Today's digital communication integrates multimodal elements such as emojis, whose use has spread to the educational sphere. Institutions such as Cambridge University and British Council have incorporated them into their materials for teaching English as a foreign language (L2). In the Spanish educational sphere, and specifically in Andalusia, institutions such as the Regional Government of Andalusia have also proposed their inclusion as Educational Digital Objects (ODE). However, there is a need to investigate the perception and impact of emojis on the semantic and emotional interpretation of messages, especially in Secondary and Baccalaureate students and future teachers, whose understanding of these symbols can influence their learning.

The graphical variability of emojis across digital platforms calls for an analysis of their interpretive variability and their influence on the teaching-learning process. Although there are studies on the role of emojis in digital communication (Ezimako, 2021; Lu & Wu, 2022; Bai et al., 2019; Logi & Zappavigna, 2023), those addressing their perception and impact on digital platforms are more limited (Miller et al., 2016; Wu et al., 2022; Chen et al., 2024). In the educational context, studies on its relationship with L2 teaching are even scarcer, despite its growing presence in classrooms (Cheng & Hsu, 2022).

From a theoretical perspective, emojis play a fundamental role in the connection between communication and semiotics, which requires an analysis from pragmatics (Hall & Mazarella, 2023; Logi & Zappavigna, 2023) and sign theory (Peirce, 1974). Pragmatics focuses on communicative intention and how signs convey meaning in a given context (Hall & Mazarella, 2023). Semiotics provides an understanding of how signs, in this case emojis, acquire meaning based on their social use, a crucial aspect in the educational context (Ezimako, 2021; Lu & Wu, 2022).

Emojis have evolved from emoticons to key multimodal tools (Bai et al., 2029), enriching digital language, providing visual information and clarifying the emotional tone of messages (Hand et al., 2022). However, their graphical variability across platforms can generate ambiguity and affect communicative effectiveness (Miller et al., 2016), especially in Generation Z, for whom emojis are an integral part of their daily communication (Hunt-Gómez et al., 2020), and whose interpretation may differ from that of previous generations, including their teachers (Wu et al., 2022).

In the field of education, emojis play multiple linguistic and emotional roles. Semantically, they complement or replace text, acting as punctuation marks or meaning modifiers, facilitating the understanding of concepts (Logi & Zappavigna, 2023). Emotionally, they convey feelings and reinforce expressiveness, creating a closer learning environment (Fisher & Herbert, 2021; Stein, 2023). However, their ambiguity can lead to misunderstandings, especially when designs vary across platforms (Miller et al., 2016) or when their interpretation depends on contextual and socio-cultural factors (Wu et al., 2022; Logi & Zappavigna, 2023), which could lead to confusion in the classroom.

Given the growing presence of emojis in digital communication and their potential in education, this research focuses on analysing the semantic and emotional perception of these symbols in secondary and high school students and future teachers. It will examine the differences between these groups and the impact of digital platforms on their interpretation. The aim is to better understand how they influence L2 communication and learning, providing relevant data for their effective integration into pedagogical materials and teaching strategies.

This exploratory, cross-sectional study employs a mixed design, combining a quantitative-descriptive approach and a qualitative-interpretative analysis. The quantitative part allows us to obtain data on the semantic and emotional perception of emojis, while the qualitative part identifies interpretative patterns for analysis and integration. The sample, selected by non-probability sampling by accessibility, included 333 Generation Z students (12-29 years old) enrolled in the academic year 2023-2024. The participants come from different educational levels, including secondary education, high school and university education. For data collection, a structured questionnaire was designed as an instrument in Google Forms. It was based on validated questionnaires from previous studies, specifically those of Lu & Wu (2022) and Miller et al. (2016), selected for their suitability. The former analyses the frequency and diversity in the use of emojis, while the latter assesses their semantic and emotional interpretation. Their formats were adapted, extending the Likert scale from three to five points and updating the sample of emojis with the proposal by Chen et al. (2024). To ensure randomisation, four versions of the questionnaire were designed with six emojis randomly selected from a set of twenty-four. Data analysis was performed with IBM SPSS Statistics 26.0 and AntConc 4.2.4. In the quantitative approach, descriptive and inferential analyses were applied, using non-parametric Chi-Square and Kruskal-Wallis H tests to identify significant differences between educational levels and digital platforms. In parallel, qualitative analysis coded the open-ended responses using an ad hoc category system, allowing for the identification of patterns of interpretation. Subsequently, the qualitative data were integrated into SPSS for a joint analysis. The study guarantees compliance with ethical principles, ensuring informed consent of participants, confidentiality of data and anonymity of responses.

