, MachizawaMG. Neural activity predicts individual differences in visual working memory capacity. Nature2004;428(6984):748–751; doi: 10.1038/nature02447
24.
VogelEK, McColloughAW, MachizawaMG. Neural measures reveal individual differences in controlling access to working memory. Nature2005;438(7067):500–503; doi: 10.1038/nature04171
25.
YeC, XuQ, LiuQ, et al.The impact of visual working memory capacity on the filtering efficiency of emotional face distractors. Biol Psychol2018;138:63–72; doi: 10.1016/j.biopsycho.2018.08.009
26.
YeC, XuQ, PanZ, et al.The differential impact of face distractors on visual working memory across encoding and delay stages. Atten Percept Psychophys2024;86(6):2029–2041; doi: 10.3758/s13414-024-02895-6
27.
BaddeleyA. The episodic buffer: A new component of working memory? Trends Cogn Sci2000;4(11):417–423; doi: 10.1016/S1364-6613(00)01538-2
28.
JostK, BryckRL, VogelEK, et al.Are old adults just like low working memory young adults? Filtering efficiency and age differences in visual working memory. Cereb Cortex2011;21(5):1147–1154; doi: 10.1093/cercor/bhq185
29.
LeeE-Y, CowanN, VogelEK, et al.Visual working memory deficits in patients with Parkinson’s disease are due to both reduced storage capacity and impaired ability to filter out irrelevant information. Brain2010;133(9):2677–2689; doi: 10.1093/brain/awq197
30.
AllonAS, LuriaR. Filtering performance in visual working memory is improved by reducing early spatial attention to the distractors. Psychophysiology2019;56(5):e13323; doi: 10.1111/psyp.13323
31.
VellageA, BeckeA, StrumpfH, et al.Filtering and storage working memory networks in younger and older age. Brain Behav2016;6(11):e00544; doi: 10.1002/brb3.544
32.
ZhangZ, ZhangL, GongR. The filtering efficiency in visual working memory. Adv Psychol Sci2021;29(4):635–651; doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1042.2021.00635
33.
LuckSJ, VogelEK. The capacity of visual working memory for features and conjunctions. Nature1997;390(6657):279–281; doi: 10.1038/36846
34.
ÖhmanA, LundqvistD, EstevesF. The face in the crowd revisited: A threat advantage with schematic stimuli. J Pers Soc Psychol2001;80(3):381–396; doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.80.3.381
35.
ZhengW, SunY, WuH, et al.The interaction of top–down and bottom–up attention in visual working memory. Sci Rep2024;14(1):17397; doi: 10.1038/s41598-024-68598-y
36.
AllenRJ. Prioritizing targets and minimizing distraction within limited capacity working memory. J Cogn2019;2(1):32; doi: 10.5334/joc.75
37.
OberauerK. Working memory and attention – response to commentaries. J Cogn2019;2(1):30; doi: 10.5334/joc.79
38.
GaspelinN, LuckSJ. “Top-down” does not mean “voluntary”. J Cogn2018;1(1); doi: 10.5334/joc.28
39.
HitchGJ, AllenRJ, BaddeleyAD. Attention and binding in visual working memory: Two forms of attention and two kinds of buffer storage. Atten Percept Psychophys2020;82(1):280–293; doi: 10.3758/s13414-019-01837-x
40.
GaspelinN, LuckSJ. The role of inhibition in avoiding distraction by salient stimuli. Trends Cogn Sci2018;22(1):79–92; doi: 10.1016/j.tics.2017.11.001
41.
CamachoMC, DeshpandeE, PerinoMT. The cognitive–affective social processing and emotion regulation (CASPER) model. Neuropsychopharmacology2026;51(1):136–152; doi: 10.1038/s41386-025-02224-x
42.
YoungAW, BurtonAM. Are we face experts? Trends Cogn Sci2018;22(2):100–110; doi: 10.1016/j.tics.2017.11.007
43.
PascalisO, De HaanM, NelsonCA. Is face processing species-specific during the first year of life? Science2002;296(5571):1321–1323; doi: 10.1126/science.1070223
44.
ErleTM, SchmidK, GoslarSH, et al.Emojis as social information in digital communication. Emotion2022;22(7):1529–1543; doi: 10.1037/emo0000992
45.
FischerB, HerbertC. Emoji as affective symbols: Affective judgments of emoji, emoticons, and human faces varying in emotional content. Front Psychol2021;12:645173; doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.645173
46.
PradaM, RodriguesDL, GarridoMV, et al.Motives, frequency and attitudes toward emoji and emoticon use. Telemat Inform2018;35(7):1925–1934; doi: 10.1016/j.tele.2018.06.005
47.
