The DOI matches its Crossref record; 71 of the 71 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; 2 of the 50 sources its claims cite were checked for support.
Psychological, Relational, and Emotional Effects of Self-Disclosure After Conversations With a Chatbot
Open accessAbstract
Disclosing personal information to another person has beneficial emotional, relational, and psychological outcomes. When disclosers believe they are interacting with a computer instead of another person, such as a chatbot that can simulate human-to-human conversation, outcomes may be undermined, enhanced, or equivalent. Our experiment examined downstream effects after emotional versus factual disclosures in conversations with a supposed chatbot or person. The effects of emotional disclosure were equivalent whether participants thought they were disclosing to a chatbot or to a person. This study advances current understanding of disclosure and whether its impact is altered by technology, providing support for media equivalency as a primary mechanism for the consequences of disclosing to a chatbot.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
2 of 50 cited sources checked · 1 supported · 0 flagged · accuracy not yet measured
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“These data confirm prior research that intimate disclosure leads to beneficial downstream outcomes through these mechanisms, as the Perceived Understanding and Disclosure Processing Hypotheses suggest (Pennebaker, 1993; Reis et al., 2017).”
§ Psychological, Relational, and Emotional Effects of Self-Disclosure After Conversations With a Chatbot > Results > Processes
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Pennebaker, 1993 source
- Partly supportedcites Reis et al., 2017 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
Section 6.1 says disclosure can foster a partner’s understanding and responsiveness, and Section 7 describes benefits associated with feeling understood. But Section 7 calls mediation by perceived understanding an “as yet untested” prediction. The paper therefore supports parts of the proposed pathway, not the stronger claim that prior research established beneficial outcomes through those mechanisms; it does not identify the named hypotheses. (LLM, conf=0.86)
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passes- Rests on an assumption: The associations between processes and outcomes reflect causal effects of processes on outcomes.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This was the case even though the confederates themselves did not use fewer conjugations or non-fluencies in the chatbot conditions compared to the person conditions (F[1, 94] = 0.20, p = .66, partial η2 = .002; F[1, 94] = 2.15, p = .15, partial η2 = .02).”
§ Psychological, Relational, and Emotional Effects of Self-Disclosure After Conversations With a Chatbot > Results > Manipulation checks
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesA result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“and non-fluencies (F[1, 94] = 9.41, p < .003, partial η2 = .09)”
§ Psychological, Relational, and Emotional Effects of Self-Disclosure After Conversations With a Chatbot > Results > Manipulation checks
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesA result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The effects of emotional disclosure were equivalent whether participants thought they were disclosing to a chatbot or to a person.”
- Also stated in: § Overview · plain
“Participants who disclosed to chatbots experienced as many emotional, relational, and psychological benefits as participants who disclosed to a human partner.”
§ Psychological, Relational, and Emotional Effects of Self-Disclosure After Conversations With a Chatbot > Abstract
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passes- Also stated in: § Overview · plain
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Consistent with previous research, effects were stronger for emotional disclosure versus factual disclosure.”
§ Psychological, Relational, and Emotional Effects of Self-Disclosure After Conversations With a Chatbot > Results > Overview
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:correlational· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesA result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“When talking to a perceived chatbot as opposed to a person, participants used fewer conjugations (F[1, 94] = 8.30, p < .005, partial η2 = .08)”
§ Psychological, Relational, and Emotional Effects of Self-Disclosure After Conversations With a Chatbot > Results > Manipulation checks
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesA result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Talking with a chatbot instead of a human also did not change whether participants were defensive towards threatening information.”
§ Psychological, Relational, and Emotional Effects of Self-Disclosure After Conversations With a Chatbot > Results > Outcomes
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesA result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Across the entire sample, the processes (perceived understanding, disclosure intimacy, and cognitive reappraisal) were significantly associated with the outcome index.”
§ Psychological, Relational, and Emotional Effects of Self-Disclosure After Conversations With a Chatbot > Results > Processes
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesA result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“as was understanding (r = .22, p < .03).”
§ Psychological, Relational, and Emotional Effects of Self-Disclosure After Conversations With a Chatbot > Results > Processes
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesA result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“and that they enjoyed the interaction more (F[1, 94] = 5.49, p < .02, partial η2 = .05) compared to a factual conversation.”
§ Psychological, Relational, and Emotional Effects of Self-Disclosure After Conversations With a Chatbot > Results > Outcomes
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passes
- Probably not a substantial claim. 18
- It may state two separate claims as one. 30
- The quote only partly states this claim. 2
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“According to the theoretical model of perceived understanding (Reis, Lemay, & Finkenauer, 2017), feeling truly understood, or that the partner “‘gets’ [disclosers] in some fundamental way,” brings emotional, relational, and psychological benefits.”
§ Psychological, Relational, and Emotional Effects of Self-Disclosure After Conversations With a Chatbot > Perceived understanding framework
What the sources say
- Supportedcites Reis, Lemay, & Finkenauer, 2017 source
The Introduction (section 1; page not provided) defines feeling understood as believing another person “gets them” in a fundamental way. The Benefits section (section 7) describes relationship, mood, and personal well-being benefits, and the Conclusion (section 8) says people and their relationships generally benefit when they feel understood. (LLM, conf=0.94)
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim.
- Supported
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“there were no significant interactions or other main effects for perceived partner on any other measure in the study.”
§ Psychological, Relational, and Emotional Effects of Self-Disclosure After Conversations With a Chatbot > Results > Manipulation checks
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In the emotional conditions, participants felt that they revealed their emotions more and shared information that was more personal, as compared to participants in the factual conditions (F[1, 94] = 133.84, p < .001).”
§ Psychological, Relational, and Emotional Effects of Self-Disclosure After Conversations With a Chatbot > Results > Manipulation checks
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“participants disclosed more intimately (F[1, 94] = 286.25, p < .001, partial η2 = .90)”
§ Psychological, Relational, and Emotional Effects of Self-Disclosure After Conversations With a Chatbot > Results > Processes
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one. The quote only partly states this claim.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“with no significant effects of perceived partner and no significant interactions.”
§ Psychological, Relational, and Emotional Effects of Self-Disclosure After Conversations With a Chatbot > Results > Outcomes
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In addition, the processes of perceived understanding, disclosure intimacy, and cognitive reappraisal all correlated as expected with outcomes and, importantly, showed the same pattern across the chatbot and person partners, supporting the Equivalence Hypothesis.”
§ Psychological, Relational, and Emotional Effects of Self-Disclosure After Conversations With a Chatbot > Results > Overview
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In contrast, our participants were not asked to disclose anything particularly embarrassing or stigmatizing, and often chose to discuss matters that they had also disclosed to others.”
