糖心视频

Smeal College of Business, Pennsylvania State University, and University of Southern California report that exclamation point use is widely read as feminine and shapes impressions of warmth, enthusiasm, power, and analytical thinking, without evidence that effects differ by communicator gender.

Why punctuation matters

Digital messages ask people to make many small choices about tone. Previous work and popular discourse have linked exclamation points to friendliness and sincerity, while also raising concerns about how such cues might affect judgments of competence or analytical thinking.

For example, if a text is sent to discover the interest someone has in attending a social event and the response is: "Sure. That sounds great." It could be read as agreeable, reluctantly agreeable, annoyed, sarcastic or even passive-aggressive.

If instead the response was: "Sure! That sounds great!" The tone would clearly indicate an enthusiastic agreement.

In a professional or academic setting, an exclamation point might indicate an unintended urgency, a panicked or even aggressive posturing, such as: "There will be an overview meeting at noon tomorrow! The final report is due next week!"

As opposed to the routine analytical reading of: "There will be an overview meeting at noon tomorrow. The final report is due next week."

Social role theory offers a lens for those choices, proposing that gendered expectations guide behavior and communication. Authors position exclamation usage as a test case for how such norms operate in everyday interactions.

In the study, "," published in the Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, researchers conducted five studies to examine whether exclamation points signal gender, how men and women think about using them, and how exclamations influence social perception. Participants were recruited through Prolific, an online platform that connects researchers with paid volunteers for behavioral and social science studies.

How the studies worked

Study 1 included 199 Prolific participants, screened for U.S. nationality and English as a first language. Study 2 included another 298 Prolific participants. Study 3 drew from 333 students at university. Study 4a analyzed 644 more Prolific participants, and Study 4b included 307 students from an academic subject pool.

Study 1 presented a workplace-style email that either used exclamation points or standard punctuation, then asked participants to infer the sender's gender. Exploratory social-perception items were collected and moved to the supplement.

Study 2 measured participants' preferred message versions with or without exclamation points across scenarios, perceptions of norms for and against exclamation use, expected effects on warmth, power, competence, analytical thinking, and the importance placed on those perceptions.

Study 3 assessed frequency of exclamation use across emails, texts, and group chats, along with conscious monitoring, efforts to adjust usage, self-evaluation of using too many or too few, and concerns considered when deciding whether to use exclamations.

Study 4a and 4b manipulated punctuation and sender gender via names in brief professional messages, then measured overall impression, warmth, enthusiasm, power, competence, and analytical thinking. Attention checks ensured recognition of sender identity. Bayes factors tested for interactions between punctuation and sender gender.

What the studies found

Study 1 showed that messages with exclamation points led more participants to infer a female sender than messages with standard punctuation, with a large effect size.

Study 2 found women more likely than men to choose messages with exclamations and to perceive a norm to use them, while men perceived a stronger norm against using them. Both groups expected warmer impressions with exclamations and anticipated some negative judgments, including lower analytical thinking. Mediation analyses suggested links between gender, perceived norms, expected impression consequences, and usage choices.

Study 3 reported higher self-reported frequency of exclamation use among women across channels. Women reported greater conscious monitoring, a tendency to try to use fewer, and a belief that they use too many. Women also considered warmth, competence, rudeness, over-enthusiasm, and recipients' interpretations to a greater degree.

Studies 4a and 4b indicated that exclamation use improved overall impressions and warmth, increased perceived enthusiasm, lowered perceived analytical thinking, and reduced perceived power. Competence showed no consistent penalty from exclamation use. Analyses and Bayes factors supported no interaction between punctuation and sender gender across outcomes.

Function of an '!'

Authors conclude that exclamation points function as a gendered cue in perception, that women report more cognitive load around managing usage, and that exclamations shift judgments in predictable ways toward warmth and away from power and analytical thinking, with no detected moderation by communicator gender in these studies.

Readers facing decisions about tone in email or chat can use these findings to anticipate trade-offs. Messages that aim for warmth may benefit from exclamations, while situations that call for power signaling or analytical tone may favor standard punctuation.

漏 2025 Science X Network