<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE article PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD JATS (Z39.96) Journal Publishing DTD v1.0 20120330//EN" "http://jats.nlm.nih.gov/publishing/1.0/JATS-journalpublishing1.dtd">
<article xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" article-type="research-article" xml:lang="en">
<front>
<journal-meta>
<journal-id journal-id-type="publisher-id">IR</journal-id>
<journal-title-group>
<journal-title>Information Research</journal-title>
</journal-title-group>
<issn pub-type="epub">1368-1613</issn>
<publisher>
<publisher-name>University of Bor&#x00E5;s</publisher-name>
</publisher>
</journal-meta>
<article-meta>
<article-id pub-id-type="publisher-id">ir30iConf47194</article-id>
<article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.47989/ir30iConf47194</article-id>
<article-categories>
<subj-group xml:lang="en">
<subject>Research article</subject>
</subj-group>
</article-categories>
<title-group>
<article-title>Graphicon evolution on Bilibili: a historically informed socio-technical approach</article-title>
</title-group>
<contrib-group>
<contrib contrib-type="author"><name><surname>Zhang</surname><given-names>Yiqiong</given-names></name>
<xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff0001"/></contrib>
<contrib contrib-type="author"><name><surname>Herring</surname><given-names>Susan C.</given-names></name>
<xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff0002"/></contrib>
<contrib contrib-type="author"><name><surname>Wu</surname><given-names>Yanmin</given-names></name>
<xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff0003"/></contrib>
<contrib contrib-type="author"><name><surname>Tan</surname><given-names>Rongle</given-names></name>
<xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff0004"/></contrib>
<aff id="aff0001"><bold>Yiqiong Zhang</bold> is Professor of Applied Linguistics at the Centre for Linguistics &#x0026; Applied Linguistics at Guangdong University of Foreign Studies in China. She obtained her PhD from the National University of Singapore in 2013. Her research focuses mainly on digital communication, covering areas such as Multimodal Discourse Analysis, Science Communication, Cross-cultural Studies, and Multiliteracies. She is on the Editorial Board of the journals Discourse &#x0026; Society, Multimodality &#x0026; Society, and Computers and Composition. She can be contacted at <email xlink:href="zhangyiqiong@gdufs.edu.cn">zhangyiqiong@gdufs.edu.cn</email></aff>
<aff id="aff0002"><bold>Susan C. Herring</bold> is Professor of Information Science and Linguistics and Director of the Centre for Computer-Mediated Communication at Indiana University, Bloomington. She received her PhD in Linguistics from the University of California, Berkeley in 1991. One of the first scholars to apply linguistic methods of analysis to computer-mediated communication (CMC), she created the Computer-Mediated Discourse Analysis (CMDA) paradigm. Her recent research has focused on multimodal CMC, including communication mediated by telepresence robots, graphical icons, and augmented reality video filters. She is a past editor of the Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication and currently edits the online journal Language@Internet. She can be contacted at <email xlink:href="herring@iu.edu">herring@iu.edu</email></aff>
<aff id="aff0003"><bold>Yanmin Wu</bold> is a Lecturer at the School of Foreign Languages, Guangzhou College of Applied Science and Technology. She holds an MA in applied linguistics from Guangdong University of Foreign Studies. Her research interest includes social media studies and multimodal discourse analysis. She can be contacted at <email xlink:href="yanminwu2020@163.com">yanminwu2020@163.com</email></aff>
<aff id="aff0004"><bold>Rongle Tan</bold> is a PhD candidate at the School of Education, Macquarie University. His research focuses on digital communication, educational technologies, multimodal discourse analysis, and social semiotics. His recent publications appear in Learning, Media and Technology, Discourse Studies, and Discourse &#x0026; Communication. He can be contacted at <email xlink:href="rongle.tan@hdr.mq.edu.au">rongle.tan@hdr.mq.edu.au</email>.</aff>
</contrib-group>
<pub-date pub-type="epub"><day>06</day><month>05</month><year>2025</year></pub-date>
<pub-date pub-type="collection"><year>2025</year></pub-date>
<volume>30</volume>
<issue>i</issue>
<fpage>798</fpage>
<lpage>814</lpage>
<permissions>
<copyright-year>2025</copyright-year>
<copyright-holder>&#x00A9; 2025 The Author(s).</copyright-holder>
<license license-type="open-access" xlink:href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/">
<license-p>This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License (<ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/">http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/</ext-link>), permitting all non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.</license-p>
</license>
</permissions>
<abstract xml:lang="en">
<title>Abstract</title>
<p><bold>Introduction.</bold> Digital technologies have transformed the way we communicate, yet research on digital communication has often focused on either social or technical factors in isolation and has generally lacked a historical perspective.</p>
<p><bold>Method.</bold> This study integrates a historical perspective with a socio-technical approach to examine the trends and factors driving the evolution of graphicons (kaomojis, emojis, and stickers) on the Chinese social media platform Bilibili.</p>
<p><bold>Analysis.</bold> The analysis involves two parts: first, identifying graphicon evolution patterns from a 14-year corpus and irregularities in relation to a predicted rise-and- fall model, and then using digital archaeology to reconstruct the history and usage of graphicons on Bilibili, classifying them into social or technical categories.</p>
<p><bold>Results.</bold> Findings show that only kaomoji usage follows a clear rise-and-fall trend, while trends for emoji and sticker use are less clear. The evolution of graphicons is influenced by both social factors, like user discourse behaviour and graphic arts, and technical factors, such as design and input interfaces.</p>
<p><bold>Conclusion.</bold> The historically informed socio-technical approach offers a feasible framework for future studies of digital phenomena. Its quantitative aspect allows the identification of longitudinal patterns and irregularities in the data, while its qualitative aspect enables greater depth through considerations of the events underlying the data. </p>
</abstract>
</article-meta>
</front>
<body>
<sec id="sec1">
<title>Introduction</title>
<p>Digital technologies have dramatically transformed communication, enabling the creation, sharing, and interpretation of visual content in more dynamic and multimodal ways across diverse platforms and at unprecedented speeds. As part of this transformation, graphicons &#x2013; graphical icons used in text-based computer-mediated communication (<xref rid="R16" ref-type="bibr">Herring &#x0026; Dainas, 2017</xref>) &#x2013; have emerged as particularly powerful tools, significantly reshaping how people express emotions, share ideas, and convey cultural nuances in digital spaces. It is thus crucial to understand how graphicons evolve and the implications of that evolution for technology-mediated communication.</p>
<p>Graphicons, as technical artefacts used in computer-mediated communication (CMC), comprise both social and technical dimensions. Studies thus far, however, have focused mainly on social perspectives, such as graphicon meanings and functions (e.g., <xref rid="R17" ref-type="bibr">Herring &#x0026; Ge-Stadnyk, 2024</xref>; <xref rid="R26" ref-type="bibr">Logi &#x0026; Zappavigna, 2021</xref>), gender and age usage patterns (<xref rid="R20" ref-type="bibr">Koch et al., 2022</xref>), and cultural influences (e.g., <xref rid="R6" ref-type="bibr">Chik &#x0026; V&#x00E1;squez, 2017</xref>; <xref rid="R46" ref-type="bibr">Zhang et al., 2021</xref>). That is, the focus has primarily been on how people use graphicons to communicate in various social contexts, while less attention has been paid to the technical factors that influence the use and evolution of graphicons. This oversight mirrors broader trends in digital communication research, where the role of technological aspects such as algorithmic design and platform interfaces has been underexplored, despite their significant impact on shaping how communication unfolds in digital environments (<xref rid="R41" ref-type="bibr">van Dijck, 2013</xref>).</p>
<p>Both perspectives are important when seeking to understand the factors that condition changes in graphicon use over time. Broadly, graphicons have evolved from simple, schematic ASCII (American Standard Code for Information Interchange) emoticons composed of keyboard symbols to more representational emojis, and further to diverse and colourful stickers on social media platforms. Konrad et al. (<xref rid="R21" ref-type="bibr">2020</xref>) propose that the evolutionary trends of these graphicons follow a rise-and-fall pattern, where a newer category of graphicon gradually replaces its predecessor. However, their proposal was inferred from synchronous, self-reported data. It remains largely unexplored how well their model aligns with actual graphicon usage and what mechanisms drive the progression in practical contexts of use.</p>
<p>The present study seeks first to identify trends in graphicon evolution on the Chinese social media platform Bilibili and then to discover the factors that contribute to those trends. It adopts a historically informed socio-technical approach, incorporating methods from digital archaeology &#x2013; the use digital technology to investigate the past &#x2013; to reconstruct the history and usage of graphicons on Bilibili. Through analysing a 14-year longitudinal corpus of Bilibili comments, we identify several key social and technical factors that arguably contributed to the observable trends and irregularities. More generally, this approach provides significant explanatory power for understanding graphicon evolution and can be applied to the study of digital communication across other platforms and cultural contexts.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="sec2">
<title>Literature review</title>
<sec id="sec2_1">
<title>Graphicon evolution</title>
<p>Graphicon studies have focused mainly on the meanings and functions of individual categories of graphicons (typically emoticons, emojis, or stickers) (see the review in <xref rid="R38" ref-type="bibr">Tang &#x0026; Hew, 2019</xref>) rather than considering graphicons in relation to one another as part of a larger ecology, as recommended by Herring and Dainas (<xref rid="R16" ref-type="bibr">2017</xref>). Even fewer studies have explored the changes that take place over time within this ecology.</p>
