Sarcasm and emoticons: Comprehension and emotional impact

Figures & data

Table 1. Example material in all experimental conditions in Experiment 1

Condition

Sarcastic criticism (with device) Sarcastic criticism (no device) Literal criticism (with device) Literal criticism (no device) Sarcastic praise (with device) Sarcastic praise (no device) Literal praise (with device) Literal praise (no device)

Tanya had noticed that Jenny had put on a lot of weight. She texted her to say: “I see the diet is going well [:-P / ;-) / . . . /!]” Tanya had noticed that Jenny had put on a lot of weight. She texted her to say: “I see the diet is going well” Tanya had noticed that Jenny had put on a lot of weight. She texted her to say: “I see the diet is going badly [:-P / ;-) / . . . /!]” Tanya had noticed that Jenny had put on a lot of weight. She texted her to say: “I see the diet is going badly” Tanya had noticed that Jenny had lost a lot of weight. She texted her to say: “I see the diet is going badly [:-P / ;-) / . . . /!]” Tanya had noticed that Jenny had lost a lot of weight. She texted her to say: “I see the diet is going badly” Tanya had noticed that Jenny had lost a lot of weight. She texted her to say: “I see the diet is going well [:-P / ;-) / . . . /!]” Tanya had noticed that Jenny had lost a lot of weight. She texted her to say: “I see the diet is going well”

Table 2. Best fitting models and fixed-effects parameters in Experiment 1

Question and device	Model	Fixed effects	Coefficient	SE	t
a ;-)	a ∼ Literality × Valence × Devicepresence + (1 + Literality|Subject) + (1 + Literality|Item)	(Intercept) literalityliteral valencepraise devicepresenceyes literalityliteral:valencepraise literalityliteral:devicepresenceyes valencepraise:devicepresenceyes literalityliteral:valencepraise:devicepresenceyes	7 −5.1 −0.3 −0.1 0.03 0.9 0.3 −0.7	0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2	39.5 −21.6 −2.8 −0.9 0.2 5.5 1.8 −3.1
a :-P	a ∼ Literality × Valence × Devicepresence + (1 + Literality|Subject) + (1 + Literality|Item)	(Intercept) literalityliteral valencepraise devicepresenceyes literalityliteral:valencepraise literalityliteral:devicepresenceyes valencepraise:devicepresenceyes literalityliteral:valencepraise:devicepresenceyes	6.8 −4.9 −0.5 −0.1 0.4 1.1 0.4 −1	0.2 0.3 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.3	34 −18.1 −3.8 −1.2 2 6.2 2 −3.7
a . . .	a ∼ Literality × Devicepresence + (1 + Literality|Subject) + (1 + Literality|Item)	(Intercept) literalityliteral devicepresenceyes literalityliteral:devicepresenceyes	6.6 −4.6 0 0.2	0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1	38.1 −21.9 −0.1 1.9
a !	a ∼ Literality + Valence + (1 + Literality|Subject) + (1 + Literality|Item)	(Intercept) literalityliteral valencepraise	6.6 −4.7 −0.2	0.2 0.2 0.1	30.9 −19.6 −3.2
b ;-)	b ∼ Literality × Valence × Devicepresence + (1 + Valence|Subject) + (1 + Literality × Valence|Item)	(Intercept) literalityliteral valencepraise devicepresenceyes literalityliteral:valencepraise literalityliteral:devicepresenceyes valencepraise:devicepresenceyes literalityliteral:valencepraise:devicepresenceyes	3.3 −0.8 1.5 0.3 2.8 0.4 0.3 −1.2	0.1 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.3 0.1 0.1 0.2	24.9 −6.6 7.3 3.3 7.8 2.8 1.9 −5.7
b :-P	b ∼ Literality × Valence × Devicepresence + (1 + Valence|Subject) + (1 + Literality × Valence|Item)	(Intercept) literalityliteral valencepraise devicepresenceyes literalityliteral:valencepraise literalityliteral:devicepresenceyes valencepraise:devicepresenceyes literalityliteral:valencepraise:devicepresenceyes	3.2 −0.8 1.7 0.4 2.6 0.4 0.3 −1.4	0.2 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.2	15.4 −5.6 6.7 3.8 10.8 2.8 2.3 −6.2
b . . .	b ∼ Literality × Valence + (1 + Valence|Subject) + (1 + Literality × Valence|Item)	(Intercept) literalityliteral valencepraise literalityliteral:valencepraise	3.1 −0.7 1.7 2.3	0.1 0.1 0.2 0.3	23.8 −5.7 6.7 8.1
b !	b ∼ Literality × Valence + Devicepresence + (1 + Valence|Subject) + (1 + Literality × Valence|Item)	(Intercept) literalityliteral valencepraise devicepresenceyes literalityliteral:valencepraise	3.3 −0.9 1.5 0.2 2.5	0.1 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.4	23.5 −6.2 7 3 5.6

Figure 1 Difference sarcasm rating scores for literal and sarcastic praise and criticism, for each device. Error bars represent 95% CI (confidence interval).

