Emoji Accessibility for Visually Impaired People
Open accessAbstract
Emoji are graphical symbols that appear in many aspects of our lives. Worldwide, around 36 million people are blind and 217 million have a moderate to severe visual impairment. This portion of the population may use and encounter emoji, yet it is unclear what accessibility challenges emoji introduce. We first conducted an online survey with 58 visually impaired participants to understand how they use and encounter emoji online, and the challenges they experience. We then conducted 11 interviews with screen reader users to understand more about the challenges reported in our survey findings. Our interview findings demonstrate that technology is both an enabler and a barrier, emoji descriptors can hinder communication, and therefore the use of emoji impacts social interaction. Using our findings from both studies, we propose best practice when using emoji and recommendations to improve the future accessibility of emoji for visually impaired people.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
While sighted users might benefit from using emojis easily, screen reader users could be challenged.
“While sighted users might benefit from using these features easily, screen reader users could be challenged.”
From The accessibility of digital technologies for people with visual impairment and blindness: a scoping review (2024) · cites this paper as [62]
Tigwell et al. explored the use of emojis from the perspectives of people with visual impairment and blindness.
“In this regard, Tigwell etal. [62] explored the use of emojis from the perspectives of people with visual impairment and blindness.”
From The accessibility of digital technologies for people with visual impairment and blindness: a scoping review (2024) · cites this paper as [62]
Some emojis do not have appropriate alt text, confusing screen reader users.
“Firstly, some emojis do not have appropriate alt text, confusing screen reader users.”
From The accessibility of digital technologies for people with visual impairment and blindness: a scoping review (2024) · cites this paper as [62]
Searching the long list of emojis and finding the one needed is laborious.
“Secondly, searching the long list of emojis and finding the one that they need is laborious: ' …finding the right one to send. I either don't know whether it exists or what it is, or where to find it. Sighted people just glance at a screen and can find them pretty quickly, while we have to go through all of them.'”
From The accessibility of digital technologies for people with visual impairment and blindness: a scoping review (2024) · cites this paper as [62]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 55 · Cited by 42
Research works printed but not linked: 1
- [45]45. Hannah Jean Miller, Jacob Thebault-Spieker, Shuo Chang, Isaac Johnson, Loren Terveen, and Brent Hecht. 2016. "Blissfully Happy" or "Ready to Fight": Varying Interpretations of Emoji. In Tenth International AAAI Conference on Web and Social Media.
- Authors
- Tigwell, G. W., Gorman, B. M., & Menzies, R.
- Affiliations
- Rochester Institute of Technology (US)
- Bournemouth University (GB)
- University of Dundee (GB)
- Venue
- Proceedings of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems
- Publisher
- ACM
- Published
- 2020-04-21
- Pages
- 1-14
- OpenAlex
- W3002968775
- Cited by
- 42
- References
- 55
- Citations by year
- 2026: 5 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 3
- FWCI
- 7.42
- Type
- conference paper
- Language
- en
- Open access
- Locations
- CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (publishedVersion)
- Bournemouth University Research Online (Bournemouth University) (acceptedVersion)
- Bournemouth University Research Online (Bournemouth University) (submittedVersion)
- Discovery Research Portal (University of Dundee) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Human Factors and Ergonomics › Digital Accessibility for Disabilities
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Human-Computer Interaction › Digital Communication and Language
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › Occupational Therapy › Assistive Technology in Communication and Mobility
- Keywords
- emojis, visual impairment, accessibility, screen readers, blind users, social interaction, assistive technology
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
