Emotional Plausibility vs. Emotional Truth: Designing Against Affective Misinformation in Conversational AI

Conversational AI systems increasingly simulate emotional presence, yet remain fundamentally unfeeling. This paper argues that such systems, through their design, propagate affective misinformation: they feel understanding, but do not understand. Drawing on HCI, AI ethics, media studies, and affect theory, we introduce a conceptual distinction between emotional plausibility and emotional truth, and demonstrate how design features like simulated typing, memory recall, affirming tone, and other anthropomorphic cues create the illusion of relational care. We conduct a cross-system design audit of leading chatbots, synthesize real-world harms, and propose five normative principles for literacy-first design. These include counter-anthropomorphic patterns that foster conceptual clarity, and design interventions that aim to mitigate relational misbelief and affective amplification in emotionally charged contexts. Our contributions advance the ethics of AI interface design by foregrounding affective misperception as a site of epistemic risk: one that must be addressed as AI systems become more persuasive, pervasive, and humanlike.

Authors

Publication Details

Journal
Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI Ethics and Society
Published
2025-10-15
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1609/aies.v8i1.36561
Primary Topic
Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Emotional Plausibility vs. Emotional Truth: Designing Against Affective Misinformation in Conversational AI

D. Leann Long, M. Ramesh Bhat
Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI Ethics and Society
Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
article

Emotional Plausibility vs. Emotional Truth: Designing Against Affective Misinformation in Conversational AI

D. Leann Long, M. Ramesh Bhat
article en

Abstract

Conversational AI systems increasingly simulate emotional presence, yet remain fundamentally unfeeling. This paper argues that such systems, through their design, propagate affective misinformation: they feel understanding, but do not understand. Drawing on HCI, AI ethics, media studies, and affect theory, we introduce a conceptual distinction between emotional plausibility and emotional truth, and demonstrate how design features like simulated typing, memory recall, affirming tone, and other anthropomorphic cues create the illusion of relational care. We conduct a cross-system design audit of leading chatbots, synthesize real-world harms, and propose five normative principles for literacy-first design. These include counter-anthropomorphic patterns that foster conceptual clarity, and design interventions that aim to mitigate relational misbelief and affective amplification in emotionally charged contexts. Our contributions advance the ethics of AI interface design by foregrounding affective misperception as a site of epistemic risk: one that must be addressed as AI systems become more persuasive, pervasive, and humanlike.

Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI Ethics and SocietyVol. 8(1)
Openalex Percentile: Top 71%
Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.