CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 30

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 25 of the 25 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Emerging AI individualism: how young people integrate social AI into everyday life

Brandtzaeg, Petter Bae, Følstad, Asbjørn, Skjuve, Marita·2025·Communication and Change
DOI 10.1007/s44382-025-00011-2
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Social AI services like ChatGPT and My AI are increasingly integrated into the lives of young people. Despite this growing use, there is limited research on how youth perceive and engage with social AI in their everyday social lives, as well as the broader social implications of such engagement. To address this gap, we conducted a qualitative study with 166 Norwegian high school students, using a questionnaire that included open-ended questions. Our findings show that while most youths had not yet adopted social AI on a regular basis, those who had reported a wide range of experiences and perceived utilities, including personalized assistance, tailored emotional support, entertainment, and creative inspiration. These patterns suggest an emerging shift toward more autonomous, AI-mediated forms of social engagement, in which social AIs are increasingly used in personal decision-making processes. We use the novel concept of AI individualism to interpret these developments and discuss how social AI may contribute to the reconfiguration of social support systems and interpersonal dynamics. Finally, we reveal potential risks raised by the sample, including misinformation, reduced privacy, and emotional overdependence on AI which may also harm social connections in society. This study contributes new empirical insights into youth–AI interaction and reflects the value of AI individualism as a novel framework for understanding the complexity and evolving role of social AI in everyday social life.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s44382-025-00011-2

Cites

25 of 25 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • AI now plays a broader multifaceted companionship role in daily life for many, with AI entities not exclusively used for mental health advice but integrated into everyday living involving entertainment, creative exploration, information-seeking, identity experimentation, technological curiosity, and social interaction and support.

    “However, the explosion in use of AI in recent years has highlighted how AI now plays a broader multifaceted companionship role in daily life for many.In these contexts, AI entities are not exclusively (or primarily) used for mental health advice, but instead are being widely integrated into new forms of everyday living involving entertainment, creative exploration, information-seeking, identity”

    From Artificial intelligence and unconditional love: the rise of generative AI as an alternative form of mental health support (2026) · cites this paper as Brandtzaeg et al., 2025