<p>An exception is Konrad et al. (<xref rid="R21" ref-type="bibr">2020</xref>), who posited that graphicons typically pass through three phases: an early phase, a peak phase, and a phase of decline or conventionalisation. In Western contexts, Konrad et al. (<xref rid="R21" ref-type="bibr">2020</xref>) situated emoticons in the third phase, based on their reduced frequency and their conventionalised use as punctuation; emojis in the second, peak phase; and stickers in the first, earliest phase. They also predicted that the trajectory would be more advanced in Asian countries, with stickers in ascendance and emojis starting to decline. Their predictions were based on interviews and surveys conducted with English-speaking Facebook messenger users rather than longitudinal data, however.</p>
<p>Studies with actual longitudinal data so far have confirmed that emoji have overtaken emoticons in the West (<xref rid="R30" ref-type="bibr">Pavalanathan &#x0026; Eisenstein, 2016</xref>). As emoticons have declined in frequency of use, their functions have become conventionalised as a type of punctuation (<xref rid="R28" ref-type="bibr">Markman &#x0026; Oshima, 2007</xref>; <xref rid="R32" ref-type="bibr">Provine et al., 2007</xref>), with the conventionalisation further demotivating their usage (<xref rid="R2" ref-type="bibr">Albert, 2020</xref>; <xref rid="R21" ref-type="bibr">Konrad et al., 2020</xref>). A longitudinal study in a Chinese context that examined the frequencies of kaomojis (Japanese-style emoticons), emojis, and stickers found only partial support for the prediction of Konrad et al. (<xref rid="R21" ref-type="bibr">2020</xref>), however. Kaomojis exhibited a rise-and-fall pattern, but their decline was not accompanied by an increase in emojis or stickers (<xref rid="R23" ref-type="bibr">Zhang et al., 2022</xref>).</p>
<p>The discrepancy between model-based predictions and actual data highlights the need for further investigation into the factors influencing these trends. Konrad et al. (<xref rid="R21" ref-type="bibr">2020</xref>) propose that popularity (frequency of use) and shift in pragmatic function are the primary drivers of the transition between graphicon categories. However, these could be seen as effects rather than as causes of the rise and fall of graphicon categories. It remains to be determined what factors, especially technical ones, drive their evolution.</p>
<p>Additionally, although an increasing number of new graphicon designs within each graphicon category are available, little is known about how each unique graphicon is used in practice. Several quantitative studies have identified the top 20 most frequently used emojis in different corpora (e.g., <xref rid="R25" ref-type="bibr">Liu et al., 2020</xref>; <xref rid="R36" ref-type="bibr">Wang et al., 2024</xref>), but little is known about the use of less frequently occurring emojis. Zhang et al. (<xref rid="R23" ref-type="bibr">2022</xref>) found in their longitudinal corpus that the trends in graphicon types differ significantly from those for graphicon tokens; however, no reasons for this discrepancy were given.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="sec2_2">
<title>Graphicons on Chinese social media and Bilibili</title>
<p>Graphicons on Chinese social media constitute a unique ecosystem with distinctive designs and usage. The graphicons incorporate the logographic features of Chinese characters (<xref rid="R23" ref-type="bibr">Li &#x0026; Zhu, 2019</xref>; <xref rid="R23" ref-type="bibr">Zhang et al., 2022</xref>) and convey rich cultural messages from Chinese idioms and traditions (<xref rid="R8" ref-type="bibr">de Seta, 2018</xref>; <xref rid="R46" ref-type="bibr">Zhang et al., 2021</xref>). The culturally enriched designs of graphicons on Chinese social media are preferred over Unicode emojis (e.g., <inline-graphic xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="images\c68-ufig9.jpg"><alt-text>none</alt-text></inline-graphic>) by users of different platforms (<xref rid="R8" ref-type="bibr">de Seta, 2018</xref>). Chinese users tend to use emojis more frequently in contexts involving family and social relationships compared to their Western counterparts, who also use emojis extensively in professional and casual settings (<xref rid="R13" ref-type="bibr">Guntuku et al., 2019</xref>). Although several studies have pointed out that stickers are now very popular among Chinese social media users (e.g., <xref rid="R8" ref-type="bibr">de Seta, 2018</xref>; <xref rid="R10" ref-type="bibr">Ge, 2020</xref>; <xref rid="R11" ref-type="bibr">Ge-Stadnyk et al., 2025</xref>; <xref rid="R34" ref-type="bibr">Sandel et al., 2019</xref>), we have been unable to find comparable information on the frequency of sticker use.</p>
<p>Graphicons on Bilibili are distinctive in several ways that make the platform a valuable case study for graphicon usage. Bilibili is one of the most popular social media platforms in China, featuring high stickiness and interactivity (<xref rid="R8" ref-type="bibr">Gao, 2021</xref>; <xref rid="R35" ref-type="bibr">Sun et al., 2023</xref>; <xref rid="R39" ref-type="bibr">Tian, 2021</xref>). As we argue here, graphicons play a significant role in user interaction, cultural expression, and community building. Bilibili has released platform-specific sets of emojis and stickers that have been overwhelmingly popular &#x2013; for instance, a TV set icon that is the symbol of Bilibili, and the Popular Words Series, which are graphic representations of selected popular verbal expressions from comments or &#x2018;<italic>danmu</italic>&#x2019; (short messages overlaid on the video itself) (<xref rid="R23" ref-type="bibr">Zhang et al., 2022</xref>). These platform-specific graphicons, which are associated with Bilibili&#x2019;s fandom cultures, enhance user engagement through expressive visual communication, allowing users to indicate their membership and build a sense of identity within the platform community (<xref rid="R43" ref-type="bibr">Wu et al., 2018</xref>). The platform also monetises graphicons by offering exclusive packs for purchase, encouraging users to invest more in their online presence (<xref rid="R22" ref-type="bibr">Yang, 2021</xref>).</p>
</sec>
<sec id="sec2_3">
<title>A socio-technical perspective on graphicon evolution</title>
<p>The development and widespread adoption of graphicons, as with other social media affordances, are the result of ongoing interactions between the digital platform&#x2019;s capabilities and the social needs and practices of its users. This interplay is what Trist (<xref rid="R40" ref-type="bibr">1978</xref>) called socio-technical systems theory, which emphasises the interaction of social and technical subsystems. The social subsystem focuses on human factors such as people, relationships, and norms, while the technical subsystem involves tools and technologies, such as hardware and software, required for tasks (<xref rid="R4" ref-type="bibr">Bostrom &#x0026; Heinen, 1977</xref>; <xref rid="R19" ref-type="bibr">Kling, 2007</xref>). Both aspects are crucial for understanding digital communication.</p>
<p>A socio-technical perspective has been found useful in exploring the evolution of digital communication, which is marked by the mutual influence of social practices and emerging technologies. For instance, it has shown how digital maps transitioned from traditional cartographic methods to web-native media forms that reshape social practices and spatial awareness (<xref rid="R14" ref-type="bibr">Hanchard, 2024</xref>). Studies in this line demonstrate the potential of the socio-technical approach to shed light on the complexity in evolving digital communication.</p>
<p>To the best of our knowledge, this perspective has not been explicitly applied in graphicon studies, although the focus of most existing graphicon research could be categorised as either social or technical. Studies from the social perspective explore topics such as the meanings and functions of graphicons (<xref rid="R17" ref-type="bibr">Herring &#x0026; Ge-Stadnyk, 2024</xref>; <xref rid="R26" ref-type="bibr">Logi &#x0026; Zappavigna, 2021</xref>), usage patterns in relation to user demographics and profiles (<xref rid="R20" ref-type="bibr">Koch et al., 2022</xref>), and cultural influences on graphicon use and interpretation (e.g., <xref rid="R6" ref-type="bibr">Chik &#x0026; V&#x00E1;squez, 2017</xref>; <xref rid="R46" ref-type="bibr">Zhang et al., 2021</xref>). In contrast, the technical perspective has been considerably less studied. Yet technical factors such as the design and availability of graphicons clearly have an impact on their usage. For instance, Unicode, as a technical standard, distinguishes emojis from emoticons and other iconographic formats, enabling their use across devices, operating systems, and Internet platforms, thereby facilitating their widespread circulation (<xref rid="R3" ref-type="bibr">Berard, 2018</xref>). The layout of the emoji keyboard has an impact on the time required for emoji selection (<xref rid="R31" ref-type="bibr">Pohl et al., 2017</xref>), thereby affecting its usage. Stickers, unlike emojis, are not supported by Unicode or standardised formats, which could hinder the development of widespread conventions of sticker use (<xref rid="R36" ref-type="bibr">Tagg &#x0026; Lyons, 2021</xref>). While social and technical perspectives both offer valuable insights into graphicon usage, studies investigating their interactions within the same longitudinal corpus are notably lacking.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="sec2_4">
<title>Research questions</title>
<p>This study extends the socio-technical perspective by integrating a historical analysis of both social and technical influences in a large corpus of graphicons. Specifically, we explore the following research questions: 1) What are the trends over time of the relative frequencies of Chinese graphicons on Bilibili? 2) What irregularities in the trends are observed when compared to the rise-and-fall model of graphicon evolution proposed by Konrad et al. (<xref rid="R21" ref-type="bibr">2020</xref>)? and 3) What socio-technical factors in the platform&#x2019;s history explain the trends in the Bilibili corpus, particularly the irregular frequencies that deviate from the predictions of Konrad et al. (<xref rid="R21" ref-type="bibr">2020</xref>)?</p>
</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="sec3">
<title>Methodology</title>
<sec id="sec3_1">
<title>Data collection</title>
<p>Our corpus consists of 14 years of longitudinal comment data collected from the Bilibili platform. Bilibili is a video-sharing platform that, like YouTube, allows users to post comments below the videos and features short danmu messages that are overlaid on the video itself.</p>
<p>The Bilibili platform was chosen for several reasons. Firstly, it is one of the most popular Chinese social media platforms, with average monthly active users reaching 0.315 billion (around one-fifth of the Chinese population) in the first quarter of 2023 (https://www.Bilibili.com/read/cv24070769/, retrieved July 9, 2024). Secondly, the comments can include kaomojis, emojis, and stickers. Lastly and most importantly, Bilibili preserves a historical record of the comments posted below the videos, including the graphicons in the comments, and the comments can be captured automatically.</p>