§ Psychological, Relational, and Emotional Effects of Self-Disclosure After Conversations With a Chatbot > Discussion > Disclosure dynamics
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“used more words reflecting cognitive reappraisal (positive emotion words: F[1, 94] = 56.92, p < .00001, partial η2 = .38; causal words: F[1, 94] = 29.79, p < .00001, partial η2 = .24; insight words: F[1, 94] = 147.89, p < .00001) after emotional disclosure compared to factual disclosure, with no effect of perceived partner and no interaction.”
§ Psychological, Relational, and Emotional Effects of Self-Disclosure After Conversations With a Chatbot > Results > Processes
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Participants reported a higher negative mood (F[1, 94] = 9.61, p < .001, partial η2 = .09)”
§ Psychological, Relational, and Emotional Effects of Self-Disclosure After Conversations With a Chatbot > Results > Outcomes
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesThe quote only partly states this claim.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Whether talking to a person or to a chatbot, participants in the emotional conditions were less defensive towards changing their behavior after reading threatening health information (F[1,94] = 8.63, p < .004, partial η2 = .08)”
§ Psychological, Relational, and Emotional Effects of Self-Disclosure After Conversations With a Chatbot > Results > Outcomes
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Participants felt more understood after emotional disclosure compared to factual disclosure (F[1, 94] = 8.94, p < .004, partial η2 = .09), but there was no significant effect of partner, nor a significant interaction.”
§ Psychological, Relational, and Emotional Effects of Self-Disclosure After Conversations With a Chatbot > Results > Processes
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The correlation between understanding and outcomes was .21 for chatbot partners and .27 for human partners, which were not significantly different from each other (zr1−r2 = .299, p = .76).”
§ Psychological, Relational, and Emotional Effects of Self-Disclosure After Conversations With a Chatbot > Results > Processes
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Similarly, the correlation between disclosure intimacy and outcomes was .45 for chatbot partners and .47 for human partners, which did not significantly differ (zr1−r2 = .12, p = .90).”
§ Psychological, Relational, and Emotional Effects of Self-Disclosure After Conversations With a Chatbot > Results > Processes
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Finally, the correlation between cognitive reappraisal and outcomes was .37 for chatbot partners and .38 for human partners, which also were not significantly different (zr1−r2 = .08, p = .93).”
§ Psychological, Relational, and Emotional Effects of Self-Disclosure After Conversations With a Chatbot > Results > Processes
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“We also found that the processes involved in producing these outcomes (perceived understanding, disclosure intimacy, and cognitive reappraisal) were equivalent in strength and affected outcomes similarly, regardless of the perceived partner.”
§ Psychological, Relational, and Emotional Effects of Self-Disclosure After Conversations With a Chatbot > Discussion
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Consistent with previous research, effects were stronger after emotional disclosure compared to factual disclosure, and we found that this occurred regardless of the partner’s perceived identity (see Table 2).”
§ Psychological, Relational, and Emotional Effects of Self-Disclosure After Conversations With a Chatbot > Discussion
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“For both human and chatbot partners, perceptions of relationship quality after emotional disclosure were higher compared to factual disclosures, with no effects of perceived partner or any interactions (see Figure 1).”
§ Psychological, Relational, and Emotional Effects of Self-Disclosure After Conversations With a Chatbot > Results > Outcomes
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This pattern of significant effect of type of disclosure, but no effect of partner, occurred across all three types of outcome measures (emotional, relational, psychological) as well as our three process measures (perceived understanding, disclosure intimacy, cognitive reappraisal).”
§ Psychological, Relational, and Emotional Effects of Self-Disclosure After Conversations With a Chatbot > Results > Overview
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“First, disclosure can impact the immediate emotional experience of a discloser by reducing stress arising from negative experiences (Martins et al., 2013)”
§ Psychological, Relational, and Emotional Effects of Self-Disclosure After Conversations With a Chatbot > Abstract
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Martins et al., 2013 source
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“According to Pennebaker’s (1993) cognitive processing model, a key component of the link between cognitive changes and beneficial outcomes is the process by which disclosing what was formerly undisclosed eliminates negative affect and processing and induces reappraisal.”
§ Psychological, Relational, and Emotional Effects of Self-Disclosure After Conversations With a Chatbot > Disclosure processing framework
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Pennebaker, 1993 source
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Participants then engaged in an online chat conversation for 25 minutes with a trained confederate, who was blind to whether participants thought they were talking to a chatbot or to a person, but not to whether participants were asked to engage in emotional or factual disclosure.”
§ Psychological, Relational, and Emotional Effects of Self-Disclosure After Conversations With a Chatbot > Methods > Procedure
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim.
In the paper
“Disclosing personal information to another person has beneficial emotional, relational, and psychological outcomes.”
- Also stated in: § Abstract · plain
“Self-disclosure, or revealing personal information to someone else (Archer, 1980), generates a wide variety of beneficial outcomes.”
§ Psychological, Relational, and Emotional Effects of Self-Disclosure After Conversations With a Chatbot > Abstract
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Archer, 1980
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim.
- Also stated in: § Abstract · plain
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“This level of suspicion was lower or on par with other studies employing WoZ methods (e.g., Aharoni & Fridlund, 2007; Hinds, Roberts, & Jones, 2004)”
§ Psychological, Relational, and Emotional Effects of Self-Disclosure After Conversations With a Chatbot > Methods > Participants
What the sources say
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedn = 13Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Participants then engaged in an online chat conversation for 25 minutes with a trained confederate, who was blind to whether participants thought they were talking to a chatbot or to a person, but not to whether participants were asked to engage in emotional or factual disclosure.”
§ Psychological, Relational, and Emotional Effects of Self-Disclosure After Conversations With a Chatbot > Methods > Procedure
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Forming a narrative of the situation facilitates new insights and eliminates rumination over what was previously confusing or bothersome (Lepore, Ragan, & Jones, 2000; Pennebaker & Chung, 2007).”
§ Psychological, Relational, and Emotional Effects of Self-Disclosure After Conversations With a Chatbot > Disclosure processing framework
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Lepore, Ragan, & Jones, 2000 source
- Not matchedcites Pennebaker & Chung, 2007
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“According to this model, the positive effects of feeling understood are mediated by the extent to which disclosers perceive that they are understood.”
§ Psychological, Relational, and Emotional Effects of Self-Disclosure After Conversations With a Chatbot > Perceived understanding framework
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Reis et al., 2017 source
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim.
In the paper
“According to this framework, people instinctively perceive, react to, and interact with computers as they do with other people, without consciously intending to do so (Reeves & Nass, 1996).”
§ Psychological, Relational, and Emotional Effects of Self-Disclosure After Conversations With a Chatbot > CASA framework
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Reeves & Nass, 1996
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim.