AwhE, VogelEK. The bouncer in the brain. Nat Neurosci2008;11(1):5–6; doi: 10.1038/nn0108-5
48.
EmrichSM, BusseriMA. Re-evaluating the relationships among filtering activity, unnecessary storage, and visual working memory capacity. Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci2015;15(3):589–597; doi: 10.3758/s13415-015-0341-z
49.
GeiterE, MazrekuG, ForestiM, et al.Distractor filtering and task load in working memory training in healthy older adults. Sci Rep2024;14(1):24583; doi: 10.1038/s41598-024-76376-z
50.
SpronkM, VogelEK, JonkmanLM. Electrophysiological evidence for immature processing capacity and filtering in visuospatial working memory in adolescents. PLoS One2012;7(8):e42262; doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0042262
51.
OwensM, KosterEHW, DerakshanN. Impaired filtering of irrelevant information in dysphoria: An ERP study. Soc Cogn Affect Neurosci2012;7(7):752–763; doi: 10.1093/scan/nsr050
52.
AllonAS, BalabanH, LuriaR. How low can you go? Changing the resolution of novel complex objects in visual working memory according to task demands. Front Psychol2014;5:265; doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00265
53.
LuriaR, BalabanH, AwhE, et al.The contralateral delay activity as a neural measure of visual working memory. Neurosci Biobehav Rev2016;62:100–108; doi: 10.1016/j.neubiorev.2016.01.003
54.
McColloughAW, MachizawaMG, VogelEK. Electrophysiological measures of maintaining representations in visual working memory. Cortex2007;43(1):77–94; doi: 10.1016/S0010-9452(08)70447-7
55.
SalahubC, LockhartHA, DubeB, et al.Electrophysiological correlates of the flexible allocation of visual working memory resources. Sci Rep2019;9(1):19428; doi: 10.1038/s41598-019-55948-4
56.
SpronkM, VogelEK, JonkmanLM. No behavioral or ERP evidence for a developmental lag in visual working memory capacity or filtering in adolescents and adults with ADHD. PLoS One2013;8(5):e62673; doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0062673
57.
FaulF, ErdfelderE, LangA-G, et al.G*power 3: A flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences. Behav Res Methods2007;39(2):175–191; doi: 10.3758/BF03193146
58.
XuG, HuangY-X, YanW, et al.Revision of the Chinese facial affective picture system. Chin Ment Health J2011;25:40–46.
59.
HoehlS, PeykarjouS. The early development of face processing—What makes faces special? Neurosci Bull2012;28(6):765–788; doi: 10.1007/s12264-012-1280-0
60.
KampsFS, HendrixCL, BrennanPA, et al.Connectivity at the origins of domain specificity in the cortical face and place networks. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A2020;117(11):6163–6169; doi: 10.1073/pnas.1911359117
61.
KosakowskiHL, CohenMA, TakahashiA, et al.Selective responses to faces, scenes, and bodies in the ventral visual pathway of infants. Curr Biol2022;32(2):265–274.e5; doi: 10.1016/j.cub.2021.10.064
62.
Feldmann-WüstefeldT, VogelEK. Neural evidence for the contribution of active suppression during working memory filtering. Cereb Cortex2019;29(2):529–543; doi: 10.1093/cercor/bhx336
63.
LuckSJ, VogelEK. Visual working memory capacity: From psychophysics and neurobiology to individual differences. Trends Cogn Sci2013;17(8):391–400; doi: 10.1016/j.tics.2013.06.006
64.
McNabF, KlingbergT. Prefrontal cortex and basal ganglia control access to working memory. Nat Neurosci2008;11(1):103–107; doi: 10.1038/nn2024
65.
ZhouJ, YinJ, ChenT, et al.Visual working memory capacity does not modulate the feature-based information filtering in visual working memory. PLoS One2011;6(9):e23873; doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0023873
66.
CzęstochowskaJ, GligorićK, PeyrardM, et al.On the context-free ambiguity of emoji. ICWSM2022;16:1388–1392; doi: 10.1609/icwsm.v16i1.19393
67.
RobertsonA, MagdyW, GoldwaterS. Identity Signals in Emoji Do Not Influence Perception of Factual Truth on Twitter. 2021; doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2105.03160
68.
LuckSJ, HillyardSA. Spatial filtering during visual search: Evidence from human electrophysiology. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform1994;20(5):1000–1014; doi: 10.1037/0096-1523.20.5.1000
69.
EimerM. The N2pc component as an indicator of attentional selectivity. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol1996;99(3):225–234; doi: 10.1016/0013-4694(96)95711-9
70.
