The use of emoticons and emoji is increasingly popular across a variety of new platforms of online communication. They have also become popular as stimulus materials in scientific research. However, the assumption that emoji/emoticon users' interpretations always correspond to the developers'/researchers' intended meanings might be misleading. This article presents subjective norms of emoji and emoticons provided by everyday users. The Lisbon Emoji and Emoticon Database (LEED) comprises 238 stimuli: 85 emoticons and 153 emoji (collected from iOS, Android, Facebook, and Emojipedia). The sample included 505 Portuguese participants recruited online. Each participant evaluated a random subset of 20 stimuli for seven dimensions: aesthetic appeal, familiarity, visual complexity, concreteness, valence, arousal, and meaningfulness. Participants were additionally asked to attribute a meaning to each stimulus. The norms obtained include quantitative descriptive results (means, standard deviations, and confidence intervals) and a meaning analysis for each stimulus. We also examined the correlations between the dimensions and tested for differences between emoticons and emoji, as well as between the two major operating systems-Android and iOS. The LEED constitutes a readily available normative database (available at www.osf.io/nua4x ) with potential applications to different research domains.

https://repositorio.iscte-iul.pt NOTICE: this is the author's version of a work that was accepted for publication in Telematics & Informatics. Changes resulting from the publishing process, such as peer review, editing, corrections, structural formatting, and other quality control mechanisms may not be reflected in this document. Changes may have been made to this work since it was

No abstract

The "organic" claim explicitly informs consumers about the food production method. Yet, based on this claim, people often infer unrelated food attributes. The current research examined whether the perceived advantage of organic over conventional food generalizes across different organic food types. Compared to whole organic foods, processed organic foods are less available, familiar and prototypical of the organic food category. In two studies (combined N = 258) we investigated how both organic foods types were perceived in healthfulness, taste and caloric content when compared to their conventional alternatives. Participants evaluated images of both whole (e.g., lettuce) and processed organic food exemplars (e.g., pizza), and reported general evaluations of these food types. The association of these evaluations with individual difference variables - self-reported knowledge and consumption of organic food, and environmental concerns - was also examined. Results showed that organically produced whole foods were perceived as more healthful, tastier and less caloric than those produced conventionally, thus replicating the well-established halo effect of the organic claim in food evaluation. The organic advantage was more pronounced among individuals who reported being more knowledgeable about organic food, consumed it more frequently, and were more environmentally concerned. The advantage of the organic claim for processed foods was less clear. Overall, processed organic (vs. conventional) foods were perceived as tastier, more healthful (Study 1) or equally healthful (Study 2), but also as more caloric. We argue that the features of processed food may modulate the impact of the organic claim, and outline possible research directions to test this assumption. Uncovering the specific conditions in which food claims bias consumer's perceptions and behavior may have important implications for marketing, health and public-policy related fields.

This article presents subjective rating norms for a new set of 600 symbols, depicting various contents (e.g., transportation, technology, and leisure activities) that can be used by researchers in different fields. Symbols were evaluated for aesthetic appeal, familiarity, visual complexity, concreteness, valence, arousal, and meaningfulness. The normative data were obtained from 388 participants, and no gender differences were found. Descriptive results (means, standard deviations, and confidence intervals) for each symbol in each dimension are presented. Overall, the dimensions were highly correlated. Additionally, participants were asked to briefly describe the meaning of each symbol. The results indicate that the present symbol set is varied, allowing for the selection of exemplars with different levels on the seven examined dimensions. This set of symbols constitutes a tool with potential for research in different areas. The database with all of the symbols is available as supplemental materials.