The Rise of Emojis (again)

May 15, 2025

Modern communication, including email, messaging platforms, and collaborative tools, has become a prime means of professional discourse in the workplace. Within this landscape, emojis, small digital icons representing emotions, objects, or concepts, have emerged as a tool to compensate for (what some people would say is) the tonal limitations inherent in text [1][2]. I cannot say that I found there to be any limitations with the written word, but proponents of emojis view them as a progressive evolution of language. Their informal nature sparks debate regarding the appropriateness of their use and potential threat to professionalism [3].

From pictographs to punctuation to pictographs

Historically, the written word has relied on various methods to clarify meaning and manage tone. Sumerian Cuneiform (c. 3400 BCE), one of the earliest writing systems, began as a system of pictograms (simplified images representing physical objects or ideas) drawn on clay tablets to represent commodities and numbers for trade. Over time, these pictograms became abstracted into wedge-shaped signs but retained some iconographic logic. Egyptian hieroglyphs were primarily a logophonetic writing system, combining logograms (symbols representing words or ideas) and phonograms (symbols representing sounds), intended to record speech, religious ideas, history, and administration; some hieroglyphs had the potential to imply emotional content indirectly. Similarly, Chinese oracle bone script (c. 1200 BCE) and Mesoamerican writing (Maya, Aztec) systems are rich in pictograms and icons, and early (mainly religious) European texts are filled with icons and images. These systems show that visual language predated alphabetic systems and illustrate how early humans abstracted the world into symbols. They bridged communication across cultures and languages through universally understood images (much like icons today, a skull to represent danger still works globally) and laid the groundwork for systems where icons carried both literal and metaphorical meaning.

The invention of the printing press in the 15^th century led to the standardisation of punctuation marks such as periods, commas, and question marks, which primarily served to structure sentences and convey pauses or inflection [4]. Many suggest that the textual infrastructure set limits in expressing emotional nuance. I remember how, in the late 20th century, we saw the emergence of emoticons, text-based symbols like 🙂 and 🙁 [5].

I recall exchanging these emoticons with my girlfriend on my Nokia 6310 circa 1998. They were fun early attempts to bridge this gap by typographically approximating facial expressions. These precursors paved the way for Unicode emojis, which were introduced in the late 1990s and popularised globally after 2010. Today, the Unicode standard includes nearly 4,000 emojis, forming a visual lexicon that transcends linguistic barriers and enriches digital dialogue [6]. Linguist Marcel Danesi (2016) has proposed that emojis represent "the most significant development in written communication since the advent of the printing press," underscoring the impact some people feel on how we can convey meaning in text [7].

Tone in text-based communication

A fundamental challenge in text-based communication is the absence of nonverbal cues that are integral to spoken language. In face-to-face interactions, elements such as tone of voice, facial expressions, and gestures contribute significantly, some sources suggest as much as 55% or even 94%, to the emotional meaning and overall understanding of a message. Written messages inherently lack these paralinguistic cues, making them susceptible to misinterpretation, especially in brief, digital exchanges like email and instant messaging. We have all experienced episodes where messages intended positively have been perceived as neutral, or neutral messages as negative, simply due to the lack of clarifying vocal or visual signals. Before emoticons and emojis, standard punctuation provided structure but offered limited means to express the sender's emotional state or intended tone. This limitation in conveying nuance highlights the communicative problem that emojis aim to solve.

Modern professional communication

Emojis are increasingly prevalent in workplace communication, particularly in instant messaging platforms like Microsoft Teams. A 2022 Adobe survey found that 58% of employees use emojis professionally [8]. Slack reports that emojis are used in 28% of internal messages, particularly in team collaborations [9]. Email platforms now widely support emoji integration, suggesting a degree of institutional acceptance. Surveys indicate that a significant percentage of American workers have used emojis in work emails, with usage being highest among younger demographics. As early as 2014, a survey showed 76% of Americans claimed to use emojis at work. Although professional platforms like LinkedIn discourage the use of emojis in profiles, you will often find them in posts [10].

Despite this growing prevalence, emojis are not universally accepted and their use in a professional context is often debated. They are frequently perceived as informal, new, immature, or inappropriate. I certainly have not yet seen one appear in a document intended for a regulatory authority. Although many employees use them, executives often claim that their use is never appropriate at work. Misuse or overuse can lead to an appearance that is juvenile, flippant, or confusing. The perception of professionalism depends heavily on the workplace culture and the specific context. Conservative sectors, such as the pharmaceutical or finance industries, tend to remain cautious and for now view them as unprofessional. Some evidence suggests that using emojis in external communications, such as responding to online complaints, can lower perceptions of professionalism unless paired with an appropriately informal tone [11].