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 33

  1. Abdaljaleel, M., Barakat, M., Alsanafi, M., Salim, N. A., Abazid, H., Malaeb, D., Mohammed, A. H., Hassan, B. A. R., Wayyes, A.M., Farhan, S. S., Khatib, S. E., Rahal, M., Sahban, A., Abdelaziz, D. H., Mansour, N. O., AlZayer, R., Khalil, R., Fekih-Romdhane, F., Hallit, R., . . . Sallam, M. (2024). A multinational study on the factors influencing university students’ attitudes and usage of ChatGPT. Scientific Reports, 14(1), 1983. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-52549-8 · DOI
  2. Boyd, R., & Holton, R. J. (2018). Technology, innovation, employment and power: Does robotics and artificial intelligence really mean social transformation? Journal of Sociology, 54(3), 331–345.https://doi.org/10.1177/1440783317726591 · DOI
  3. Brandtzaeg, P. B., spsampsps Følstad, A. (2017). Why people use chatbots. International conference on internet science, Thessaloniki, Greece.https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-70284-1_30 · DOI · Paper page
  4. Brandtzaeg, P.B., Skjuve, M. & Følstad, A. (2024). Understanding Model Power in Social AI. AI & Society. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00146-024-02053-4 · DOI
  5. Brandtzaeg, P. B., Skjuve, M., & Følstad, A. (2022). My AI friend: How users of a social chatbot understand their human–AI friendship. Human Communication Research, 48(3), 404–429.https://doi.org/10.1093/hcr/hqac008 · DOI · Paper page
  6. Brandtzaeg, P. B., You, Y., Wang, X., spsampsps Lao, Y. (2023). “Good” and “Bad” Machine Agency in the Context of Human-AI Communication: The Case of ChatGPT. In H. Degen, S. Ntoa, spsampsps A. Moallem, HCI International 2023 – Late Breaking Papers Cham.https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-48057-7_1 · DOI · Paper page
  7. Brandtzaeg, P. B., Skjuve, M., & Følstad, A. (2025). AI individualism: Transforming social structures in the age of social artificial intelligence. In P. Hacker (Ed.), Oxford Intersections: AI in Society (online ed.). Oxford Academic. https://doi.org/10.1093/9780198945215.003.0099 · DOI
  8. Clarke, V., & Braun, V. (2013). Successful qualitative research: A practical guide for beginners. SAGE Publications Ltd, . http://digital.casalini.it/9781446281024
  9. Couldry, N., & Mejias, U. A. (2019). The costs of connection: How data is colonizing human life and appropriating it for capitalism. Stanford University Press · DOI · Paper page
  10. Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1991). A motivational approach to self: Integration in personality. In R. A. Dienstbier (Ed.), Nebraska Symposium on Motivation, 1990: Perspectives on motivation (pp. 237–288). University of Nebraska Press.
  11. van Dijck, J. (2013). The culture of connectivity: A critical history of social media. Oxford University Press · DOI · Paper page
  12. Egan, S. J., Johnson, C., Wade, T. D., Carlbring, P., Raghav, S., & Shafran, R. (2024). A pilot study of the perceptions and acceptability of guidance using artificial intelligence in internet cognitive behaviour therapy for perfectionism in young people. Internet Interventions, 35, 100711.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.invent.2024.100711 · DOI
  13. Granovetter, M. S. (1973). The strength of weak ties. American Journal of Sociology, 78(6), 1360–1380. https://doi.org/10.1086/225469 · DOI · Paper page
  14. Grudin, J. (2018). From Tool to Partner: The Evolution of Human-Computer Interaction Extended Abstracts of the 2018 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, Montreal, Canada. https://doi.org/10.1145/3170427.3170663 · DOI
  15. Hasse, A., Cortesi, S., Lombana-Bermudez, A., & Gasser, U. (2019). Youth and artificial intelligence: Where we stand. Berkman Klein Center Research Publication(2019–3).https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3385718 · DOI
  16. Holton, R., & Boyd, R. (2021). ‘Where are the people? What are they doing? Why are they doing it?’(Mindell) Situating artificial intelligence within a socio-technical framework. Journal of Sociology, 57(2), 179–195.https://doi.org/10.1177/1440783319873046 · DOI
  17. Snap Inc. (2023). Snap Inc. announces third quarter 2023 financial results. Snap Inc. [Press release]. Retrieved from https://investor.snap.com/news/news-details/2023/Snap-Inc.-Announces-Third-Quarter-2023-Financial-Results/default.aspx
  18. Jauhiainen, J. S., & Guerra, A. G. (2023). Generative AI and ChatGPT in school Children’s education: evidence from a school lesson. Sustainability, 15(18), 14025.https://doi.org/10.3390/su151814025 · DOI · Paper page
  19. Kim, J., Merrill Jr, K., & Collins, C. (2021). AI as a friend or assistant: The mediating role of perceived usefulness in social AI vs. functional AI. Telematics and Informatics, 64, 101694.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tele.2021.101694 · DOI
  20. Laestadius, L., Bishop, A., Gonzalez, M., Illenčík, D., & Campos-Castillo, C. (2024). Too human and not human enough: A grounded theory analysis of mental health harms from emotional dependence on the social chatbot Replika. New Media & Society, 26(10), 5923–5941. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444822114200 · DOI
  21. Langford, C. P. H., Bowsher, J., Maloney, J. P., & Lillis, P. P. (1997). Social support: a conceptual analysis. Journal of advanced nursing, 25(1), 95–100.https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2648.1997.1997025095.x · DOI
  22. Ma, Z., Mei, Y., & Su, Z. (2023). Understanding the Benefits and Challenges of Using Large Language Model-based Conversational Agents for Mental Well-being Support. American Medical Informatics Association Annual Symposium Proceedings, 2023, 1105–1114.
  23. Mukhopadhyay, S., spsampsps Chakrabarti, A. (2023). A Review on the Impacts of Artificial Intelligence (AI) on Youth. In S. Deb spsampsps S. Deb (Eds.), Handbook of Youth Development: Policies and Perspectives from India and Beyond (pp. 195–207). Springer Nature Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-4969-4_11 · DOI
  24. Ngo, T. T. A. (2023). The perception by university students of the use of ChatGPT in education. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning (Online), 18(17), 4.https://doi.org/10.3991/ijet.v18i17.39019 · DOI
  25. Rozado, D. (2024). The political preferences of llms. arXiv preprint arXiv:2402.01789.https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2402.01789 · DOI
  26. Sætra, H. S. (2020). The Parasitic Nature of Social AI: Sharing Minds with the Mindless. Integrative Psychological and Behavioral Science, 54(2), 308–326.https://doi.org/10.1007/s12124-020-09523-6 · DOI
  27. Shukla, S. (2023). Creative Computing and Harnessing the Power of Generative Artificial Intelligence. Journal Environmental Sciences And Technology, 2(1), 556-579.https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.1084710 · DOI
  28. Skjuve, M., Følstad, A., & Brandtzaeg, P. B. (2023). The User Experience of ChatGPT: Findings from a Questionnaire Study of Early Users. Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Conversational User Interfaces, Eindhoven, Netherlands.https://doi.org/10.1145/3571884.3597144 · DOI
  29. Skjuve, M., Følstad, A., & Brandtzæg, P. B. (2023). A Longitudinal Study of Self-Disclosure in Human–Chatbot Relationships. Interacting with Computers, 35(1), 24–39.https://doi.org/10.1093/iwc/iwad022 · DOI
  30. Wellman, B. (2001). Computer Networks As Social Networks. Science, 293(5537), 2031–2034.https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1065547 · DOI · Paper page
  31. Williams, R., Alghowinem, S., & Breazeal, C. (2024). Dr. R.O. Bott Will See You Now: Exploring AI for Wellbeing with Middle School Students. Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence, 38(21), 23309–23317.https://doi.org/10.1609/aaai.v38i21.30379 · DOI
  32. Willson, M. (2019). Raising the ideal child? Algorithms, quantification and prediction. Media, Culture & Society, 41(5), 620–636.https://doi.org/10.1177/0163443718798901 · DOI
  33. Xie, Z., & Wang, Z. (2024). Longitudinal Examination of the Relationship Between Virtual Companionship and Social Anxiety: Emotional Expression as a Mediator and Mindfulness as a Moderator. Psychology Research and Behavior Management, 765–782.https://doi.org/10.2147/PRBM.S447487 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Brandtzaeg, P. B., Følstad, A., & Skjuve, M.
Venue
Communication and Change
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Published
2025-07-07
Volume
1
Issue
1
ISSN
3059-2011
DOI
10.1007/s44382-025-00011-2
Cited by
30
References
25
Language
en
Licence
Funders
  • Stiftelsen Dam (SDAM_FOR462134)
  • Norwegian Media Authority

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review