<p>The data consist of comments and replies to comments from the channel of Bilibili&#x2019;s annual Spring Festival Gala Show (hereafter, the Bilibili show) (https://space.Bilibili.com/1868902080, retrieved April 5, 2022). This channel was chosen because it is the only one that includes consecutive comments dating back to 2010. The show consists of a mash-up video of content provided by professional users to celebrate the Chinese New Year, and it is released on the eve of the Chinese New Year. Besides the show videos, the Bilibili show channel includes videos related to the gala show, such as trailers, teasers, and outtakes. Like the Bilibili show videos, these videos include older comments and replies and thus are included in our data.</p>
<p>Comments and replies from all 54 videos available in the channel, covering the years from 2010 to 2023, were captured and stored in March 2023 using Python and the Scrapy tool. A total of 992,856 messages (including both comments and replies) were collected. Danmu messages were excluded from the data due to their limited use of graphicons.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="sec3_2">
<title>Data analysis</title>
<p>The analysis was conducted in two stages. To obtain the trends of kaomojis, emojis, and stickers in use, we first identified their occurrence in the messages using a semi-supervised process of deep learning (<xref rid="R33" ref-type="bibr">Qin et al., 2019</xref>) and manual identification and calculated their frequency. The frequencies were normalised based on the total number of messages each year. We also applied Voyant (https://voyant-tools.org/), a web-based text analysis tool for analysing word frequencies and trends in comments. We derived patterns for the corpus as a whole, as well as identifying deviations from the model predicted by Konrad et al. (<xref rid="R21" ref-type="bibr">2020</xref>).</p>
<p>In the second stage, to account for the patterns in the frequencies, we adopted a historically informed socio-technical approach. We conducted digital archaeology to reconstruct the history and usage of graphicons on Bilibili, based on which we identified factors that could plausibly be related to irregularities and classified them into social or technical categories. Digital archaeology refers to &#x2018;the use of digital technology to investigate and communicate the past&#x2019; (<xref rid="R29" ref-type="bibr">Morgan, 2022</xref>, p. 214); in this case, the past being examined is also digital. Specifically, our search for historical information included the following major sources: 1) information available on Bilibili for the timeline of events, platform practices, and culture; 2) annual Bilibili financial reports for user numbers and profiles; 3) media reports about Bilibili for major events in its development and its social impact; 4) the internet archive Wayback Machine for old Bilibili webpages; and 5) questions and answers about Bilibili on platforms such as Zhihu (Chinese Reddit) for graphicon input settings and graphicon accessibility.</p>
<p>We recognise that our backgrounds as researchers influence our analysis of Bilibili&#x2019;s user communities and platform dynamics. Our approach is informed by cross-disciplinary perspectives from computer-mediated communication, linguistics, and information science. Further, the third and fourth authors are native Chinese speakers who are users of Bilibili, and the first and second authors have previously researched Bilibili and other Chinese social media platforms. While we believe these perspectives enrich our analysis, we acknowledge that our interpretations may be shaped by our familiarity with Chinese cultural contexts. Concerning data collection and use, the study followed the platform&#x2019;s guidelines for data access, scraping, and usage for academic research.</p>
</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="sec4">
<title>Findings</title>
<p>This section presents the frequencies of graphicon usage on Bilibili over time and explores how irregularities in the frequencies can be explained with reference to key historical events associated with the platform, which we classify into social or technical categories.</p>
<sec id="sec4_1">
<title>Trends in graphicon evolution on Bilibili</title>
<p>The normalised frequencies of all graphicon tokens for each of the 14 years are displayed in <xref ref-type="fig" rid="F1">Figure 1</xref>.</p>
<fig id="F1">
<label>Figure 1.</label>
<caption><p>Frequencies of graphicon tokens by year (normalized in relation to the number of messages for each year)</p></caption>
<graphic xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="images\c68-fig1.jpg"><alt-text>none</alt-text></graphic>
</fig>
<p>These trends provide partial support for the evolutionary trajectory of graphicons proposed by Konrad et al. (<xref rid="R21" ref-type="bibr">2020</xref>), particularly as regards kaomoji. Deviations from Konrad et al.&#x2019;s (2020) predicted rise and fall of each graphicon (emoji replacing emoticons (kaomojis) and stickers replacing emojis) include the following:
<list list-type="order">
<list-item><p>Although kaomoji rose and fell from 2010 to 2019, the decrease in kaomoji was not replaced by emojis or stickers, leading to a significant drop in graphicon use in 2017.</p></list-item>
<list-item><p>Emojis were not popular on Bilibili between 2010 and 2019, despite being popular on other social media platforms in China during that same period. Emoji tokens increased significantly in 2020 but remained level for the following three years.</p></list-item>
<list-item><p>Stickers, which first appeared on Bilibili in 2016, showed a steady increase except for a dramatic spike in 2021.</p></list-item>
</list></p>
</sec>
<sec id="sec4_2">
<title>History of the platform</title>
<p>As part of the findings from our digital archaeology, a brief overview of the platform&#x2019;s history is essential to understand the socio-technical factors contributing to the irregularities in graphicon evolution. Bilibili was founded in 2009 as a non-profit video-sharing community for Anime, Comics, and Games (ACG) fans (<xref rid="R35" ref-type="bibr">Sun et al., 2023</xref>). The platform derives its name from the popular anime <italic>A Certain Magical Index</italic>, where the protagonist Mikoto Misaka&#x2019;s electric attack produces a sound humorously referred to as <italic>Bilibili</italic>, which later became the nickname given to her by the male protagonist (https://www.Bilibili.com/read/cv154805/, retrieved June 4, 2024). In 2013, Bilibili received its first investment from Tencent, was listed on the NASDAQ stock index in 2018, and was listed on the Hong Kong Stock Exchange in 2021. Along with its increasing commercialisation, Bilibili has seen changes in its policies, content, and the number and profiles of its users.</p>
<p><italic>Bilibili</italic> released open registration in 2013 with a strict membership test to familiarise the newcomers with the platform&#x2019;s culture and practices. Only individuals who passed the test were granted permission to interact with comments or &#x2018;<italic>danmu&#x2019;</italic>. The test was discontinued in 2015 to accommodate a broader group of users. Not long after, a paid membership was implemented in 2017, suggesting the platform&#x2019;s full commitment to commercialisation. Together with these developments, the video content on the platform expanded from pure ACG to pan-ACG (including general games and animations, then movies and TV programs), then further to a broad spectrum of videos. Alongside the expansion of video content categories, the main user groups also shifted from ACG fans to pan-ACG fans, and then to pan-entertainment users. By 2023, the monthly active users had increased to over 300 million. The expansion of the platform from a closed community for ACG lovers to a massive pan-entertainment site is illustrated in <xref ref-type="table" rid="T1">Table 1</xref>, alongside trends in graphicon use.</p>
<table-wrap id="T1">
<label>Table 1.</label>
<caption><p>Bilibili history</p></caption>
<table>
<thead>
<tr>
<th align="center" valign="top"><bold>Stage</bold></th>
<th align="center" valign="top"><bold>1</bold></th>
<th align="center" valign="top"><bold>2</bold></th>
<th align="center" valign="top"><bold>3</bold></th>
<th align="center" valign="top"><bold>4</bold></th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td align="center" valign="top">Time</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">2010-2012</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">2013-2016</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">2017-2019</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">2020-2023</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="center" valign="top">Platform commercialisatio n</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">Non- profitable communit y for ACG</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">Investment from Tencent</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">Listed on NASDAQ in 2018</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">Opened to all brand partners in 2020; listed on the Hong Kong Stock Exchange in 2021</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="center" valign="top">Platform policies</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">Time-limited registratio n system</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">Strict membership test started in 2013, but removed in 2015</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">Paid membership in 2017</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">Hardcore membership test in 2022</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="center" valign="top">Video content on the platform</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">ACG</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">Moving from ACG to pan- ACG, including general games and animations, then to movies and TV programs</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">Non-ACG videos outnumbered ACG videos; the largest online community for professional user-generated video, vlogs, and classroom sessions</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">A broad spectrum of videos</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="center" valign="top">User profiles</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">ACG fans</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">Pan-ACG fans</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">Pan-ACG fans, Generation Z</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">Pan-entertainment users</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="center" valign="top">Graphicon trends</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">Kaomoji relatively stable</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">Kaomoji increased</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">Kaomojis decreased, not replaced by emojis or stickers</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">Platform-specific emojis and stickers increased sharply</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</table-wrap>
</sec>
<sec id="sec4_3">
<title>Socio-technical factors influencing trends in graphicon use</title>
<sec id="sec4_3_1">
<title>Social factors: user discourse behaviour</title>