- Not matched
In the paper
“diminishing anxiety (Tam et al., 2006)”
§ Psychological, Relational, and Emotional Effects of Self-Disclosure After Conversations With a Chatbot > Abstract
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Tam et al., 2006 source
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“Participants were also randomly assigned to engage in an emotional conversation, in which they were asked to discuss a current problem they were facing and their deepest feelings about it, or a factual conversation, in which they were asked to describe their schedule for the day and the upcoming week in an objective way, without mentioning their feelings or emotions (Birnbaum et al., 2016; Gortner”
§ Psychological, Relational, and Emotional Effects of Self-Disclosure After Conversations With a Chatbot > Methods > Procedure
What the sources say
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“Computerized agents reduce impression management and increase disclosure intimacy compared to human partners in situations in which fears of negative evaluation may be prominent (e.g., when asked potentially embarrassing questions; Kang & Gratch, 2010; Lucas et al., 2014).”
§ Psychological, Relational, and Emotional Effects of Self-Disclosure After Conversations With a Chatbot > Disclosure processing framework
What the sources say
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“The WoZ procedure was used rather than employing a real chatbot because of current chatbots’ conversational limitations, and because perceptions of the partner’s identity can impact subsequent effects, while actual identity does not (Lucas et al., 2014).”
§ Psychological, Relational, and Emotional Effects of Self-Disclosure After Conversations With a Chatbot > The present study
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Lucas et al., 2014 source
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“which ultimately results in long-term psychological improvement (Kelley, Lumley, & Leisen, 1997)”
§ Psychological, Relational, and Emotional Effects of Self-Disclosure After Conversations With a Chatbot > Abstract
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Kelley, Lumley, & Leisen, 1997 source
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“On the other hand, people assume that chatbots are worse at emotional tasks than humans (Madhavan, Wiegmann, & Lacson, 2006)”
§ Psychological, Relational, and Emotional Effects of Self-Disclosure After Conversations With a Chatbot > Abstract
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Madhavan, Wiegmann, & Lacson, 2006 source
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Participants were randomly assigned to be told they would have a conversation with either another person or a chatbot.”
§ Psychological, Relational, and Emotional Effects of Self-Disclosure After Conversations With a Chatbot > Methods > Procedure
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim.
In the paper
“The beneficial nature of self-disclosure is amplified when the listener responds with support and validation, rather than ignoring or blaming the discloser (Shenk & Fruzzetti, 2011).”
§ Psychological, Relational, and Emotional Effects of Self-Disclosure After Conversations With a Chatbot > Abstract
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Shenk & Fruzzetti, 2011 source
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“increasing negative affect in the short term (Greenberg & Stone, 1992)”
§ Psychological, Relational, and Emotional Effects of Self-Disclosure After Conversations With a Chatbot > Abstract
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Greenberg & Stone, 1992 source
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Additionally, participants’ perceptions of chatbot competence were not measured before the conversation.”
§ Psychological, Relational, and Emotional Effects of Self-Disclosure After Conversations With a Chatbot > Discussion > Limitations
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Our study takes this work a step further by finding that not only are perceptions similar, but disclosure to bots and humans exert similar beneficial outcomes.”
§ Psychological, Relational, and Emotional Effects of Self-Disclosure After Conversations With a Chatbot > Discussion > Theoretical implications
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Emotional disclosure was more beneficial than factual disclosure because of enhanced perceived understanding, disclosure intimacy, and cognitive reappraisal, with no difference depending on whether the partner was perceived to be a chatbot or a person.”
§ Psychological, Relational, and Emotional Effects of Self-Disclosure After Conversations With a Chatbot > Discussion > Conclusion
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: The associations between processes and outcomes reflect causal effects of processes on outcomes.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Thus, our study did not include reciprocal disclosure, which may explain why we did not find significant effects in terms of liking of the partner.”
§ Psychological, Relational, and Emotional Effects of Self-Disclosure After Conversations With a Chatbot > Discussion > Limitations
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The Perceived Understanding Hypothesis and the Disclosure Processing Hypothesis received partial support, in that our data replicated previous research on these mechanisms, but no support for their predictions on how these mechanisms would be either undermined or enhanced by disclosure to a chatbot partner.”
§ Psychological, Relational, and Emotional Effects of Self-Disclosure After Conversations With a Chatbot > Discussion > Theoretical implications
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“These findings expand on the work of communication scholars who have either focused on resulting perceptions but not beneficial outcomes of disclosure (Birnbaum et al., 2016; Gong & Nass, 2007) or on beneficial outcomes when the listener is always human, but not when the listener is a computer (Jones & Wirtz, 2006).”
§ Psychological, Relational, and Emotional Effects of Self-Disclosure After Conversations With a Chatbot > Discussion > Theoretical implications
What the sources say
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“and thus felt greater self-affirmation, than participants in the factual conditions, with no effect of perceived partner or interaction (see Figure 1).”
§ Psychological, Relational, and Emotional Effects of Self-Disclosure After Conversations With a Chatbot > Results > Outcomes
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Thus, the processes were associated with the outcomes to the same strength for human partners as they were for chatbot partners, providing additional support for the Equivalence Hypothesis.”
§ Psychological, Relational, and Emotional Effects of Self-Disclosure After Conversations With a Chatbot > Results > Processes
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: The absence of significant effects of partner indicates equivalence between chatbot and human partners.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This may be why intimacy of disclosure to bots compared to humans was equivalent, suggesting that people only disclose more intimately to a computer compared to a person when fears of being judged are heightened.”
§ Psychological, Relational, and Emotional Effects of Self-Disclosure After Conversations With a Chatbot > Discussion > Disclosure dynamics
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“In other recent research, however, participants disclosed more intimately to a perceived computer than to a perceived person (Gratch, Lucas, King, & Morency, 2014; Kang & Gratch, 2010; Lucas et al., 2014).”
§ Psychological, Relational, and Emotional Effects of Self-Disclosure After Conversations With a Chatbot > Discussion > Disclosure dynamics
What the sources say
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Outcomes of disclosure were similar whether the partner was perceived to be a chatbot or a person, supporting the Equivalence Hypothesis.”
§ Psychological, Relational, and Emotional Effects of Self-Disclosure After Conversations With a Chatbot > Results > Processes
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: The absence of significant effects of partner indicates equivalence between chatbot and human partners.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“While we had sufficient power to detect main effects of the disclosure manipulation”
§ Psychological, Relational, and Emotional Effects of Self-Disclosure After Conversations With a Chatbot > Discussion
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This provides support for the CASA framework and its Equivalence Hypothesis, that people psychologically engage with chatbots as they do with people, resulting in similar disclosure processes and outcomes.”
§ Psychological, Relational, and Emotional Effects of Self-Disclosure After Conversations With a Chatbot > Discussion
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: The absence of significant effects of partner indicates equivalence between chatbot and human partners.
The paper relies on this without support.
A chatbot cannot understand a discloser on a deeper level.
“In the case of a chatbot, disclosers know that a chatbot is a computer program that cannot understand them on this deeper level.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Another person has the capability of truly understanding a discloser in a way a chatbot cannot.
