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.

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.

The Karolinska Directed Emotional Faces (KDEF) is one of the most widely used human facial expressions database. Almost a decade after the original validation study (Goeleven et al., 2008), we present subjective rating norms for a sub-set of 210 pictures which depict 70 models (half female) each displaying an angry, happy and neutral facial expressions. Our main goals were to provide an additional and updated validation to this database, using a sample from a different nationality (N = 155 Portuguese students, M = 23.73 years old, SD = 7.24) and to extend the number of subjective dimensions used to evaluate each image. Specifically, participants reported emotional labeling (forced-choice task) and evaluated the emotional intensity and valence of the expression, as well as the attractiveness and familiarity of the model (7-points rating scales). Overall, results show that happy faces obtained the highest ratings across evaluative dimensions and emotion labeling accuracy. Female (vs. male) models were perceived as more attractive, familiar and positive. The sex of the model also moderated the accuracy of emotional labeling and ratings of different facial expressions. Each picture of the set was categorized as low, moderate, or high for each dimension. Normative data for each stimulus (hits proportion, means, standard deviations, and confidence intervals per evaluative dimension) is available as supplementary material (available at https://osf.io/fvc4m/).