<p>User discourse behaviour refers to the patterns and tendencies in how users communicate and interact within a particular context, platform, or medium (<xref rid="R15" ref-type="bibr">Herring, 2004</xref>). Variations in user behaviours can contribute to the observed irregularities in graphicon usage. Specifically, message valence (positive or negative) contributed to a significant drop in graphicon use in 2017 on Bilibili.</p>
<p>The valence of messages was examined because the emotional tone of messages has been found to be related to graphicon usage (<xref rid="R37" ref-type="bibr">Tang &#x0026; Hew, 2018</xref>). Through close reading of the messages in 2017, we found that the content was predominantly serious and negative due to two major events that occurred that year. Firstly, comments were dominated by intense and serious discussions about the plot design of the 2017 show, which featured a sci-fi mystery story with three different endings. Secondly, during the 2017 gala show, the website&#x2019;s credit system was hacked. As a result, users at advanced experience levels 5 and 6 had their credits removed and were unable to interact on the platform, including posting comments or danmu. In reaction to these events, two distinct focuses were observed in the 2017 comments: a concentration on the plot design of the Gala Show (Extract 1), and criticism of the hackers (Extract 2). Both sets of comments were generally serious in tone and tended to avoid the use of graphicons.</p>
<p>Extract 1 (2017-1-30 11:25)</p>
<p>&#x6211;&#x770B;&#x5B8C;&#x4E5F;&#x662F;&#x8FD9;&#x4E48;&#x60F3;&#x7684;&#xFF0C;&#x4E0D;&#x7136;&#x7537;&#x4E3B;&#x6D3B;&#x7684;&#x89E3;&#x51B3;&#x5C31;&#x8BF4;&#x4E0D;&#x901A;&#x4E86;&#xFF1B;&#x6D3B;&#x4E0B;&#x7684;&#x7537;&#x4E3B;&#x6CA1;&#x7EF3;&#x7D22;&#x6CA1;&#x6253;&#x706B;&#x673A;&#x53BB;&#x62EF;&#x6551;&#x4E00;&#x4E0B;&#x5973;&#x4E3B;&#x662F;&#x4E0D; &#x53EF;&#x80FD;&#x7684;&#xFF0C;&#x697C;&#x91CC;&#x4E5F;&#x6CA1;&#x7537;&#x4E3B;&#x5C38;&#x9AA8;&#x3002;&#x8FD9;&#x6837;&#x89E3;&#x91CA;&#x4E2A;&#x4EBA;&#x611F;&#x89C9;&#x6BD4; &#x8F83;&#x5408;&#x9002;&#x3002; (Translation: I had the same idea after watching it. Otherwise, the resolution of the male protagonist surviving doesn&#x2019;t make sense. Without a rope or a lighter, it would be impossible for the surviving male protagonist to save the female protagonist, and there were no remains of the male protagonist in the building. This explanation feels more fitting to me personally.)</p>
<p>In Extract 1, the commenter attempted to make sense of the plot design by ruling out various possible interpretations. No graphicons were used in the comment, and several negations were used in ruling out possibilities. Graphicons have always tended to be used in playful and positive settings (e.g., <xref rid="R46" ref-type="bibr">Zhang et al., 2021</xref>), but they were absent in this serious discussion. Similarly, the commenters who posted messages to the hackers in Extract 2 intended for their messages to be taken seriously, so they also avoided using graphicons, which might suggest a playful tone, as highlighted in many studies (<xref rid="R21" ref-type="bibr">Konrad et al., 2020</xref>; <xref rid="R46" ref-type="bibr">Zhang et al., 2021</xref>).</p>
<p>Extract 2 (2017-01-28 01:26)</p>
<p>&#x81F4;&#x656C;&#x653B;&#x51FB; B &#x7AD9;&#x7684;&#x4EBA;-&#x4F60;&#x4EEC;&#x8D8A;&#x8FD9;&#x4E48;&#x95F9;&#xFF0C;&#x6211;&#x53CD;&#x800C;&#x8D8A;&#x7231;&#x8FD9;&#x4E2A;&#x7F51;&#x7AD9;&#xFF01;(Translation: A salute to those attacking Bilibili: The more you cause trouble, the more I love this website!)</p>
<p>The use of negation in Extract 1 prompted us to examine the negativity of the comments more systematically. We identified occurrences of the Chinese character for negation &#x4E0D; [BU] in the corpus along the timeline using Voyant for analysing word frequencies and trends in comments. The normalised frequency of the negation character, as shown in <xref ref-type="fig" rid="F2">Figure 2</xref>, peaked in 2017, indicating that the degree of negativity in the comments was most prominent that year. This is the relative frequency of the term in the document, calculated by dividing the raw frequency by the total number of terms in the document and multiplying by 1 million (https://voyant- tools.org/docs/#!/guide/documentterms). The seriousness and negativity of messages in 2017 plausibly explains the drop in overall graphicon usage, particularly in kaomojis, in 2017. </p>
<fig id="F2">
<label>Figure 2.</label>
<caption><p>Frequencies of occurrence of &#x4E0D; [BU] (normalized in relation to the total number of Chinese words)</p></caption>
<graphic xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="images\c68-fig2.jpg"><alt-text>none</alt-text></graphic>
</fig>
<p>A cooccurring factor that could also have contributed to the significant drop in kaomoji usage was the influx of new and non-ACG users in 2017 (as shown in <xref ref-type="table" rid="T1">Table 1</xref>), since the use of kaomojis is closely linked to ACG culture (<xref rid="R18" ref-type="bibr">Kaneyasu, 2022</xref>).</p>
<p>Another type of user discourse behaviour that plausibly impacted graphicon irregularities in our data is graphicon art. This involves using graphicons to create various shapes and designs, as illustrated in <xref ref-type="fig" rid="F3">Figure 3</xref>. As emoticons gained in popularity in the 1990s, ASCII art emerged as a type of <italic>&#x2018;cyberplay&#x2019;</italic> (<xref rid="R7" ref-type="bibr">Danet, 2001</xref>) involving the use of the symbols from the ASCII set to craft images and designs in text-based messages (<xref rid="R8" ref-type="bibr">de Seta, 2018</xref>; <xref rid="R22" ref-type="bibr">Kozar, 1995</xref>). Graphicon art has evolved with the introduction of new graphicon forms, from ASCII symbols to emojis (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="F3">Figure 3</xref>, left) and stickers (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="F3">Figure 3</xref>, right). Designs composed of stickers were more popular than those with emojis in our corpus, a preference that may stem from stickers being larger and more colourful than emojis, making them a more appealing choice as graphic arts components.</p>
<fig id="F3">
<label>Figure 3.</label>
<caption><p>Examples of graphicon arts in messages from 2021</p></caption>
<graphic xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="images\c68-fig3.jpg"><alt-text>none</alt-text></graphic>
</fig>
<p>Graphicon arts gained immense popularity on Bilibili in 2021, with numerous replies featuring copy-pasted designs. This surge increased the frequency of graphicons, leading to a sharp rise in sticker tokens in 2021. However, its popularity was short-lived, resulting in a temporary spike in sticker usage in that year.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="sec4_3_2">
<title>Technical factors: graphicon availability</title>
<p>Beyond social factors, technical factors also significantly shaped the evolution of Bilibili graphicons. Graphicon availability stands out as a crucial factor in explaining their use. This refers to the presence and accessibility of graphicons on specific platforms, which in turn determines the range, variety, and ease of use of graphicons for users. This section focuses on two issues related to accessibility, graphicon design and the input interface.</p>
<p>Graphicon design influences graphicon usage, because visually appealing, easily recognizable, and contextually appropriate designs are more likely to be adopted and regularly used by users. This factor is especially important in the Chinese context, because users tend to prefer platform-specific graphicons that encode the community culture (<xref rid="R8" ref-type="bibr">de Seta, 2018</xref>; <xref rid="R23" ref-type="bibr">Zhang et al., 2022</xref>; <xref rid="R46" ref-type="bibr">Zhang et al., 2021</xref>).</p>
<p>Our corpus has very low frequencies of emojis and stickers until 2020, which is unexpected given their widespread use on other social media platforms well before 2020. The significant increase in emojis and stickers after 2020 is primarily due to the introduction of platform-specific sets. Notably, Bilibili released a set of Yellow Face emojis in 2019 (see examples in <xref ref-type="table" rid="T2">Table 2</xref>), with facial representations that differ slightly from those found on other social media platforms like WeChat or Weibo (<xref rid="R8" ref-type="bibr">de Seta, 2018</xref>; <xref rid="R23" ref-type="bibr">Zhang et al., 2022</xref>). The Yellow Faces set also includes emojis for the New Year&#x2019;s celebration, such as the New Year Blessing in <xref ref-type="table" rid="T2">Table 2</xref>. Regarding stickers, Bilibili released several free sets that have become overwhelmingly popular among users. These include the TV set, which is an iconic symbol of Bilibili, and the Popular Words Series (PWS), which are graphic representations of selected popular expressions from comments or &#x2018;<italic>danmu&#x2019;</italic> (see <xref ref-type="table" rid="T2">Table 2</xref>). These platform-specific graphicons encode Chinese characters and the discourse practices of the platform, making them among the most frequently used in Bilibili (<xref rid="R23" ref-type="bibr">Zhang et al., 2022</xref>).</p>
<table-wrap id="T2">
<label>Table 2.</label>
<caption><p>Examples of platform-specific sets of emojis and stickers</p></caption>
<table>
<thead>
<tr>
<th align="center" valign="top">Category</th>
<th align="center" valign="top">Yellow faces</th>
<th align="center" valign="top">Stickers</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td align="center" valign="top">Name</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">Doge</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">New Year Blessing</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">PWS: wonderful</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">TV set: smile</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="center" valign="top">Graphicon</td>
<td align="center" valign="top"><inline-graphic xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="images\c68-ufig1.jpg"><alt-text>none</alt-text></inline-graphic></td>
<td align="center" valign="top"><inline-graphic xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="images\c68-ufig2.jpg"><alt-text>none</alt-text></inline-graphic></td>
<td align="center" valign="top"><inline-graphic xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="images\c68-ufig3.jpg"><alt-text>none</alt-text></inline-graphic></td>
<td align="center" valign="top"><inline-graphic xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="images\c68-ufig4.jpg"><alt-text>none</alt-text></inline-graphic></td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</table-wrap>
<p>It should be noted that there was a noticeable lag between the release of graphicons and their usage in comments. Emojis and stickers released in March 2019 did not see widespread use until 2020, as most comments on the gala show were posted shortly after the event in January. This explains the increase in the frequency of emojis and stickers from 2020 to 2023, driven by the release of platform-specific sets. This rise is especially noteworthy in light of a study on emoji usage during the COVID-19 outbreak on Chinese social media, which found a substantial decline in both the proportion of posts containing emojis and the ratio of users using emojis during that period (<xref rid="R16" ref-type="bibr">Liu et al., 2022</xref>).</p>