“On the other hand, individuals know that another person has the capability of truly understanding them in a way a chatbot cannot, especially who they are and how they experience the world.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Current chatbots have conversational limitations.
“The WoZ procedure was used rather than employing a real chatbot because of current chatbots’ conversational limitations”
The paper relies on this without support.
This is the first study to compare the downstream effects of disclosing to a chatbot partner with disclosing to a human partner.
“This is the first study to compare the downstream effects of disclosing to a chatbot partner with disclosing to a human partner.”
The paper relies on this without support.
To our knowledge, this is the first study to find that more wide-ranging downstream effects, such as those relating to immediate emotional experience or self-affirmation, are similar whether the partner is a computer or a person.
“To our knowledge, this is the first study to find that more wide-ranging downstream effects, such as those relating to immediate emotional experience or self-affirmation, are similar whether the partner is a computer or a person.”
The paper relies on this without support.
This is the first study to examine the psychological impact of disclosing to a partner with a computer identity, such as a chatbot, compared to another person.
“This is the first study to examine the psychological impact of disclosing to a partner with a computer identity, such as a chatbot, compared to another person.”
The paper relies on this without support.
The absence of significant effects of partner indicates equivalence between chatbot and human partners.
“This provides support for the CASA framework and its Equivalence Hypothesis, that people psychologically engage with chatbots as they do with people, resulting in similar disclosure processes and outcomes.”
The paper relies on this without support.
The associations between processes and outcomes reflect causal effects of processes on outcomes.
“Emotional disclosure was more beneficial than factual disclosure because of enhanced perceived understanding, disclosure intimacy, and cognitive reappraisal, with no difference depending on whether the partner was perceived to be a chatbot or a person.”
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?
In the citing paper
“Simply disclosing concerns and receiving emotionally supportive responses can have positive value in some contexts25.”
From Chatbots in the fight against the COVID-19 pandemic (2020) · cites this paper as [25]
In the citing paper
“In a study in which students believed they were speaking with a conversational AI, the students reported feeling better after talking about their problems following the encounter (43).”
From Key Considerations for Incorporating Conversational AI in Psychotherapy (2019) · cites this paper as [43]
In the citing paper
“However, contrary findings have also been identified as some studies show evidence that people respond well and disclose more personal information if the chatbot is presented as a bot and can also display emotions [60,61].”
Citations
Cites
Development and validation of brief measures of positive and negative affect: The PANAS scales.
Watson, D., Clark, L. A., & Tellegen, A. (1988) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.54.6.1063 · Cited by 32,433
Cohen, J. (1992) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037//0033-2909.112.1.155 · Cited by 8,771
The Psychological Meaning of Words: LIWC and Computerized Text Analysis Methods
Tausczik, Y. R., & Pennebaker, J. W. (2010) · Journal of Language and Social Psychology · doi:10.1177/0261927x09351676 · Cited by 5,774 · cited 2×
“Usage of these words has been found to re fl ect cognitive reappraisal and reconstrual processes (Tausczik & Pennebaker, 2010): as disclosers come to think about the situation di ff erently and broaden their perspective, they develop new explanations for why the situation may have happened (causal…”
Background(1997) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.34-3702 · Cited by 4,872
Development and validation of the working alliance inventory
Horvath, A. O., & Greenberg, L. S. (1989) · Journal of Counseling Psychology · doi:10.1037//0022-0167.36.2.223 · Cited by 3,520 · cited 1×
“Despite low reliability ( α = .49), these two items lie on the same subscale or factor (Horvath & Greenberg, 1989), so they were combined into an index.”
Background(1973) · Medical Entomology and Zoology · Cited by 2,836
Confronting a traumatic event: Toward an understanding of inhibition and disease.
Pennebaker, J. W., & Beall, S. K. (1986) · Journal of Abnormal Psychology · doi:10.1037/0021-843x.95.3.274 · Cited by 2,074
Effects of an expanding-spaced vs massed exposure schedule on fear reduction and return of fear
Rowe, M. K., & Craske, M. G. (1998) · Behaviour Research and Therapy · doi:10.1016/s0005-7967(97)10016-x · Cited by 1,782
Written emotional expression: Effect sizes, outcome types, and moderating variables
Smyth, J. M. (1998) · Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-006x.66.1.174 · Cited by 1,294
Written emotional expression: Effect sizes, outcome types, and moderating variables.
Smyth, J. M. (1998) · Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology · doi:10.1037//0022-006x.66.1.174 · Cited by 1,290 · cited 2×
“This e ff ect size is r = .35 (Smyth, 1998).”
Background
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 1
- Pickett, 2005, Sydney Symposium of Social Psychology series. The social outcast: Ostracism, social exclusion, rejection, and bullying, 213
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Items 101–200 of 630
Self-disclosure in social media and psychological well-being: A meta-analysis
Chu, T.-H., Sun, M.-R., & Jiang, L. C. (2022) · Journal of Social and Personal Relationships · doi:10.1177/02654075221119429 · Cited by 61
“Self-disclosure in social media was found to be associated with positive emotions (Ho et al., 2018) and high self-esteem (Gonzales, 2014); but in some circumstances, it was found to be associated with negative emotions (Derks et al., 2008), low self-esteem (O’Connor et al., 2011), anxiety (Tam et…”
BackgroundLee, H. S., Wright, C., Ferranto, J., Buttimer, J., Palmer, C. E., Welchman, A., Mazor, K. M., Fisher, K. A., Smelson, D., O’Connor, L., et al. (2025) · Frontiers in Psychiatry · doi:10.3389/fpsyt.2024.1505024 · Cited by 55
Grover, T., Rowan, K., Suh, J., McDuff, D., & Czerwinski, M. P. (2020) · ACM International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces (IUI) · doi:10.1145/3377325.3377507 · Cited by 60
“Recent research also suggests that the psychological benefits of disclosure and reflection with an agent are similar to reflection with another human [13].”
BackgroundAraujo, T., & Bol, N. (2023) · Computers in Human Behavior Artificial Humans · doi:10.1016/j.chbah.2023.100030 · Cited by 68
Intention to adopt services by AI avatar: A protection motivation theory perspective
Park, J., Yun, J., & Chang, W. (2024) · Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services · doi:10.1016/j.jretconser.2024.103929 · Cited by 51
Zarouali, B., Makhortykh, M., Bastian, M., & Araujo, T. (2020) · European Journal of Communication · doi:10.1177/0267323120940908 · Cited by 55
Exploring how politeness impacts the user experience of chatbots for mental health support
Bowman, R., Cooney, O., Newbold, J. W., Thieme, A., Clark, L., Doherty, G. J., & Cowan, B. R. (2023) · International Journal of Human-Computer Studies · doi:10.1016/j.ijhcs.2023.103181 · Cited by 57
A Matter of Trust? Examination of Chatbot Usage in Insurance Business
Cardona, D. R., Janssen, A., Guhr, N., Breitner, M. H., & Milde, J. (2021) · Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS) · doi:10.24251/hicss.2021.068 · Cited by 49
“Past research has demonstrated that the psychological, emotional, and relational effects of disclosing personal information to a chatbot are the same that providing information to a human [35].”
