The power of facial expressions in branding: can emojis versus human faces shape emotional contagion and brand fun?

Abstract

Despite the growing importance of facial expressions in online brand communications, little is known about the positive and negative effects of replacing human facial expressions with emojis. To address this gap, this research examines how facial expressions (emojis versus human faces) shape consumers' emotional contagion and brand fun. Findings from three experimental studies (two online and one with eye-tracking) demonstrate that the presence of emojis increases brand fun due to the underlying mechanism of emotional contagion. However, although emojis might foster positive brand outcomes, they reduce credibility compared to brand communications using human faces. Finally, this research provides relevant managerial implications for brands that wish to create communications using facial expressions since emojis can positively impact product engagement.

Appendices

Appendix A: theoretical background on emotional face recognition & emotions

Study	Journal	Findings	Human Face	Emojis
Barabanschikov (2015)	Perception	The duration of fixations also depends on the intensity of expression	Yes	No
Casado-Molina et al. (2019)	International Journal of Research Business Communication	Brand communications with emojis help generate different levels of engagement	No	Yes
Chen & Wyer Jr. (2020)	International Journal of Research in Marketing	Facial expressions that endorsers convey in a print ad can influence consumers	Yes	No
Cherbonnier & Michinov (2021)	Computers in Human Behavior	The emotions conveyed by ‘new’ emoticons were recognized more effectively and with greater intensity than other modes of expression	Yes	Yes
Das et al. (2019)	Journal of Business Research	The presence of emojis in brand promotional communications leads consumers to experience higher positive affect and higher purchase intentions	No	Yes
Dass et al. (2019)	Global Business Review	Individuals with a higher level of brand engagement tend to have a higher recall of specific brands and reduced-price sensitivity for their favorite brands	No	No
Droulers & Adil (2015)	The Journal of Applied Business Research	Product category, brand recall, and recognition were significantly improved with face presence in advertising	Yes	No
Gantiva et al. (2021)	Biological Psychology	Happy emoji faces generated pleasant emotional responses, and angry emoji faces generated a trend toward unpleasant emotional responses	No	Yes
Herter et al. (2021)	Journal of Business Research	This research shows that specific emotions (sadness vs. embarrassment) differ on agency appraisals and affect consumers’ intention regarding dieting, effort(s) to quit smoking, and physical activity	No	No
Krishna et al. (2016)	Current Opinion in Psychology	Changing a visual product’s depiction leads viewers to imagine that product and can, thereby interacting to increase purchase intention	Yes	No
Kumar et al. (2021)	Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services	The relationship between prestige brands and happiness can be explained by simply fulfilling a need	No	No
Kumar & Kaushik (2022)	Journal of Business Research	Perceived brand authenticity (PBA) is analogous to consumer brand perception, emerges as a significant purchase over and above product quality, etc	No	No
Luangrath et al. (2016)	Journal of Consumer Psychology	Warmth and competence are two characteristics that increase consumer engagement. However, emoticons have also been viewed as casual and unprofessional, which could potentially hurt perceptions of the firm´s competence	No	No
McShane et al. (2021)	Journal of Interactive Marketing	The research demonstrates that emoji presence increases engagement with tweets (depending on the nature of the interplay between emojis and text)	No	Yes
Mrkva et al. (2019)	Psychological Science	Attention can alter the experience of perception and, in so doing, intensify the perception of emotion	No	No
Philip et al. (2018)	i-Perception	1) when the stimulus is dynamic, participants tend to react more intensely 2) the dynamism effect is stronger when the human emotional expression is real	Yes	No
Plassmann et al. (2012)	Journal of Consumer Psychology	As the number of choice options increases, the decision maker becomes more visually selective in what information he or she encodes	No	No
Prada et al. (2018)	Telematics and Informatics	Results of the study showed that women reported using emojis more often and expressed more positive attitudes toward their usage than men	No	Yes
Riordan (2017)	Journal of Language and Social Psychology	Using nonface emojis can increase the positive effect on a reader’s interpretation; it cannot change the valence of the message itself	No	Yes
Guerreiro et al. (2015)	European Journal of Marketing	This paper demonstrates that physiological reactions such as emotional arousal and attention are important markers for predicting altruistic behavior	No	No
Sajjacholapunt & Ball (2014)	Frontiers in Psychology	Results indicated that the condition involving faces with averted gaze increased attention to the banner overall and the advertising text and product	Yes	No
Shen & Ferguson (2021)	Journal of Experimental Social Psychology	People with trustworthy faces will be evaluated more positively	Yes	No
Smith & Rose (2019)	International Journal of Research in Marketing	If fitting with the overall communication strategy, the emoji can help increase customer satisfaction by encouraging these positive inferences	No	Yes
Soussignan et al. (2019)	Appetite	Participants displayed a greater zygomatic activity to avatars' happy faces, as it had a powerful effect on attention	Yes	No
Thomson et al. (2005)	Journal of Consumer Psychology	Consumers' emotional attachments to a brand are one of the drivers that might predict their commitment to the brand (e.g., brand loyalty) and their willingness to make financial sacrifices to obtain it (e.g., to pay a price premium)	No	No
Warren et al. (2019)	Journal of Marketing	The study explains that over time, some cool brands become adopted by the masses, at which point they are perceived to be more popular and iconic	No	No
Warren et al. (2018)	Journal of Consumer Psychology	Endorsers seem less cool when they are inexpressive because being inexpressive makes them seem less warm, and lacking warmth decreases perceived coolness	Yes	No
Zhu et al. (2021)	Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services	Neutral facial expressions increase perceived social distance, further enhancing the valuation of luxury goods. The opposite happens with mundane products	Yes	No