<p>Another technical factor influencing the availability of graphicons is the input interface, which refers to the features and functionalities that allow users to type and select graphicons in their comments for submission to be displayed on the platform. We expected that the inclusion of graphicons in the input interface would lead to an increase in their accessibility and further their usage.</p>
<table-wrap id="T3">
<label>Table 3.</label>
<caption><p>Input interface versions on the Bilibili website from 2010 to 2023</p></caption>
<table>
<thead>
<tr>
<th align="center" valign="top"><bold>Time</bold></th>
<th align="center" valign="top"><bold>Screen shot</bold></th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td align="center" valign="top">2010-2012</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">No kaomoji in the input interface for comments.</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="center" valign="top">2013-2014</td>
<td align="center" valign="top"><inline-graphic xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="images\c68-ufig5.jpg"><alt-text>none</alt-text></inline-graphic>
<italic>From a post on Zhihu discussing the Bilibili interface design in 2014, captured 07/20/2023 (https://www.zhihu.com/question/25116069)</italic></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="center" valign="top">2015-2018</td>
<td align="center" valign="top"><inline-graphic xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="images\c68-ufig6.jpg"><alt-text>none</alt-text></inline-graphic>
<italic>From the Wayback Machine, dated 04/24/2015, captured 07/20/2023.</italic></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="center" valign="top">2019</td>
<td align="center" valign="top"><inline-graphic xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="images\c68-ufig7.jpg"><alt-text>none</alt-text></inline-graphic>
<italic>From the Wayback Machine, dated 10/02/2019, captured 07/20/2023.</italic></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="center" valign="top">2020-2023</td>
<td align="center" valign="top"><inline-graphic xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="images\c68-ufig8.jpg"><alt-text>none</alt-text></inline-graphic>
<italic>From the Wayback Machine, dated 02/03/2020, captured 07/20/2023.</italic></td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</table-wrap>
<p>Several successive versions of the input interface for comments on Bilibili are presented in <xref ref-type="table" rid="T3">Table 3</xref>. At the early stage of Bilibili, no graphicons were available in the input interface. The input of kaomojis at that time required users to either manually type ASCII symbols or copy kaomojis from other sources. Kaomojis first appeared in the input interface in 2013 (see the interface of 2013-2014 in <xref ref-type="table" rid="T3">Table 3</xref>). The introduction of an auto-drop-down menu for kaomojis in 2015 (see the 2015-2018 input interface in <xref ref-type="table" rid="T3">Table 3</xref>) significantly improved input convenience, leading to a further increase in kaomoji use.</p>
<p>In 2019, the Yellow Faces set was introduced to the input interface, followed by an increase in emoji frequencies in 2020. The Popular Words Series and Bilibili TV series appeared in the 2020 interface, followed by an increase in sticker frequencies in 2021, 2022, and 2023. Also, in the 2020 interface, kaomojis were downplayed by using grey fonts instead of black, as in previous versions. It is also worth highlighting that the input interface did not include Unicode emojis or non-platform-specific stickers, which could be a possible reason for their usage frequencies remaining extremely low over the course of 14 years. This suggests that the (lack of) availability of a graphicon category in the input interface greatly affects its use. In support of this, we examined the top 10 kaomojis and found that they were mostly from the recommended list in the 2015-2018 interface, whereas the top emojis and stickers were from the recommended lists in the 2020 interface. It should be noted that the web interface is different from the mobile interface, which Bilibili released in February 2012. According to the mobile interface in 2023, users who made comments could either use graphicons recommended by the Bilibili interface or mobile input methods. Unfortunately, we were not able to retrieve the interface data from mobile versions.</p>
</sec>
</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="sec5">
<title>Discussion</title>
<p>Based on a longitudinal corpus of comments from Bilibili, we first mapped the trends of the frequencies of kaomojis, emojis, and stickers. We then explored how these trends aligned with or diverged from the predicted rise-and-fall pattern of graphicons by Konrad et al. (<xref rid="R21" ref-type="bibr">2020</xref>). We investigated the history of Bilibili and uncovered both social and technical factors that plausibly influenced the evolution of graphicons.</p>
<p>Among the social factors, serious and negative situations in 2017 caused a marked decrease in the frequency of kaomojis in user comments (emojis and stickers had not yet become widely used on Bilibili). Previous studies using qualitative data have shown that people tend to use more emoticons in positive contexts than in negative ones (<xref rid="R1" ref-type="bibr">Ahn et al., 2011</xref>) and that emojis are not likely to be used in negative criticism statements (<xref rid="R5" ref-type="bibr">Chang, 2016</xref>). The statistics from our corpus offer the first quantitative confirmation of this tendency. While it is widely recognised that graphicons are commonly used to add a positive and playful tone to messages (e.g., <xref rid="R21" ref-type="bibr">Konrad et al., 2020</xref>), understanding of their meaning potential in negative contexts remains quite limited. This factor highlights the need for further exploration of graphicons in negative contexts and for developing graphicon categories to express negative meanings.</p>
<p>Graphicon arts represent another form of user discourse whereby users craft elaborate visual displays by blending a combination of kaomojis, emojis, and stickers, causing a notable surge in sticker usage in 2021. There has been a trend toward larger and more complex visual designs as graphicons evolved from kaomojis to emojis and then to stickers. Meanwhile, there is a growing integration of graphicons, both their design and usage, into internet meme culture. Although it is widely acknowledged that internet memes are a major source for sticker creation (e.g., <xref rid="R10" ref-type="bibr">Ge, 2020</xref>; <xref rid="R27" ref-type="bibr">Ma, 2016</xref>), our findings indicate that graphicons are also intricately intertwined with the meme culture through graphicon arts. The copy-pasted graphicon arts are frequently used in messages as memes to execute various types of speech acts such as confirm and congratulate, consistent with the concept of &#x2018;<italic>memes as speech acts</italic>&#x2019; (<xref rid="R12" ref-type="bibr">Grundlingh, 2018</xref>). However, graphicon arts were only popular on Bilibili in 2021, and the reasons for their decline in 2022 remain unclear. To assess the durability of the graphicon art trend, further observation with more extensive longitudinal data is necessary.</p>
<p>For technical factors, we proposed that the design of graphicons had a significant impact on graphicon usage on Bilibili. The most popular graphicon types were those platform-specific sets that are deeply imbued with community practices and culture, first kaomojis and then Yellow Faces and Popular Word Series. Bilibili has highly sticky user groups and community engagement through the interactivity of the platform (<xref rid="R8" ref-type="bibr">Gao, 2021</xref>; <xref rid="R35" ref-type="bibr">Sun et al., 2023</xref>; <xref rid="R39" ref-type="bibr">Tian, 2021</xref>). Given the sharp increase in the frequency of platform-specific graphicon sets during a period of rapid influx of new users, we propose that these graphicon sets are strategic tools employed by the Bilibili platform to boost user engagement and cultivate a sense of community belonging.</p>
<p>Another technical factor that had a major impact on graphicon usage on Bilibili is the availability of graphicon categories in the input interface. We noted a rise in the frequency of each category (kaomojis, emojis, and stickers) after it was featured in the comment input interface. While we were able to track the availability of the web version&#x2019;s input interface using archived data, we could not be certain whether the extremely low usage of Unicode emojis and non-platform-specific stickers was due to their non-appearance in the input interface. However, there is precedent for assuming that it was. In their comparative study of websites/apps for restaurant recommendations, Chik and V&#x00E1;squez (<xref rid="R6" ref-type="bibr">2017</xref>) found that many OpenRice reviewers included emojis in their reviews, while Yelp reviewers did not, because OpenRice provided users with the option to use emojis, whereas Yelp did not.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="sec6">
<title>Conclusion</title>
<p>To the best of our knowledge, this is the first empirical case study to explore the factors driving graphicon evolution based on actual longitudinal data. Our longitudinal analysis uncovered both social factors, such as user discourse behaviour and graphicon arts, and technical factors, including graphicon design and input interfaces, that plausibly played a role in shaping graphicon evolution on Bilibili. Findings from the case study should be validated with other topics and platforms, however, as our analysis was limited to the Bilibili channel for the Chinese New Year show.</p>
<p>From a methodological perspective, building on our digital archaeological investigation of the factors influencing graphicon use, we expanded the socio-technical approach into a historically informed socio-technical approach for studying graphicon evolution. This method uncovered insights and connections that might otherwise have never been made previously, emphasising the value of a contextually and historically enriched approach. Its quantitative aspect allows the identification of longitudinal patterns and irregularities in the data, while its qualitative aspect enables greater depth through consideration of the events underlying the data. In the present study, the historical aspect of this approach focused on understanding the temporal context in which graphicons have emerged, evolved, and declined, recognising their development as deeply intertwined with the broader social context and technological advancements on Bilibili. However, we are aware that the historical factors discussed in this article are not exhaustive. For instance, it is important to consider how specific hardware and mobile operating systems might influence the use of graphicons. Nonetheless, the historically informed socio-technical approach offers a feasible framework for future studies of graphicon evolution, as well as of other digital phenomena. It encourages researchers to consider historical and contextual factors for more comprehensive analyses. For platform designers and developers, our findings highlight the importance of both user behaviour and technical design in shaping digital communication tools. This understanding can lead to more user-centred and culturally responsive platform designs. The generalizability of the findings from Bilibili to other platforms remains to be explored; other Chinese social media platforms such as Sina Weibo and WeChat have their own distinctive cultures of use, including as regards graphicons. Such explorations can benefit from the historically informed socio-technical approach, which sheds light on the evolution of communication tools and digital communication, as well as broader trends in digital culture.</p>