Background"I’m Hurt Too": The Effect of a Chatbot's Reciprocal Self-Disclosures on Users’ Painful Experiences
Chung, L. L., & Kang, J. (2023) · Archives of Design Research · doi:10.15187/adr.2023.11.36.4.67 · Cited by 54
Yim, M. C. (2023) · International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction · doi:10.1080/10447318.2023.2234114 · Cited by 51
“Moreover, these studies often employ human confederates to simulate the role of a chatbot ’ s virtual assistant, using techniques such as the Wizard of Oz manipulation (e.g., Go & Sundar, 2019; Ho et al., 2018).”
Artificial Intelligence and the Psychology of Human Connection
Boyd, R. L., & Markowitz, D. M. (2026) · Perspectives on Psychological Science · doi:10.1177/17456916251404394 · Cited by 78
“When AI acts as a mediator, psychological proximity may be more diffuse, enhancing the perceived warmth, clarity, or depth of a human-to-human exchange (Beattie et al., 2020; Ho et al., 2018; J. Li et al., 2023).”
Replika in the Metaverse: the moral problem with empathy in ‘It from Bit’
McStay, A. (2022) · AI and Ethics · doi:10.1007/s43681-022-00252-7 · Cited by 46
“for example observe that for relationships with social robots to progress beyond initial interactions and exploration, self-disclosure is required for gratification from the human–chatbot interaction [33].”
BackgroundIntroducing the socialbot: a novel touchpoint along the young adult customer journey
Wilson‐Nash, C., Goode, A., & Currie, A. (2020) · European Journal of Marketing · doi:10.1108/ejm-07-2019-0555 · Cited by 50
van Straten, C. L., Peter, J., Kühne, R., & Barco, À. (2021) · Computers in Human Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.chb.2021.107135 · Cited by 46
Namvarpour, M. (., Pauwels, H., & Razi, A. (2025) · Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction · doi:10.1145/3757548 · Cited by 45
“Companion chatbots, a subset of conversational AI, are designed specifically to provide users with emotional support and companionship [35, 95].”
Desirable or Distasteful? Exploring Uncertainty in Human-Chatbot Relationships
Pan, S., Cui, J., & Mou, Y. (2024) · International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction · doi:10.1080/10447318.2023.2256554 · Cited by 44
“Notably, an experiment by Ho et al. (2018) demonstrated that social chatbots fulfilled emotional, relational, and therapeutic roles on par with human interlocutors.”
Modeling users’ satisfaction and visit intention using AI-based chatbots
Orden-Mejía, M. A., Carvache‐Franco, M., Huertas, A., Carvache‐Franco, O., & Carvache‐Franco, W. (2023) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0286427 · Cited by 55
“Studies about chatbots and empathy have increased recently [36,60,61] in order to make them more empathetic and human-like.”
BackgroundService chatbot: Co-citation and big data analysis toward a review and research agenda
Lee, S. E., Ju, N., & Lee, K. (2023) · Technological Forecasting and Social Change · doi:10.1016/j.techfore.2023.122722 · Cited by 52
Liu, Y., Yan, W., Hu, B., Zhi, L., & Song, Y. (2023) · International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction · doi:10.1080/10447318.2023.2238974 · Cited by 47
“Some scholars imply that there is no substantial difference in an individual ’ s perception of humans and chatbots (e.g., Beattie et al., 2020; Ho et al., 2018).”
BackgroundResultMassa, P., de Souza Ferraz, D. A., Magno, L., Silva, A. P., Greco, M., Dourado, I., & Grangeiro, A. (2023) · Journal of Medical Internet Research · doi:10.2196/41881 · Cited by 42
“Agreeing with Ho et al [27], participants highlighted feeling safer while disclosing intimate information to a computer as compared with a person, especially when talking about sexual experiences that they felt might be judged by others.”
How Chatbot Language Shapes Consumer Perceptions: The Role of Concreteness and Shared Competence
Jiménez‐Barreto, J., Rubio, N., & Molinillo, S. (2023) · Journal of Interactive Marketing · doi:10.1177/10949968231177618 · Cited by 46
“Priorinvestigations have found that chatbots may suffer from a perceptual penalization compared with human employees while attending to consumers ’ requests (see Crolic et al. 2022; Ho, Hancock, and Miner 2018; Luo et al. 2019; Mou and Xu 2017).”
BackgroundConversational Agent Research Toolkit
Araujo, T. (2020) · Computational Communication Research · doi:10.5117/ccr2020.1.002.arau · Cited by 42
Park, H., & Lee, J. (2021) · Proceedings of the 2021 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/3411764.3445133 · Cited by 44
Xu, S., & Li, W. (2022) · New Media & Society · doi:10.1177/14614448221108112 · Cited by 54
“Previous studies showed that the relational use of voice assistants may generate psychological benefits (e.g. Ho et al., 2018).”
BackgroundResultInfluentialPan, W., Liu, D., Meng, J., & Liu, H. (2024) · New Media & Society · doi:10.1177/14614448241259149 · Cited by 47
“Humans can also build intimacy and form genuine relationships with these AI communicators (Brandtzaeg et al., 2022; Ho et al., 2018).”
Do Multilingual Users Prefer Chat-bots that Code-mix? Let's Nudge and Find Out!
Bawa, A., Khadpe, P., Joshi, P., Bali, K., & Choudhury, M. (2020) · Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction · doi:10.1145/3392846 · Cited by 43
“Subsequent research has gone on to show that: people have similar processes of impression formation with robots as they do with other humans [37], derive similar psychological outcomes from disclosing to a chatbot when compared to another human [32], and even co-operate more with a computer when they are primed to thi…”
BackgroundXu, K., Chen, M., & You, L. (2023) · International Journal of Social Robotics · doi:10.1007/s12369-022-00961-3 · Cited by 40
“…of social cues have been documented in research on various technologies such as computers, chat-bots, voice assistants, and telepresence robots [9, 49, 134], limited research has directly responded to Nass and Moon’s call for studies on whether some social cues are more powerful than others in…”
BackgroundThe Use of AI-Supported Chatbot in Psychology
Uludağ, K. (2025) · Advances in medical technologies and clinical practice book series · doi:10.4018/979-8-3693-3112-5.ch001 · Cited by 47
Therapy and E-therapy—Preparing Future Psychiatrists in the Era of Apps and Chatbots
Gratzer, D., & Goldbloom, D. S. (2020) · Academic Psychiatry · doi:10.1007/s40596-019-01170-3 · Cited by 40
“Work in the area is supportive of this view, though we acknowledge that research in this area has just begun, and that for some patients, the concept of therapist-free therapy will likely be unworkable [7].”
