Unmasking Deception: Examining Receivers’ Emotional Responses with Automated Facial Expression Analysis in Veracity and Valence

Abstract Emotional mimicry, an unconscious nonverbal response, may reveal how people react to truthful versus deceptive communication. Mimicry typically increases when individuals seek connection but may be suppressed when deception reduces liking and affiliation. Emotional tone further shapes this process: positive expressions promote alignment, whereas negative ones can evoke scepticism or discomfort. This study examined how message truthfulness and emotional framing influence emotional mimicry in receivers. Using Automated Facial Expression Analysis (AFEA) in a 2 × 2 within-subjects design, 33 participants viewed 16 video messages in which four speakers delivered truthful or deceptive stories with positive or negative valence. Facial expressions were recorded and analysed to quantify emotional mimicry. Emotional mimicry was significantly lower for deceptive than for truthful messages across both positive and negative content, consistent with expectations. The decrease was strongest for positively framed deceptions, indicating that deception disrupts alignment most when positivity would otherwise encourage connection. Negative messages elicited weaker emotional mimicry overall, regardless of veracity, also in line with predictions. In contrast, presuppositions about deception were unrelated to emotional mimicry or veracity judgments, contrary to expectations. These findings suggest that emotional mimicry is not a straightforward cue to deception but an indicator of affective attunement shaped by authenticity and emotional tone. Mimicry appears driven more by emotional than cognitive processes, offering insight into unconscious receiver responses. The use of AFEA underscores both the promise and the limitations of automated tools for studying dynamic interpersonal behaviour.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Nonverbal Behavior
Published
2026-02-24
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10919-026-00506-6
Primary Topic
Deception detection and forensic psychology
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Unmasking Deception: Examining Receivers’ Emotional Responses with Automated Facial Expression Analysis in Veracity and Valence

Mariëlle Stel, Steven James Watson, Peter Jan Hendrik Slijkhuis, H. Förster et al.
Journal of Nonverbal Behavior
Deception detection and forensic psychology
article

Unmasking Deception: Examining Receivers’ Emotional Responses with Automated Facial Expression Analysis in Veracity and Valence

Mariëlle Stel, Steven James Watson, Peter Jan Hendrik Slijkhuis, H. Förster, Ellen Giebels
article en

Abstract

Abstract Emotional mimicry, an unconscious nonverbal response, may reveal how people react to truthful versus deceptive communication. Mimicry typically increases when individuals seek connection but may be suppressed when deception reduces liking and affiliation. Emotional tone further shapes this process: positive expressions promote alignment, whereas negative ones can evoke scepticism or discomfort. This study examined how message truthfulness and emotional framing influence emotional mimicry in receivers. Using Automated Facial Expression Analysis (AFEA) in a 2 × 2 within-subjects design, 33 participants viewed 16 video messages in which four speakers delivered truthful or deceptive stories with positive or negative valence. Facial expressions were recorded and analysed to quantify emotional mimicry. Emotional mimicry was significantly lower for deceptive than for truthful messages across both positive and negative content, consistent with expectations. The decrease was strongest for positively framed deceptions, indicating that deception disrupts alignment most when positivity would otherwise encourage connection. Negative messages elicited weaker emotional mimicry overall, regardless of veracity, also in line with predictions. In contrast, presuppositions about deception were unrelated to emotional mimicry or veracity judgments, contrary to expectations. These findings suggest that emotional mimicry is not a straightforward cue to deception but an indicator of affective attunement shaped by authenticity and emotional tone. Mimicry appears driven more by emotional than cognitive processes, offering insight into unconscious receiver responses. The use of AFEA underscores both the promise and the limitations of automated tools for studying dynamic interpersonal behaviour.

Journal of Nonverbal Behavior
University of Twente (NL)
Reduced inequalities
Openalex Percentile: Top 52%
Deception detection and forensic psychology
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.