</sec>
</body>
<back>
<ack>
<title>Acknowledgements</title>
<p>This study was partially supported by the Humanities and Social Sciences Fund of the Ministry of Education of the People&#x2019;s Republic of China (Grant No. 22YJA740037) and the Department of Education of Guangdong Province (Grant No. 2020WTSCX016). We also acknowledge the generous contributions of the China Scholarship Council, the Carnegie Corporation of New York, the Ford Foundation, the Harvard-Yenching Institute, the Henry Luce Foundation, and the Rockefeller Brothers Fund. The views and opinions expressed in the article do not reflect the positions of the supporting institutions.</p>
</ack>
<ref-list>
<title>References</title>
<ref id="R1"><element-citation publication-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Ahn</surname><given-names>W.</given-names></name><name><surname>Park</surname><given-names>J.</given-names></name><name><surname>Han</surname><given-names>K.</given-names></name></person-group><year>2011</year><chapter-title>Emoticons convey emotion in CMC</chapter-title><person-group person-group-type="editor"><name><surname>Little</surname><given-names>L.</given-names></name></person-group><person-group person-group-type="editor"><name><surname>Coventry</surname><given-names>L.</given-names></name></person-group><source>Proceedings of HCI 2011: The 25th BCS Conference on Human Computer Interaction (HCI)</source><publisher-name>BCS Learning &#x0026; Development Ltd</publisher-name><ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.14236/ewic/HCI2011.11">https://doi.org/10.14236/ewic/HCI2011.11</ext-link></element-citation></ref>
<ref id="R2"><element-citation publication-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Albert</surname><given-names>G.</given-names></name></person-group><year>2020</year><chapter-title>Beyond the binary: emoji as a challenge to the image-word distinction</chapter-title><person-group person-group-type="editor"><name><surname>Thurlow</surname><given-names>C.</given-names></name></person-group><person-group person-group-type="editor"><name><surname>D&#x00FC;rscheid</surname><given-names>C.</given-names></name></person-group><person-group person-group-type="editor"><name><surname>Di&#x00E9;moz</surname><given-names>F.</given-names></name></person-group><source>Visualizing digital discourse</source><fpage>65</fpage><lpage>80</lpage><publisher-name>De Gruyter Mouton</publisher-name></element-citation></ref>
<ref id="R3"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Berard</surname><given-names>B.</given-names></name></person-group><year>2018</year><article-title>I second that emoji: the standards, structures, and social production of emoji</article-title><source>First Monday</source><volume>23</volume><issue>9</issue><ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5210/fm.v23i9.9381">https://doi.org/10.5210/fm.v23i9.9381</ext-link></element-citation></ref>
<ref id="R4"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Bostrom</surname><given-names>R. P.</given-names></name><name><surname>Heinen</surname><given-names>J. S.</given-names></name></person-group><year>1977</year><article-title>MIS problems and failures: a socio-technical perspective. Part I: The causes</article-title><source>MIS Quarterly</source><volume>1</volume><issue>3</issue><fpage>17</fpage><lpage>32</lpage><ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.2307/248710">https://doi.org/10.2307/248710</ext-link></element-citation></ref>
<ref id="R5"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Chang</surname><given-names>C. Y.</given-names></name></person-group><year>2016</year><article-title>EFL reviewers&#x2019; emoticon use in asynchronous computerm-ediated peer response</article-title><source>Computers and Composition</source><volume>40</volume><fpage>1</fpage><lpage>18</lpage><ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compcom.2016.03.008">https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compcom.2016.03.008</ext-link></element-citation></ref>
<ref id="R6"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Chik</surname><given-names>A.</given-names></name><name><surname>V&#x00E1;squez</surname><given-names>C.</given-names></name></person-group><year>2017</year><article-title>A comparative multimodal analysis of restaurant reviews from two geographical contexts</article-title><source>Visual Communication</source><volume>16</volume><issue>1</issue><fpage>3</fpage><lpage>26</lpage><ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1177/1470357216634005">https://doi.org/10.1177/1470357216634005</ext-link></element-citation></ref>
<ref id="R7"><element-citation publication-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Danet</surname><given-names>B.</given-names></name></person-group><year>2001</year><source>Cyberplay: communicating online</source><publisher-name>Berg</publisher-name></element-citation></ref>
<ref id="R8"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>de Seta</surname><given-names>G.</given-names></name></person-group><year>2018</year><article-title>Biaoqing: the circulation of emoticons, emoji, stickers, and custom images on Chinese digital media platforms</article-title><source>First Monday</source><volume>23</volume><issue>9</issue><ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5210/fm.v23i9.9391">https://doi.org/10.5210/fm.v23i9.9391</ext-link></element-citation></ref>
<ref id="R9"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Gao</surname><given-names>J.</given-names></name></person-group><year>2021</year><article-title>Business model evolution of content platform in emerging economy: a case study of Bilibili</article-title><source>American Journal of Industrial and Business Management</source><volume>11</volume><issue>8</issue><fpage>954</fpage><lpage>972</lpage><ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.4236/ajibm.2021.118058">https://doi.org/10.4236/ajibm.2021.118058</ext-link></element-citation></ref>
<ref id="R10"><element-citation publication-type="other"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Ge</surname><given-names>J.</given-names></name></person-group><year>2020</year><article-title>The anatomy of memetic stickers: An analysis of sticker competition on Chinese social media</article-title><source>In Proceedings of the 3rd International Workshop on Emoji Understanding and Applications in Social Media (Emoji2020)</source><ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.36190/2020.01">10.36190/2020.01</ext-link></element-citation></ref>
<ref id="R11"><element-citation publication-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Ge-Stadnyk</surname><given-names>J.</given-names></name><name><surname>Herring</surname><given-names>S. C.</given-names></name><name><surname>Sa</surname><given-names>L.</given-names></name></person-group><year>2025</year><chapter-title>Multimodality in digital discourse: exploring image-text interrelations in WeChat sticker use</chapter-title><person-group person-group-type="editor"><name><surname>Vasquez</surname><given-names>C.</given-names></name></person-group><person-group person-group-type="editor"><name><surname>Chovanec</surname><given-names>J.</given-names></name></person-group><source>Experiencing digital discourses: multimodality, engagement, activism</source><publisher-name>Palgrave Macmillan</publisher-name></element-citation></ref>
<ref id="R12"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Grundlingh</surname><given-names>L.</given-names></name></person-group><year>2018</year><article-title>Memes as speech acts</article-title><source>Social Semiotics</source><volume>28</volume><issue>2</issue><fpage>147</fpage><lpage>168</lpage><ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1080/10350330.2017.1303020">https://doi.org/10.1080/10350330.2017.1303020</ext-link></element-citation></ref>
<ref id="R13"><element-citation publication-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Guntuku</surname><given-names>S. C.</given-names></name><name><surname>Li</surname><given-names>M.</given-names></name><name><surname>Tay</surname><given-names>L.</given-names></name><name><surname>Ungar</surname><given-names>L. H.</given-names></name></person-group><year>2019</year><chapter-title>Studying cultural differences in emoji usage across the East and the West</chapter-title><source>International AAAI Conference on Web and Social Media</source><publisher-loc>M&#x00FC;nich, Germany</publisher-loc></element-citation></ref>
<ref id="R14"><element-citation publication-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Hanchard</surname><given-names>M.</given-names></name></person-group><year>2024</year><source>Engaging with digital maps: our knowledgeable deferral to rough guides</source><publisher-name>Palgrave Macmillan</publisher-name><ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-8972-0">https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-8972-0</ext-link></element-citation></ref>
<ref id="R15"><element-citation publication-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Herring</surname><given-names>S. C.</given-names></name></person-group><year>2004</year><chapter-title>Computer-mediated discourse analysis: an approach to researching online behavior</chapter-title><person-group person-group-type="editor"><name><surname>Barab</surname><given-names>S. A.</given-names></name></person-group><person-group person-group-type="editor"><name><surname>Kling</surname><given-names>R.</given-names></name></person-group><person-group person-group-type="editor"><name><surname>Gray</surname><given-names>J. H.</given-names></name></person-group><source>Designing for virtual communities in the service of learning</source><fpage>338</fpage><lpage>376</lpage><publisher-name>Cambridge University Press</publisher-name></element-citation></ref>
<ref id="R16"><element-citation publication-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Herring</surname><given-names>S. C.</given-names></name><name><surname>Dainas</surname><given-names>A.</given-names></name></person-group><year>2017</year><chapter-title>"Nice picture comment!": graphicons in Facebook comment threads</chapter-title><source>Proceedings of the Fiftieth Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences</source><fpage>2185</fpage><lpage>2194</lpage><publisher-name>IEEE Press</publisher-name><ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.24251/HICSS.2017.264">https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.24251/HICSS.2017.264</ext-link></element-citation></ref>