BackgroundLee, S., Park, G., & Chung, J. (2023) · Telematics and Informatics · doi:10.1016/j.tele.2023.102009 · Cited by 43
Conversational Agents for Health and Wellbeing
Kocaballi, A., Quiroz, J., Laranjo, L., Rezazadegan, D., Kocielnik, R., Clark, L., Liao, Q., Park, S., Moore, R. J., & Miner, A. S. (2020) · CHI Extended Abstracts · doi:10.1145/3334480.3375154 · Cited by 42
Self-citationZhao, X., Chen, L., Jin, Y., & Zhang, X. (2022) · Information Processing & Management · doi:10.1016/j.ipm.2022.103203 · Cited by 38
Emotional attachment to AI companions and European law
Boine, C. (2023) · MIT Case Studies in Social and Ethical Responsibilities of Computing · doi:10.21428/2c646de5.db67ec7f · Cited by 34
My colleague is not “human”: Will working with robots make you act more indifferently?
Lv, X., Shi, K., He, Y., Ji, Y., & Lan, T. (2024) · Journal of Business Research · doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2024.114585 · Cited by 39
"This Chatbot Would Never...": Perceived Moral Agency of Mental Health Chatbots
Wester, J., Pohl, H., Hosio, S. J., & van Berkel, N. (2024) · Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction · doi:10.1145/3637410 · Cited by 51
“In this study, results indicate how disclosing private information (e.g., emotional or intimate information) did not differ between a chatbot or a human regarding their beneficence [41].”
BackgroundAffandi, S., Ishaq, M. I., Raza, A., Talpur, Q., & Ahmad, R. (2024) · Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services · doi:10.1016/j.jretconser.2024.104087 · Cited by 44
Ireland, D., Bradford, D., Szepe, E., Lynch, E., Martyn, M. M., Hansen, D. T., & Gaff, C. (2020) · Patient Education and Counseling · doi:10.1016/j.pec.2020.11.007 · Cited by 36
“I’m Here for You”: Can Social Chatbots Truly Support Their Users? A Literature Review
van Wezel, M. M. C., Croes, E. A. J., & Antheunis, M. L. (2021) · Lecture notes in computer science · doi:10.1007/978-3-030-68288-0_7 · Cited by 36
Bartle, V., Lyu, J., El Shabazz-Thompson, F., Oh, Y., Chen, A. A., Chang, Y.-J., Holstein, K., & Dell, N. (2022) · CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/3491102.3517683 · Cited by 35
“behavior change [4, 57, 58, 67], aging in place [54, 61], and rehabilitation [28, 29, 35, 50].”
BackgroundCho, E., Motalebi, N., Sundar, S. S., & Abdullah, S. (2022) · Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction · doi:10.1145/3555164 · Cited by 35
“factual) conversations, which in turn, created positive emotional and relational outcomes [28].”
BackgroundInfluentialDiwanji, V. S., Geana, M., Pei, J., Nguyen, N. H. T., Izhar, N., & Chaif, R. H. (2025) · International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction · doi:10.1080/10447318.2025.2454954 · Cited by 41
“However, our results contrast other studies that found that AI agents elicit similar reactions as human agents (Ho et al., 2018; Rapp et al., 2021).”
Human–chatbot communication: a systematic review of psychological studies
Семеновна, Р. А., & Воронин, А. Н. (2025) · AI & Society · doi:10.1007/s00146-025-02277-y · Cited by 42
“Research has also explored the impact of users’ emotional states (self-disclosure, emotionally charged conversations, relational warmth, etc.) on the effectiveness of interactions with chatbots (Rieke and Martins 2023; Ho et al. 2018).”
No secrets between the two of us: Privacy concerns over using AI agents.
Lim, S., & Shim, H. (2022) · Cyberpsychology Journal of Psychosocial Research on Cyberspace · doi:10.5817/cp2022-4-3 · Cited by 35
“For example, Ho et al. (2018) examined the downstream effects that occurred after emotional and factual disclosures in conversations with either a supposed AI agent or a real person.”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialLove, marriage, pregnancy: Commitment processes in romantic relationships with AI chatbots
Djufril, R., Frampton, J. R., & Knobloch-Westerwick, S. (2025) · Computers in Human Behavior: Artificial Humans · doi:10.1016/j.chbah.2025.100155 · Cited by 33
Multimodal Analysis and Estimation of Intimate Self-Disclosure
Soleymani, M., Stefanov, K., Kang, S., Ondras, J., & Gratch, J. S. (2019) · INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON MULTIMODAL INTERACTION · doi:10.1145/3340555.3353737 · Cited by 33
“Sharing private information with others has demonstrated emotional, relational and psychological benefits [21].”
BackgroundDesigning Reenacted Chatbots to Enhance Museum Experience
Noh, Y.-G., & Hong, J.-H. (2021) · Applied Sciences · doi:10.3390/app11167420 · Cited by 40
Dai, Y. H., Lee, J., & Kim, J. W. (2023) · International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction · doi:10.1080/10447318.2023.2288734 · Cited by 38
“…paradigm in human-computer interaction suggests that when social cues from computing devices activate social scripts, the interaction’s focus moves to the interaction’s nature itself, rather than the inherent difference between the machine communicator and human communicators (Ho et al., 2018).”
Bricker, J. B., Sullivan, B. M., Mull, K. E., Santiago‐Torres, M., & Ferres, J. L. (2024) · JMIR mhealth and uhealth · doi:10.2196/57318 · Cited by 42
“A chatbot that used self-disclosure increased the user’s perception that the chatbot understood their needs, which in turn predicted more positive mood [51].”
Liang, K.-H., Shi, W., Oh, Y. J., Wang, H., Zhang, J., & Yu, Z. (2024) · Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction · doi:10.1145/3653691 · Cited by 46
“This framework suggests that disclosure processes and outcomes would be similar regardless of whether the partner is a human or a bot [18].”
BackgroundMethodResultInfluentialCoping with Emotional Distress via Self-Disclosure to Robots: An Intervention with Caregivers
Laban, G., Morrison, V., Kappas, A., & Cross, E. S. (2025) · International Journal of Social Robotics · doi:10.1007/s12369-024-01207-0 · Cited by 46
“The aim of this scale scale is to capture how participants perceived Pepper in terms of friendliness and warmth using one item from [133] and two items from [134], as suggested by [135].”
Mou, Y., Xu, K., & Xia, K. (2018) · Computers in Human Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.chb.2018.08.049 · Cited by 31
“The unique perceived identity of a chatbot as a conversation partner is expected to underpin a new information process, expectations of the partner, and e ff ects di ff erent from human-human interaction (Ho, Hancock, & Miner, 2018).”