Figure 2 Difference emotional rating scores for literal and sarcastic praise and criticism, for each device. Error bars represent 95% CI (confidence interval).

Figure 3 Mean perceived emotional impact of literal and sarcastic comments of both valences, in the presence of a device (top panel), and in the absence of a device (bottom panel). Error bars represent 95% CI (confidence interval).

Table 3. Example material in all experimental conditions in Experiment 2

Device	Positive valence	Negative valence
Full stop	Person A: How did you find your presentation went earlier? Person B: I have no idea really. Person A: I thought it was so interesting.	Person A: How did you find your presentation went earlier? Person B: I have no idea really. Person A: I thought it was so boring.
Wink emoticon	Person A: How did you find your presentation went earlier? Person B: I have no idea really. Person A: I thought it was so interesting ;-)	Person A: How did you find your presentation went earlier? Person B: I have no idea really. Person A: I thought it was so boring ;-)
Ellipsis	Person A: How did you find your presentation went earlier? Person B: I have no idea really. Person A: I thought it was so interesting . . .	Person A: How did you find your presentation went earlier? Person B: I have no idea really. Person A: I thought it was so boring . . .

Table 4. Best fitting models and fixed-effects parameters in Experiment 2

Question	Model	Fixed effects	Coefficient	SE	t
a	a ∼ Valence × Device + (1 + Valence|Subject) + (1|Item)	(Intercept) valencepositive devicefullstop devicewinkface valencepositive:devicefullstop valencepositive:devicewinkface	3.6 0.5 −0.6 2.1 −1.6 −1.24	0.1 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2	25.9 3.4 −4.9 15.2 −8.3 −6.3
b: sarcastic interpretation	b ∼ Valence × Device + (1 + Valence|Subject) + (1|Item)	(Intercept) valencepositive devicefullstop devicewinkface valencepositive:devicefullstop valencepositive:devicewinkface	3.8 −0.4 −0.2 1 0.6 −0.8	0.1 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.3 0.1	24.9 −2 −1.2 8.8 2.1 −5.6
b: literal interpretation	b ∼ Valence × Device + (1 + Valence|Subject) + (1|Item)	(Intercept) valencepositive devicefullstop devicewinkface valencepositive:devicefullstop valencepositive:devicewinkface	2.2 3.1 −0.1 0.9 0.5 −0.9	0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.2	23.7 21.3 −1.6 5.5 3.7 −4.1

Figure 4 Mean sarcasm ratings. Error bars represent 95% CI (confidence interval).

Figure 5 Mean perceived emotional impact. The rating scale has been converted so that 0 represents the middle rating of 4, while positive scale numbers represent ratings from 5 to 7, and negative numbers represent ratings from 1 to 3. Error bars represent 95% CI (confidence interval).

Table 5. Overview of results from Experiments 1 and 2

		Sarcasm rating	Positivity of emotional rating
Experiment 1	Sarcastic criticism	with :-P = without :-P with ;-) = without ;-) with . . . = without …  with ! = without !	with :-P > without :-P with ;-) > without ;-) with . . . = without …  with ! > without !
	Literal praise	with :-P > without :-P with ;-) > without ;-) with . . . > without …  with ! = without !	with :-P = without :-P with ;-) = without ;-) with . . . = without …  with ! > without !
	Sarcastic praise	with :-P = without :-P with ;-) = without ;-) with . . . = without …  with ! = without !	with :-P > without :-P with ;-) > without ;-) with . . . = without …  with ! > without !
	Literal criticism	with :-P > without :-P with ;-) > without ;-) with . . . > without …  with ! = without !	with :-P > without :-P with ;-) > without ;-) with . . . = without …  with ! > without !
Experiment 2	Sarcastic criticism	;-) > . . . > full stop	full stop > [ … = ;-)]
	Literal praise		full stop > [ … = ;-)]
	Sarcastic praise	;-) > . . . > full stop	;-) > (full stop = … )
	Literal criticism		;-) > (full stop = … )

Figure 6 Mean perceived emotional impact of literal and sarcastic comments of both valences. The rating scale has been converted so that 0 represents the middle rating of 4, while positive scale numbers represent ratings from 5 to 7, and negative numbers represent ratings from 1 to 3. Error bars represent 95% CI (confidence interval).