The double-edged sword

Emojis function as a 'double-edged sword' in professional communication, offering both benefits and drawbacks. In terms of benefits, emojis have the potential to enhance tone and clarity and thus help mitigate the absence of nonverbal cues in text [12]. They can convey warmth (e.g., 😊), urgency (🚨), or gratitude (🙏). Studies suggest they can soften messages and convey warmth where traditional punctuation might imply formality or displeasure. They have the potential to humanise interactions and build rapport in digital communications, fostering camaraderie, particularly in remote teams [13]. They help build connections by adding a personal touch [14]. Emojis can be used to inject levity and lighten the tone of a message, which can be useful in stressful situations. They can also help break up dense text, drawing attention to key points, especially in less formal contexts like social media. Functioning within the context of "a picture speaking a thousand words," emojis have the ability to provide a reaction or emotional context, helping to keep communication brief and to the point [15]. Further, in areas like marketing and customer engagement, emojis are used to boost engagement metrics [16].

On the other hand, emojis introduce a risk of misinterpretation and ambiguity. I mean, what does the aubergine emoji really stand for? Emojis are not universally understood, and their meaning can vary depending on context, platform, device, or cultural background [17]. For example, the folded hands emoji (🙏) can signify prayer, gratitude, or a high-five [17]. Cultural differences are significant; the thumbs-up (👍) can be offensive in some regions [18] and is increasingly viewed by younger users as passive or dismissive [19]. Platform variations can also alter appearance and perceived meaning. As already discussed, research indicates that although emojis might make senders appear warmer and more relatable, they can also undermine perceptions of competence and professionalism [20]. Studies have found that professionals using emojis in formal reports were rated as less authoritative, and including smiley faces in emails lowered the perception of the sender's competence, particularly in formal situations or first-time interactions [1]. Some senior managers explicitly view emojis as unprofessional. Equally, using too many emojis in one message can clutter it and make it hard to read. It is highly likely that inappropriate, excessive or irrelevant use of emojis can confuse or upset recipients in my age group. Moreover, recent research indicates that AI models like GPT-4V show less interpretative ambiguity with emojis than humans, highlighting the inherently subjective nature of human emoji comprehension [21].

Work culture

How we behave at work is defined by unspoken rules that dictate what is acceptable. The appropriateness of emoji use in professional settings is heavily influenced by these cultural norms. As the workforce demographic shifts and the average age of employees decreases, these cultural norms are evolving. Younger employees, particularly Millennials and Gen Z, are driving emoji adoption [22]. A Microsoft study (2023) found that 78% of workers under 35 years of age view emojis as acceptable in workplace chats, compared to only 42% of those over 45 [23]. This generational divide reflects different norms regarding formality and self-expression, with younger cohorts often prioritising relatability.

Younger workers are more comfortable using emojis to manage tone, humour, and interpersonal connection. For them (I believe), emojis are often functional tools akin to intonation or body language. However, they may also be concerned about being misjudged or taken less seriously for using them in formal correspondence. The norms around emoji use, like other workplace norms (such as dress code), are subject to change based on the 'management'. As digital-native generations become decision-makers, their comfort with emojis will likely influence workplace culture and normalise their use. Organisational policies are beginning to address emoji use, with some companies including guidelines in employee handbooks [24]. However, I still expect it to be a cold day in hell before it appears in an FDA submission document—though who knows with RFK in charge...

Psychological and linguistic perspectives

From a psychological standpoint, emoji use can be linked to individual traits. A 2024 study found that higher emotional intelligence is associated with more frequent emoji use with friends, while avoidant attachment styles are linked to less emoji use, particularly with friends and romantic partners [25]. Women tend to use emojis more than men, especially in interactions with friends and family [25]. Other research suggests links between more frequent emoji use and lower levels of 'openness to experience.' In addition, studies have found a link between emoji use and traits from what has been termed the Dark Triad, particularly narcissism (in both men and women, most strongly in women) and Machiavellianism (in men) [26]. It is speculated that individuals with these traits might use emojis as part of a strategy focused on self-promotion and impression management. Frequent emoji users may also use language related to family, positive emotion, and sadness, but fewer words tied to abstract ideas or articles, hinting that emojis might replace rather than just decorate language. Some researchers propose emojis are used as rhetorical tools to soften emotional impact.

Conclusion

Linguists are increasingly viewing emojis as a legitimate mode of visual, symbolic communication [7]. They have been described as functioning similarly to ideograms, conveying meaning without words, and as a 'paralanguage' of digital expression. Their integration into written communication is seen by some not as a deterioration of language, but as its evolution (though you might be forgiven for seeing it as more of a return to its origins).

Their increasing presence in professional settings reflects broader cultural shifts in communication norms, propelled by digital advancements and the growing influence of younger, digital-native generations [27]. Used thoughtfully and appropriately, emojis can enhance clarity, add warmth, humanise digital interactions, soften messages, and contribute to building rapport and team culture [2][16]. However, their informal nature presents challenges, including the risk of misinterpretation due to ambiguity and cultural differences, and the potential to undermine perceived competence or professionalism. Even positive outcomes like humanisation must be balanced against possible negative effects on professionalism perceptions in certain contexts [28].