<ref id="R17"><element-citation publication-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Herring</surname><given-names>S. C.</given-names></name><name><surname>Ge-Stadnyk</surname><given-names>J.</given-names></name></person-group><year>2024</year><chapter-title>Emoji and illutionarity: acting on, and acting as, language</chapter-title><person-group person-group-type="editor"><name><surname>Gill</surname><given-names>M.</given-names></name></person-group><person-group person-group-type="editor"><name><surname>Malmivirta</surname><given-names>A.</given-names></name></person-group><person-group person-group-type="editor"><name><surname>Warvik</surname><given-names>B.</given-names></name></person-group><source>Structures in discourse: studies in interaction, adaptability, and pragmatic functions</source><fpage>124</fpage><lpage>165</lpage><publisher-name>John Benjamins</publisher-name></element-citation></ref>
<ref id="R18"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Kaneyasu</surname><given-names>M.</given-names></name></person-group><year>2022</year><article-title>Multimodal strategies for balancing formality and informality: the role of kaomoji in online comment-reply interactions</article-title><source>Internet Pragmatics</source><volume>5</volume><issue>1</issue><fpage>143</fpage><lpage>164</lpage><ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1075/ip.00071.kan">https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1075/ip.00071.kan</ext-link></element-citation></ref>
<ref id="R19"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Kling</surname><given-names>R.</given-names></name></person-group><year>2007</year><article-title>What is social informatics and why does it matter?</article-title><source>The Information Society</source><volume>23</volume><issue>4</issue><fpage>205</fpage><lpage>220</lpage><ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1080/01972240701441556">https://doi.org/10.1080/01972240701441556</ext-link></element-citation></ref>
<ref id="R20"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Koch</surname><given-names>T. K.</given-names></name><name><surname>Romero</surname><given-names>P.</given-names></name><name><surname>Stachl</surname><given-names>C.</given-names></name></person-group><year>2022</year><article-title>Age and gender in language, emoji, and emoticon usage in instant messages</article-title><source>Computers in Human Behavior</source><volume>126</volume><fpage>106990</fpage><ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2021.106990">https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2021.106990</ext-link></element-citation></ref>
<ref id="R21"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Konrad</surname><given-names>A.</given-names></name><name><surname>Herring</surname><given-names>S. C.</given-names></name><name><surname>Choi</surname><given-names>D.</given-names></name></person-group><year>2020</year><article-title>Sticker and emoji use in Facebook messenger: Implications for graphicon change</article-title><source>Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication</source><volume>25</volume><issue>3</issue><fpage>217</fpage><lpage>235</lpage><ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1093/jcmc/zmaa003">https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1093/jcmc/zmaa003</ext-link></element-citation></ref>
<ref id="R22"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Kozar</surname><given-names>S.</given-names></name></person-group><year>1995</year><article-title>Enduring traditions, ethereal transmissions: recreating Chinese New Year celebrations on the Internet</article-title><source>Journal of Computer&#x2010;Mediated Communication</source><volume>1</volume><issue>2</issue><ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1083-6101.1995.tb00329.x">https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1083-6101.1995.tb00329.x</ext-link></element-citation></ref>
<ref id="R23"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Li</surname><given-names>W.</given-names></name><name><surname>Zhu</surname><given-names>H.</given-names></name></person-group><year>2019</year><article-title>Tran&#x00DF;cripting: playful subversion with Chinese characters</article-title><source>International Journal of Multilingualism</source><volume>16</volume><issue>2</issue><fpage>145</fpage><lpage>161</lpage><ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1080/14790718.2019.1575834">https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1080/14790718.2019.1575834</ext-link></element-citation></ref>
<ref id="R24"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Liu</surname><given-names>C.</given-names></name><name><surname>Tan</surname><given-names>X.</given-names></name><name><surname>Zhou</surname><given-names>T.</given-names></name><name><surname>Zhang</surname><given-names>W.</given-names></name><name><surname>Liu</surname><given-names>J.</given-names></name><name><surname>Lu</surname><given-names>X.</given-names></name></person-group><year>2022</year><article-title>Emoji use in China: popularity patterns and changes due to COVID-19</article-title><source>Applied Intelligence</source><volume>52</volume><issue>14</issue><fpage>16138</fpage><lpage>16148</lpage><ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s10489-022-03195-y">https://doi.org/10.1007/s10489-022-03195-y</ext-link></element-citation></ref>
<ref id="R25"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Liu</surname><given-names>F.</given-names></name><name><surname>Wang</surname><given-names>H.</given-names></name><name><surname>Xu</surname><given-names>X.</given-names></name></person-group><year>2020</year><article-title>Usage behaviour and cause of emoji in social media</article-title><source>Complex Systems and Complexity Science</source><volume>17</volume><issue>3</issue><fpage>70</fpage><lpage>77</lpage><ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.13306/j.1672-3813.2020.03.007">https://doi.org/10.13306/j.1672-3813.2020.03.007</ext-link></element-citation></ref>
<ref id="R26"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Logi</surname><given-names>L.</given-names></name><name><surname>Zappavigna</surname><given-names>M.</given-names></name></person-group><year>2021</year><article-title>A social semiotic perspective on emoji: how emoji and language interact to make meaning in digital messages</article-title><source>New Media &#x0026; Society</source><volume>25</volume><issue>12</issue><fpage>3222</fpage><lpage>3246</lpage><ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1177/14614448211032965">https://doi.org/10.1177/14614448211032965</ext-link></element-citation></ref>
<ref id="R27"><element-citation publication-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Ma</surname><given-names>X.</given-names></name></person-group><year>2016</year><chapter-title>From Internet memes to emoticon engineering: insights from the Baozou comic phenomenon in China</chapter-title><person-group person-group-type="editor"><name><surname>Kurosu</surname><given-names>M.</given-names></name></person-group><source>Human-computer interaction. Novel user experiences: 18th International Conference, HCI International 2016</source><fpage>15</fpage><lpage>27</lpage><publisher-name>Springer</publisher-name></element-citation></ref>
<ref id="R28"><element-citation publication-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Markman</surname><given-names>K. M.</given-names></name><name><surname>Oshima</surname><given-names>S.</given-names></name></person-group><year>2007</year><chapter-title>Pragmatic play? some possible functions of English emoticons and Japanese kaomoji in computer-mediated discourse</chapter-title><source>Paper presented at the Association of Internet Researchers Annual Conference 8.0: Let&#x2019;s Play!</source><publisher-name>Vancouver, B.C.</publisher-name><publisher-loc>Canada</publisher-loc></element-citation></ref>
<ref id="R29"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Morgan</surname><given-names>C.</given-names></name></person-group><year>2022</year><article-title>Current digital archaeology</article-title><source>Annual Review of Anthropology</source><volume>51</volume><fpage>213</fpage><lpage>231</lpage><ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-anthro-041320-114101">https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-anthro-041320-114101</ext-link></element-citation></ref>
<ref id="R30"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Pavalanathan</surname><given-names>U.</given-names></name><name><surname>Eisenstein</surname><given-names>J.</given-names></name></person-group><year>2016</year><article-title>More emojis, less :) The competition for paralinguistic function in microblog writing</article-title><source>First Monday</source><volume>22</volume><issue>11</issue><ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.5210/fm.v21i11.6879">https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.5210/fm.v21i11.6879</ext-link></element-citation></ref>
<ref id="R31"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Pohl</surname><given-names>H.</given-names></name><name><surname>Domin</surname><given-names>C.</given-names></name><name><surname>Rohs</surname><given-names>M.</given-names></name></person-group><year>2017</year><article-title>Beyond just text: semantic emoji similarity modeling to support expressive communication</article-title><source>ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction (TOCHI)</source><volume>24</volume><issue>1</issue><fpage>1</fpage><lpage>42</lpage><ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1145/3039685">https://doi.org/10.1145/3039685</ext-link></element-citation></ref>
<ref id="R32"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Provine</surname><given-names>R. R.</given-names></name><name><surname>Spencer</surname><given-names>R. J.</given-names></name><name><surname>Mandell</surname><given-names>D. L.</given-names></name></person-group><year>2007</year><article-title>Emotional expression online: emoticons punctuate website text messages</article-title><source>Journal of Language and Social Psychology</source><volume>26</volume><issue>3</issue><fpage>299</fpage><lpage>307</lpage><ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1177/0261927X06303481">https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1177/0261927X06303481</ext-link></element-citation></ref>
<ref id="R33"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Qin</surname><given-names>Y.</given-names></name><name><surname>Shen</surname><given-names>G.</given-names></name><name><surname>Zhao</surname><given-names>W.</given-names></name><name><surname>Chen</surname><given-names>Y.</given-names></name><name><surname>Yu</surname><given-names>M.</given-names></name><name><surname>Jin</surname><given-names>X.</given-names></name></person-group><year>2019</year><article-title>A network security entity recognition method based on feature template and CNN-BiLSTM-CRF</article-title><source>Frontiers of Information Technology &#x0026; Electronic Engineering</source><volume>20</volume><issue>6</issue><fpage>872</fpage><lpage>884</lpage><ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1631/FITEE.1800520">https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1631/FITEE.1800520</ext-link></element-citation></ref>