Appendix B: stimuli used in studies

Study	Emoji Face	Human Face
Studies 1 and 3
Study 2

Appendix C: scales and measures

Scale	Study	Items	Crombach’ Alpha
Brand Fun (Das et al. 2019; McShane et al. 2021)	Study 1	1. I believe this brand is fun
	Study 2	1. Not Thrilling/Thrilling 2. Boring/Exciting 3. Not Fun/Fun	α = 0.909
Ad Credibility (Herter et al. 2021; Kukar-Kinney & Walters 2003)	Study 1	1. I feel that the advertising message is credible
	Study 2	1. I feel that the advertising message is credible 2. I feel that the advertising message is believable 3. I feel that the advertising message is reliable	α = 0.939
Emotional Contagion	Studies 2 and 3	1. Happy 2. Delighted 3. Excited 4. Enthusiastic 5. Joyful	α = 0.957
Manipulation Checks	All studies	Please indicate what you have seen in the advertisement 1. Emoji 2. Human Face
Manipulation Checks		Have you seen this advertisement before? 1. No 2. Yes 3. I do not remember

Appendix D: studies main effect results

Study	Test	Emojis	Human Face
1	Facial expressions → brand fun F(1, 118) = 23.60; p < 0.001	M = 6.80 SD = 2.44	M = 4.77 SD = 2.16
	Facial expressions → ad credibility F(1, 118) = 10.22; p < 0.01	M = 4.79 SD = 1.86	M = 5.91 SD = 1.97
2	Facial expressions → brand fun F(1, 218) = 17.76; p < 0.001	M = 5.99 SD = 2.02	M = 4.82 SD = 2.09
	Facial expressions → ad credibility F(1, 218) = 10.72; p < 0.01	M = 5.17 SD = 2.22	M = 6.10 SD = 1.97

Appendix E: studies mediation results

Study	Test	Indirect Effect	Direct Effect
2	Facial expressions → emotional contagion → brand fun	b = 0.72; 95% CI: 0.32 to 1.15	b = 0.44, p < 0.05; 95% CI: 0.07 to 0.81
	Facial expressions → emotional contagion → ad credibility	b = 0.57; 95% CI: 0.24 to 0.92	b = -1.49, p < 0.001; 95% CI: -1.96 to -1.02
3	Facial expressions → emotional contagion → product engagement	b = 4.95; 95% CI: 11.47 to 0.06	b = 17.73, p < 0.05; 95% CI: 32.60 to 2.87