The effectiveness of emojis in the workplace depends heavily on mindful application. Professionals must develop 'emoji literacy' understanding when, where, and how to use them to complement, rather than replace, clear communication. Factors such as audience, context, industry norms, and company culture are critical determinants of appropriate usage. Following the lead of recipients, using moderation, and being aware of potential misinterpretations are key strategies for navigating emoji etiquette.

As digital communication continues to evolve and younger generations move into leadership positions, the acceptance and integration of emojis into mainstream professional discourse are likely to increase. Ultimately, their success in the workplace hinges on their appropriate use to enhance expression and connection while maintaining clarity and professionalism.

References

1. Riordan MA, Glikson E. On the hazards of the technology age: how using emojis affects perceptions of leaders. Int J Bus Commun. 2020.
2. Derks D, Bos AER, von Grumbkow J. Emoticons in computer-mediated communication: social motives and social context. Cyberpsychol Behav. 2008;11(1):99-101.
3. Bai Q, Dan Q, Mu Z, Yang M. A systematic review of emoji: current research and future perspectives. Front Psychol. 2019;10:2221.
4. Parkes MB. Pause and Effect: An Introduction to the History of Punctuation in the West. University of California Press; 1992.
5. Dresner E, Herring SC. Functions of the nonverbal in CMC: emoticons and illocutionary force. Commun Theory. 2010;20(3):249-268.
6. Tang Y, Hew KF. Emoticon, emoji, and sticker use in computer-mediated communication: a review of theories and research findings. Int J Commun. 2019;13:27.
7. Danesi M. The Semiotics of Emoji: The Rise of Visual Language in the Age of the Internet. Bloomsbury Academic; 2016.
8. Emoji Trend Report. 2022.
9. Montrief T, Haas MRC, Alvarez A, Gottlieb M, Siegal D, Chan T. Thinking Outside the Inbox: Use of Slack in Clinical Groups as a Collaborative Team Communication Platform. AEM Educ Train. 2020 Jul 28;5(1):121-129.
10. Profile Best Practices. 2022.
11. Verheijen L, Liebrecht C. How emoji in company responses to online consumer complaints affect observers: emoji as visual signalling cues in webcare. Int J Bus Commun. 2025.
12. Boutet I, LeBlanc M, Chamberland JA, Collin CA. Emojis that work! Incorporating visual cues from facial expressions in emojis can reduce ambiguous interpretations. Comput Hum Behav. 2022;9:100251.
13. Kelly R, Watts L. Characterising the inventive appropriation of emoji as relationally meaningful. In: Proceedings of the 33rd Annual ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 2015:2297-2306.
14. Janssen JH, IJsselsteijn WA, Westerink JHDM. How affective technologies can influence intimate interactions and improve social connectedness. Int J Hum-Comput Stud. 2014;72(1):33-43.
15. Gesselman AN, Ta VP, Garcia JR. Worth a thousand interpersonal words: emoji as affective signals for relationship-oriented digital communication. PLoS ONE. 2019;14(8):e0221297.
16. Glikson E, Cheshin A, van Kleef GA. The dark side of a smiley: effects of smiling emoticons on trust and warmth in computer-mediated communication. Soc Psychol Personal Sci. 2018;9(5):614-625.
17. Miller H, Kluver D, Thebault-Spieker J, Terveen L, Hecht B. Understanding emoji ambiguity in context: the role of platform. In: Proceedings of the 10th AAAI International Conference on Web and Social Media. 2016:312-321.
18. Evans V. What's so wrong about using the thumbs-up emoji? Psychology Today. 2022.
19. Broni K. Gen Z and the thumbs-up emoji: why younger users are abandoning the gesture. Forbes. 2024.
20. Cavalheiro BP, Prada M, Lopes D, Rodrigues DL. Evaluating the adequacy of emoji use in positive and negative messages from close and distant senders. Cyberpsychol Behav Soc Netw. 2022;25(3):174-181.
21. Lyu H, Qi W, Wei Z, Luo J. Human vs. LMMs: exploring the discrepancy in emoji interpretation and usage in digital communication. In: Proceedings of the Eighteenth International AAAI Conference on Web and Social Media (ICWSM 2024). 2024:1025-1036.
22. Prada M, et al. Motives, frequency and attitudes toward emoji and emoticon use. Telemat Inform. 2018;35(7):1925-1934.
23. Workplace Trends Report. 2023.
24. Society for Human Resource Management (SHRM). The State of Global Workplace Culture in 2023: An International Model for Building Better Workplaces.
25. Dubé S, et al. Beyond words: relationships between emoji use, attachment style, and emotional intelligence. PLoS ONE. 2024;19(12):e0308880.
26. Ocklenburg S. The dark side of emojis: a surprising link to narcissism. Psychology Today. 2025.
27. McCulloch G. Because Internet: Understanding the New Rules of Language. Riverhead Books; 2019.
28. Verheijen L, Liebrecht C. How emoji in company responses to online consumer complaints affect observers: emoji as visual signalling cues in webcare. Int J Bus Commun. 2025. doi: 10.1177/23294884241297831