Cited by 58Technology Adoption and User BehaviourAI in Service InteractionsSocial Robot Interaction and HRI

Exploring the Effect of Attachment on Technology Addiction to Generative AI Chatbots: A Structural Equation Modeling Analysis

Huang, Yiting, Huang, Hanyun·2025·International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction

Abstract

With the advancement of artificial intelligence technology, generative AI chatbots (GAIC) such as ChatGPT, are integrating into various aspects of society and quietly changing people’s lives. However, although there is a plethora of research concerning social media usage and addiction, discussions about chatbots remain far from adequate. Investigating the use and potential technology addiction to generative AI chatbots (TAGAIC) holds both theoretical and practical significance. Drawing on attachment theory, this study aims to investigate the formative factors in TAGAIC. A structural equation model was used to analyze the data collected from a questionnaire survey of 364 GAIC users. Results reveal that technology addiction is positively influenced by emotional attachment but not by functional attachment. Besides, perceived anthropomorphism and perceived empathy have a positive effect on emotional attachment, while system quality and information quality have a positive effect on functional attachment. Limitations of the study were discussed.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/10447318.2024.2426029

Cites

21 of 21 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • Perceived empathy predicts emotional attachment.

    “Huang and Huang found that emotional attachment (predicted by anthropomorphizing and perceived empathy) predicted LLM-CB addiction121.”
  • Emotional attachment predicts LLM-CB addiction.

    “Huang and Huang found that emotional attachment (predicted by anthropomorphizing and perceived empathy) predicted LLM-CB addiction121.”
  • Anthropomorphizing predicts emotional attachment.

    “Huang and Huang found that emotional attachment (predicted by anthropomorphizing and perceived empathy) predicted LLM-CB addiction121.”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Huang, Y., & Huang, H.
Affiliations
School of Journalism and Communication, Xiamen University
Venue
International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction
Published
2024-11-15
Volume
41
Issue
15
Pages
9440-9449
ISSN
  • 1044-7318 (ISSN-L)
  • 1532-7590
OpenAlex
W4404415230
Cited by
58
References
21
Citations by year
2026: 38 · 2025: 19 · 2024: 1
FWCI
21.64
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Information Systems and Management › Technology Adoption and User Behaviour
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › AI in Service Interactions
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Social Robot Interaction and HRI
Keywords
technology addiction, generative AI chatbots, attachment theory, emotional attachment, functional attachment, perceived anthropomorphism, perceived empathy, system quality, information quality, ChatGPT

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