In the digital age, emojis have become a fundamental element of communication, especially among young people and teenagers, and their use has even spread to the educational sphere, such as in foreign language teaching. Their use is characterised by a wide interpretative diversity, both semantic and emotional, influenced by their graphical variability on different digital platforms. The study confirms that the interpretation of emojis varies significantly according to the level of education and the platform used. At the semantic level, there is evidence of great interpretative heterogeneity, with some emojis showing meanings that are opposite or far removed from their conventional use. This ambiguity is more pronounced in emojis with expressions of disgust and fear, while others, such as surprise and anger, show less variability. In emotional terms, the perception of emojis also departs from conventional schemes, with marked differences in the interpretation of those with a negative charge, such as sadness, disgust and fear. In addition, it is observed that younger students tend to interpret emojis more accurately and consistently, compared to higher levels of education. These findings highlight the impact of the interpretative diversity of emojis in communication, affecting the understanding and intention of the message. In education, their use in teaching materials and written production activities raises the need for a better understanding of their meaning to avoid misunderstandings, especially in L2 teaching. Although the study has limitations such as the sample size and the random generation of emojis in the questionnaire, its results offer a novel approach to the perception of these symbols at different educational levels. Future studies could explore the influence of factors such as culture, cross-generational variation and textual context on the interpretation of emojis.

Bai, Q., Dan, Q., Mu, Z., & Yang, M. (2019). A Systematic Review of Emoji: Current Research and Future Perspectives. Frontiers in Psychology, 10(2221), 1-16. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.02221 Chen, Y., Yang, X., Howman, H., & Filik, R. (2024). Individual differences in emoji comprehension: Gender, age, and culture. PLoS ONE, 19(2), 1-20. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0297379 Cheng, Y. J. & Hsu, L. (2022). Enhancing EFL Learners’ Self-Efficacy Beliefs of Learning English with Emoji Feedbacks in CALL: Why and How. Behavioural Sciences, 12(227), 1-14. https://doi.org/10.3390/bs12070227 Ezimako, E. (2021). New Media Semiotics and the Rise of Universal Symbolic Language: Digital Natives’ Perspective Amidst Covid-19. Journal of Higher Education Theory and Practice, 21(1), 190-206. https://doi.org/10.33423/jhetp.v21i1.4048 Fischer, B.& Herbert, C. (2021). Emoji as Affective Symbols: Affective Judgments of Emoji, Emoticons, and Human Faces Varying in Emotional Content. Frontiers in Psychology, 12(645173), 1-15. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.645173 Hall, A. & Mazzarella, D. (2023). Pragmatic inference, levels of meaning and speaker accountability. Journal of Pragmatics, 205, 92-110. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2022.12.007 Hand, C.J., Burd, K., Oliver, A., & Robus, C.M. (2022). Interaction between text content and emoji types determine perceptions of both messages and senders. Computers in Human Behavior Reports, 8(100242), 1-12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chbr.2022.100242 Hunt-Gómez, C. I., Núñez-Román, F., y Gómez-Camacho, A. (2020). Textismos y ortografía. Percepción de los profesores en formación de la Generación Z. Formación Universitaria, 13(2), 143 - 152. http://dx.doi.org/10.4067/S071850062020000200143 Logi, L. & Zappavigna, M. (2023). A social semiotic perspective on emoji: How emoji and language interact to make meaning in digital messages. New media & Society, 25(12), 3222-3246. https://doi.org/10.1177/14614448211032965 Lu, Y. & Wu, J. (2022). An Empirical Study on the Use of Emojis by College Students From the Perspective of Symbolic Interactionism. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 12(4), 707-714. https://doi.org/10.17507/tpls.1204.11 Miller, H., Thebault-Spieker, J., Chang, S., Johnson, I., Terveen, L., & Hecht, B. (2016). “Blissfully Happy” or “Ready toFight”: Varying Interpretations of Emoji. Proceedings of the International AAAI Conference on Web and Social Media, 10(1), 259-268. https://doi.org/10.1609/icwsm.v10i1.14757 Peirce, C. S. (1974). La Ciencia de la Semiótica. Nueva Visión. Stein, J.P. (2023). Smile Back at Me, But Only Once: Social Norms of Appropriate Nonverbal Intensity and Reciprocity Apply to Emoji Use. Journal of Nonverbal Behaviour, 47, 245-266. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10919-023-00424-x Wu, R., Chen., J., Wang. C.L., & Zhou, L. (2022). The influence of emoji meaning multipleness on perceived online review helpfulness: The meaditing role of processing. Journal of Business Research, 141, 299-307. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2021.12.037