<ref id="R34"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Sandel</surname><given-names>T. L.</given-names></name><name><surname>Buttny</surname><given-names>R.</given-names></name><name><surname>Varghese</surname><given-names>M.</given-names></name></person-group><year>2019</year><article-title>Online interaction across three contexts: an analysis of culture and technological affordances</article-title><source>Journal of Intercultural Communication Research</source><volume>48</volume><issue>1</issue><fpage>52</fpage><lpage>71</lpage><ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1080/17475759.2018.1552616">https://doi.org/10.1080/17475759.2018.1552616</ext-link></element-citation></ref>
<ref id="R35"><element-citation publication-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Sun</surname><given-names>L.</given-names></name><name><surname>Zhang</surname><given-names>J.</given-names></name><name><surname>Shou</surname><given-names>J.</given-names></name></person-group><year>2023</year><chapter-title>Value co-creation of community e-commerce platform: how does Bilibili balance between content and commercialization?</chapter-title><person-group person-group-type="editor"><name><surname>Zhang</surname><given-names>J.</given-names></name></person-group><person-group person-group-type="editor"><name><surname>Ying</surname><given-names>K.</given-names></name></person-group><person-group person-group-type="editor"><name><surname>Wang</surname><given-names>K.</given-names></name></person-group><person-group person-group-type="editor"><name><surname>Fan</surname><given-names>Z.</given-names></name></person-group><person-group person-group-type="editor"><name><surname>Zhao</surname><given-names>Z.</given-names></name></person-group><source>Innovation of digital economy: Cases from China</source><fpage>117</fpage><lpage>128</lpage><publisher-name>Springer Nature Singapore</publisher-name><ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-1741-9_8">https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-1741-9_8</ext-link></element-citation></ref>
<ref id="R36"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Tagg</surname><given-names>C.</given-names></name><name><surname>Lyons</surname><given-names>A.</given-names></name></person-group><year>2021</year><article-title>Repertoires on the move: exploiting technological affordances and contexts in mobile messaging interactions</article-title><source>International Journal of Multilingualism</source><volume>18</volume><issue>2</issue><fpage>244</fpage><lpage>266</lpage><ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1080/14790718.2020.1867150">https://doi.org/10.1080/14790718.2020.1867150</ext-link></element-citation></ref>
<ref id="R37"><element-citation publication-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Tang</surname><given-names>Y.</given-names></name><name><surname>Hew</surname><given-names>K. F.</given-names></name></person-group><year>2018</year><chapter-title>Emoticon, emoji, and sticker use in computer-mediated communications: understanding its communicative function, impact, user behavior, and motive</chapter-title><person-group person-group-type="editor"><name><surname>Deng</surname><given-names>L.</given-names></name></person-group><person-group person-group-type="editor"><name><surname>Ma</surname><given-names>W. W. K.</given-names></name></person-group><person-group person-group-type="editor"><name><surname>Fong</surname><given-names>C. W. R.</given-names></name></person-group><source>New media for educational change</source><fpage>191</fpage><lpage>201</lpage><publisher-name>Springer</publisher-name></element-citation></ref>
<ref id="R38"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Tang</surname><given-names>Y.</given-names></name><name><surname>Hew</surname><given-names>K. F.</given-names></name></person-group><year>2019</year><article-title>Emoticon, emoji and sticker use in computer-mediated communication: A review of theories and research findings</article-title><source>International Journal of Communication</source><volume>13</volume><fpage>27</fpage></element-citation></ref>
<ref id="R39"><element-citation publication-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Tian</surname><given-names>H.</given-names></name></person-group><year>2021</year><chapter-title>Analysis of the marketing strategy of Bilibili and the reasons for its success</chapter-title><person-group person-group-type="editor"><name><surname>Thurasamy</surname><given-names>R.</given-names></name></person-group><person-group person-group-type="editor"><name><surname>Majid</surname><given-names>I. A.</given-names></name></person-group><person-group person-group-type="editor"><name><surname>Rahman</surname><given-names>N. A. B. A.</given-names></name></person-group><person-group person-group-type="editor"><name><surname>Zulkafli</surname><given-names>A. H.</given-names></name></person-group><source>Proceedings of the 2021 3rd International Conference on Economic Management and Cultural Industry (ICEMCI 2021)</source><fpage>2853</fpage><lpage>2856</lpage><publisher-name>Atlantis Press</publisher-name><ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.2991/assehr.k.211209.463">https://doi.org/10.2991/assehr.k.211209.463</ext-link></element-citation></ref>
<ref id="R40"><element-citation publication-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Trist</surname><given-names>E. L.</given-names></name></person-group><year>1978</year><chapter-title>On socio-technical systems</chapter-title><person-group person-group-type="editor"><name><surname>Pasmore</surname><given-names>W. A.</given-names></name></person-group><person-group person-group-type="editor"><name><surname>Sherwood</surname><given-names>J. J.</given-names></name></person-group><source>Sociotechnical systems: a sourcebook</source><fpage>43</fpage><lpage>57</lpage><publisher-name>University Associates</publisher-name></element-citation></ref>
<ref id="R41"><element-citation publication-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>van Dijck</surname><given-names>J.</given-names></name></person-group><year>2013</year><source>The culture of connectivity: a critical history of social media</source><publisher-name>Oxford University Press</publisher-name></element-citation></ref>
<ref id="R42"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Wang</surname><given-names>Y.</given-names></name><name><surname>Zhang</surname><given-names>Y.</given-names></name><name><surname>Zhang</surname><given-names>G.</given-names></name><name><surname>He</surname><given-names>S.</given-names></name><name><surname>Qi</surname><given-names>J.</given-names></name></person-group><year>2024</year><article-title>Linguistics properties of emojis: a quantitative exploration of emoji frequency, category, and position on Twitter</article-title><source>Journal of Quantitative Linguistics</source><volume>31</volume><issue>3</issue><fpage>183</fpage><lpage>209</lpage><ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1080/09296174.2024.2347055">https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1080/09296174.2024.2347055</ext-link></element-citation></ref>
<ref id="R43"><element-citation publication-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Wu</surname><given-names>Q.</given-names></name><name><surname>Sang</surname><given-names>Y.</given-names></name><name><surname>Zhang</surname><given-names>S.</given-names></name><name><surname>Huang</surname><given-names>Y.</given-names></name></person-group><year>2018</year><chapter-title>Danmaku vs. forum comments: understanding user participation and knowledge sharing in online videos</chapter-title><person-group person-group-type="editor"><name><surname>Forte</surname><given-names>A.</given-names></name></person-group><person-group person-group-type="editor"><name><surname>Prilla</surname><given-names>M.</given-names></name></person-group><person-group person-group-type="editor"><name><surname>Vivacqua</surname><given-names>A.</given-names></name></person-group><source>Proceedings of the 2018 ACM International Conference on Supporting Group Work</source><fpage>209</fpage><lpage>218</lpage><publisher-name>Association for Computing Machinery</publisher-name><ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1145/3148330.3148344">https://doi.org/10.1145/3148330.3148344</ext-link></element-citation></ref>
<ref id="R44"><element-citation publication-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Yang</surname><given-names>G.</given-names></name></person-group><year>2021</year><chapter-title>Social media and state-sponsored platformization in China</chapter-title><person-group person-group-type="editor"><name><surname>Yang</surname><given-names>G.</given-names></name></person-group><person-group person-group-type="editor"><name><surname>Wang</surname><given-names>W.</given-names></name></person-group><source>Engaging social media in China: platforms, publics, and production</source><fpage>xi</fpage><lpage>xxxi</lpage><publisher-name>Michigan State University Press</publisher-name></element-citation></ref>
<ref id="R45"><element-citation publication-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Zhang</surname><given-names>Y.</given-names></name><name><surname>Herring</surname><given-names>S. C.</given-names></name><name><surname>Gan</surname><given-names>S.</given-names></name></person-group><year>2022</year><chapter-title>Graphicon evolution on the Chinese social media platform Bilibili</chapter-title><person-group person-group-type="editor"><name><surname>Wijeratne</surname><given-names>S.</given-names></name></person-group><person-group person-group-type="editor"><name><surname>Lee</surname><given-names>J.</given-names></name></person-group><person-group person-group-type="editor"><name><surname>Saggion</surname><given-names>H.</given-names></name></person-group><person-group person-group-type="editor"><name><surname>Sheth</surname><given-names>A.</given-names></name></person-group><source>Proceedings of the Fifth International Workshop on Emoji Understanding and Applications in Social Media (Emoji2022)</source><fpage>75</fpage><lpage>85</lpage><publisher-name>Association for Computational Linguistics</publisher-name><ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/2022.emoji-1.9">https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/2022.emoji-1.9</ext-link></element-citation></ref>
<ref id="R46"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Zhang</surname><given-names>Y.</given-names></name><name><surname>Wang</surname><given-names>M.</given-names></name><name><surname>Li</surname><given-names>Y.</given-names></name></person-group><year>2021</year><article-title>More than playfulness: emojis in the comments of a WeChat official account</article-title><source>Internet Pragmatics</source><volume>4</volume><issue>2</issue><fpage>247</fpage><lpage>271</lpage><ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1075/ip.00048.zha">https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1075/ip.00048.zha</ext-link></element-citation></ref>
</ref-list>
</back>
</article>