StoletniyAS, AlekseevaDS, BabenkoVV, et al.The N2pc component in studies of visual attention. Neurosci Behav Physi2022;52(8):1299–1309; doi: 10.1007/s11055-023-01359-y
71.
PersuhM, LaRockE, BergerJ. Working memory and consciousness: The current state of play. Front Hum Neurosci2018;12:78; doi: 10.3389/fnhum.2018.00078
GalludJA, FardounHM, AndresF, et al.A Study on How Older People Use Emojis. In: Proceedings of the XIX International Conference on Human Computer Interaction Association for Computing Machinery: New York, NY, USA; 2018; pp. 1–4; doi: 10.1145/3233824.3233861
74.
GarciaC, ȚurcanA, HowmanH, et al.Emoji as a tool to aid the comprehension of written sarcasm: Evidence from younger and older adults. Comput Hum Behav2022;126:106971; doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2021.106971
75.
TogansLJ, HoltgravesT, KwonG, et al.Digitally saving face: An experimental investigation of cross-cultural differences in the use of emoticons and emoji. J Pragmat2021;186:277–288; doi: 10.1016/j.pragma.2021.09.016
76.
LiuS, SunR. To express or to end? Personality traits are associated with the reasons and patterns for using emojis and stickers. Front Psychol2020;11:1076; doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2020.01076
77.
QiS, DingC, LiH. Neural correlates of inefficient filtering of emotionally neutral distractors from working memory in trait anxiety. Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci2014;14(1):253–265; doi: 10.3758/s13415-013-0203-5
78.
StoutDM, ShackmanAJ, LarsonCL. Failure to filter: Anxious individuals show inefficient gating of threat from working memory. Front Hum Neurosci2013;7:58; doi: 10.3389/fnhum.2013.00058
79.
LiesefeldAM, LiesefeldHR, ZimmerHD. Intercommunication between prefrontal and posterior brain regions for protecting visual working memory from distractor interference. Psychol Sci2014;25(2):325–333; doi: 10.1177/0956797613501170
80.
PeverillM, McLaughlinKA, FinnAS, et al.Working memory filtering continues to develop into late adolescence. Dev Cogn Neurosci2016;18:78–88; doi: 10.1016/j.dcn.2016.02.004
81.
JostK, MayrU. Switching between filter settings reduces the efficient utilization of visual working memory. Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci2016;16(2):207–218; doi: 10.3758/s13415-015-0380-5
82.
PosnerMI, PetersenSE. The attention system of the human brain. Annu Rev Neurosci1990;13(1):25–42; doi: 10.1146/annurev.ne.13.030190.000325
83.
MiyakeA, FriedmanNP, EmersonMJ, et al.The unity and diversity of executive functions and their contributions to complex “frontal lobe” tasks: A latent variable analysis. Cogn Psychol2000;41(1):49–100; doi: 10.1006/cogp.1999.0734
84.
SzetoMD, BarberC, RanpariyaVK, et al.Emojis and emoticons in health care and dermatology communication: Narrative review. JMIR Dermatol2022;5(3):e33851; doi: 10.2196/33851
85.
MammolaS, FalaschiM, FicetolaGF. Biodiversity communication in the digital era through the emoji tree of life. iScience2023;26(12):108569; doi: 10.1016/j.isci.2023.108569
86.
LinTS, LuoY. Emoji and visual complexity in health information design: A moderated serial mediation model. Telemat Inform2023;85:102065; doi: 10.1016/j.tele.2023.102065
87.
SchweizerS, HampshireA, DalgleishT. Extending brain-training to the affective domain: Increasing cognitive and affective executive control through emotional working memory training. PLoS One2011;6(9):e24372; doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0024372
88.
KlinA, JonesW, SchultzR, et al.Visual fixation patterns during viewing of naturalistic social situations as predictors of social competence in individuals with autism. Arch Gen Psychiatry2002;59(9):809–816; doi: 10.1001/archpsyc.59.9.809
89.
SchultzRT. Developmental deficits in social perception in autism: The role of the amygdala and fusiform face area. Int J Dev Neurosci2005;23(2–3):125–141; doi: 10.1016/j.ijdevneu.2004.12.012
90.
LiuN, JiangY, WangW, et al.The specificity of faces processing in children with autism: Evidences from eye movement study. Adv Psychol2024;14:400; doi: 10.12677/ap.2024.144234
91.
TanakaJW, SungA. The “eye avoidance” hypothesis of autism face processing. J Autism Dev Disord2016;46(5):1538–1552; doi: 10.1007/s10803-013-1976-7
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