“I just shared your responses”
Sannon, S., Stoll, B., DiFranzo, D. J., Jung, M. F., & Bazarova, N. N. (2020) · Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction · doi:10.1145/3375188 · Cited by 31
“People also derive similar positive benefits from emotionally disclosing to agents as they do from interacting with other humans [11].”
BackgroundPotdevin, D., Clavel, C., & Sabouret, N. (2021) · International Journal of Human-Computer Studies · doi:10.1016/j.ijhcs.2021.102612 · Cited by 28
Mou, Y., Zhang, L., Wu, Y., Pan, S., & Ye, X. (2023) · International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction · doi:10.1080/10447318.2022.2163350 · Cited by 30
“In some aspects, service robots ’ performance can be similar to or even better than humans ’ (e.g., Ho et al., 2018).”
BackgroundResultInfluentialSharing Stress With a Robot: What Would a Robot Say?
Ling, H., & Björling, E. A. (2020) · Human-Machine Communication · doi:10.30658/hmc.1.8 · Cited by 30
“In another study, Ho et al. (2018) randomly assigned participants to interact with a confederate on an online chat platform who was either perceived as a chatbot or a real human actor.”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialRobinson, N., & Kavanagh, D. J. (2021) · International Journal of Human-Computer Studies · doi:10.1016/j.ijhcs.2021.102700 · Cited by 32
Ringfort-Felner, R., Laschke, M., Sadeghian, S., & Hassenzahl, M. (2022) · Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction · doi:10.1145/3492852 · Cited by 30
“These findings encourage further research into the psychological benefits of social experiences created in conversation with "machines" [29], such as sVAs.”
BackgroundKeijsers, M., Bartneck, C., & Eyssel, F. (2021) · Interaction Studies Social Behaviour and Communication in Biological and Artificial Systems · doi:10.1075/is.20002.kei · Cited by 29
Soman, G., Judy, M. V., & Abou, A. M. (2025) · Cognitive Systems Research · doi:10.1016/j.cogsys.2025.101337 · Cited by 37
How does turning to AI for companionship predict loneliness and vice versa?
Folk, D., & Dunn, E. (2026) · Psychological Science · doi:10.1177/09567976261427747 · Cited by 33
“In addition, several experiments have shown that chatbots reduce loneliness and increase mood on par with brief interactions with humans (De Freitas et al., 2024; Drouin et al., 2022; Folk et al., 2024; Ho et al., 2018).”
Lee, S. K., & Sun, J. (2022) · Behaviour and Information Technology · doi:10.1080/0144929x.2022.2145998 · Cited by 29
“…teachers, caregivers, surveillance agents, decision-makers, personal companions) and they have the potential to improve quality of human life (Ho, Hancock, and Miner 2018; Spence 2019), it is necessary to understand the emotional factors and processes that increase or decrease trust in…”
BackgroundAbendschein, B., Edwards, C. C., & Edwards, A. P. (2021) · Communication Research Reports · doi:10.1080/08824096.2021.1966405 · Cited by 28
“For example, studies focused on emotional disclosures (Ho, Hancock, & Miner, 2018) and empathetic messages (Inkster et al., 2018; Liu & Sundar, 2018) from AI chatbots point to the potential for interactions that contain a sense of warmth and connection between human and non-human actors.”
BackgroundXia, H., Chen, J., Qiu, Y., Liu, P., & Liu, Z. F. (2024) · International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction · doi:10.1080/10447318.2024.2305985 · Cited by 28
“In addition to HHI, people may also obtain perceived value in HCI (Ho et al., 2018).”
Yuan, J., Peng, X., Liu, Y. H., & Wang, Q. (2024) · Computers in Human Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.chb.2024.108501 · Cited by 31
Meyer, S., & Elsweiler, D. (2025) · International Journal of Human-Computer Studies · doi:10.1016/j.ijhcs.2025.103514 · Cited by 39
Moriuchi, E. (2022) · Journal of Technology in Behavioral Science · doi:10.1007/s41347-022-00277-z · Cited by 28
“Furthermore, there are studies that indicated that participants exhibited higher rates of disclosure when they were told that an avatar was computer operated rather than human operated (Ho et al., 2018).”
BackgroundGuingrich, R. E., & Graziano, M. S. A. (2025) · Oxford Intersections: AI in Society · doi:10.1093/9780198945215.003.0011 · Cited by 28
“…benefits of human–chatbot interactions may include reduced feelings of being judged and more self-disclosure, as well as lower negative affect when interacting with an artificial agent than with a human one (de Gennaro et al., 2020; Ho et al., 2018; D. Kim et al., 2014; Lucas et al., 2014).”
Luetke Lanfer, H., Reifegerste, D., Weber, W., Memenga, P., Baumann, E., Geulen, J., Klein, S., Müller, A., Hahne, A., & Weg-Remers, S. (2024) · BMC Health Services Research · doi:10.1186/s12913-024-10785-8 · Cited by 30
“More-over, the responses are often bound by a narrow frame of topics, and there is a risk of the user’s emotional state being misunderstood or not conveyed effectively [36, 41, 43, 44].”
Shen, H., & Wang, M. (2023) · Computers in Human Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.chb.2023.107718 · Cited by 33
36 Questions to Loving a Chatbot: Are People Willing to Self-disclose to a Chatbot?
Croes, E. A. J., & Antheunis, M. L. (2021) · Lecture notes in computer science · doi:10.1007/978-3-030-68288-0_6 · Cited by 27
“A profound advantage of social chatbots over more functional chatbots is that they are able to recognize emotions in social interactions and are able to respond in an empathic way [18].”
BackgroundSağlam, R. B., Nurse, J. R. C., & Hodges, D. (2022) · Frontiers in Computer Science · doi:10.3389/fcomp.2022.908245 · Cited by 35
Zhou, A. Y., Tsai, W. S., & Men, L. R. (2024) · International Journal of Business Communication · doi:10.1177/23294884241229223 · Cited by 29
“Companies embraced chatbots due to their interactivity, 24-7 availability, cost-efficiency, and improved ability to convey emotional intelligence and project brand per-sonalities (Ho et al., 2018).”
Park, G., Chung, J., & Lee, S. (2024) · Technological Forecasting and Social Change · doi:10.1016/j.techfore.2024.123211 · Cited by 26
Luo, X., Zhang, A., Li, Y., Zhang, Z., Ying, F., Lin, R., Yang, Q., Wang, J., & Huang, G. (2024) · International Journal of Mental Health Nursing · doi:10.1111/inm.13384 · Cited by 26
Das, R., & Hodkinson, P. (2019) · Social Media + Society · doi:10.1177/2056305119846488 · Cited by 30
A Study on the Regulatory Fit Effects of Influencer Types and Message Types
Yi, M. R., & Lee, H.-S. (2023) · International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction · doi:10.1080/10447318.2023.2232213 · Cited by 28
“In addition, it was confirmed that in conversations, participants responded emotionally regardless of whether the partner was a chatbot or a human (Ho et al., 2018).”
InfluentialThompson, D., & Baranowski, T. (2019) · Translational Behavioral Medicine · doi:10.1093/tbm/ibz065 · Cited by 22
Can Chatbots Ever Provide More Social Connection Than Humans?
Folk, D., Yu, S., & Dunn, E. (2024) · Collabra: Psychology · doi:10.1525/collabra.117083 · Cited by 21
Sia, D. E., Yu, M. J., Daliva, J. L., Montenegro, J., & Ong, E. (2021) · Asian CHI Symposium · doi:10.1145/3429360.3468177 · Cited by 25
“A study suggested that people are likely to share more personal information with a chatbot rather than a person [15].”
BackgroundGambino, A., & Liu, B. (2022) · Human-Machine Communication · doi:10.30658/hmc.4.6 · Cited by 25
“As empirical studies have found both similarities (Edwards et al., 2020; Ho et al., 2018; S. K. Lee et al., 2021; Meng & Dai, 2021; Xu, 2019) and differences between HMC and interpersonal communication (Edwards & Edwards, 2022; Jia et al., 2022; Kim & Song, 2021; Liu & Wei, 2021; van Straten et…”
BackgroundResultLiao, W., Oh, Y. J., Feng, B., & Zhang, J. (2023) · Communication Research · doi:10.1177/00936502221138427 · Cited by 25
“The communication of emotions, especially in terms of emotional support, can facilitate advice-taking among people (Feng, 2009) and between people and artificial agents (e.g., Ho et al., 2018; Liu & Sundar, 2018).”
BackgroundInfluentialAI-mediated social support: the prospect of human–AI collaboration
Meng, J., Zhang, R., Qin, J., Lee, Y.-J., & Lee, Y. (2025) · Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication · doi:10.1093/jcmc/zmaf013 · Cited by 34
Sedláková, J., Lucivero, F., Pavarini, G., & Kerasidou, A. (2025) · The American Journal of Bioethics · doi:10.1080/15265161.2025.2526734 · Cited by 27
“Self-disclosure toward another human being who is a moral agent is already an important step in psycho-therapy that has beneficial effects (Ho, Hancock, and Miner 2018).”
Willoughby, B. J., Dover, C. R., Hakala, R. M., & Carroll, J. S. (2025) · Journal of Social and Personal Relationships · doi:10.1177/02654075251371394 · Cited by 24
“…of AI platforms demonstrating the potential for misuse of both the technology and users; furthermore, this misuse can lead to issues such as emotional dependence, privacy violations, and even delusion in relationships formed with AI (Ho et al., 2018; Laestadius et al., 2022; Ragab et al., 2024).”
AI companions and subjective well-being: moderation by social connectedness and loneliness
Nakagomi, A., Akutsu, Y., Yasuoka, M., Abe, N., Ihara, S., Teroh, T., & Tabuchi, T. (2026) · Technology in Society · doi:10.1016/j.techsoc.2026.103229 · Cited by 29
An Explainable Artificial Intelligence Approach for Detecting Empathy in Textual Communication
Montiel-Vázquez, E. C., Uresti, J. A. R., & Loyola‐González, O. (2022) · Applied Sciences · doi:10.3390/app12199407 · Cited by 27
“Sci. Emotion models vary, as emotion is an abstract psychological concept [73].”
Using AI chatbots in climate change mitigation: a moderated serial mediation model
Lee, S., Park, Y., & Park, G. (2024) · Behaviour and Information Technology · doi:10.1080/0144929x.2023.2298305 · Cited by 23
“To evaluate the manipulation of the chatbot emotional expressions, participants were asked to rate three items borrowed from Ho, Hancock, and Miner (2018).”
Söderlund, M. (2019) · Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services · doi:10.1016/j.jretconser.2019.102001 · Cited by 25
Kim, Y., & Lee, H. (2022) · International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction · doi:10.1080/10447318.2022.2108669 · Cited by 23
“As outlines, compared to factual chat messages, emotional chat messages have been found to result in more effective and beneficial outcomes (Han et al., 2019; Ho et al., 2018; Liu & Sundar, 2018; Meng & Dai, 2021; Rhim et al., 2022).”
BackgroundLau, Y., Ang, W. H. D., Ang, W. W., Pang, P. C., Wong, S. H., & Chan, K. S. (2025) · Depression and Anxiety · doi:10.1155/da/8930012 · Cited by 31
Slacking with the Bot: Programmable Social Bot in Virtual Team Interaction
Laitinen, K., Laaksonen, S.-M., & Koivula, M. (2021) · Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication · doi:10.1093/jcmc/zmab012 · Cited by 32
“Additionally, our findings are in line with studies of therapy bots and other social bots designed for socioemotional needs, since they also seem to indicate that nonhuman communicators have relational and emotional impact (Ho et al., 2018; De Gennaro et al., 2020).”
ResultFu, C., Deng, Q., Shen, J., Mahzoon, H., & Ishiguro, H. (2022) · Sensors · doi:10.3390/s22030991 · Cited by 22
“These abilities need to be expressed in some way during the interaction, which is difficult to achieve by simply using some constructed models or features, such as a chatbot that has an emotional response [11] or personal information disclosure chatbot [12].”
BackgroundChatbots in the Field of Mental Health: Challenges and Opportunities
Viduani, A. C., Cosenza, V., Araújo, R., & Kieling, C. (2023) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-10698-9_8 · Cited by 25
Sha, S., Loveys, K., Qualter, P., Shi, H., Krpan, D., & Galizzi, M. M. (2024) · BMC Public Health · doi:10.1186/s12889-024-19153-x · Cited by 23
“The answer is probably complex, but from a practical perspective it seems that the answer may not matter: people seem to benefit from relational agents as long as they feel they are understood and heard by them – irrespective of whether this is actually the case [18].”
BackgroundMohammed, I. A., Bello, A., & Ayuba, B. (2025) · Education and Information Technologies · doi:10.1007/s10639-024-13293-8 · Cited by 23
“Chatbots are AI programs that permit person-to-machine communication based on written or oral code (Bailey, 2019; Colace et al., 2018; Ho et al., 2018).”
Gong, Z., & Su, L. Y.-F. (2024) · Science Communication · doi:10.1177/10755470241280986 · Cited by 22
“…chatbots that feed them pre-written replies in the form of button options and do not allow them to input queries in their own words (Zhao et al., 2023); or (c) used the “Wizard of Oz” protocol, in which participants interact with a “chatbot” that is actually a researcher (e.g., Ho et al., 2018).”
Richards, R., Spence, P. R., & Edwards, C. C. (2022) · Human-Machine Communication · doi:10.30658/hmc.4.3 · Cited by 21
“Three coders completed categorization of all content within Communication Research Reports for the 11-year period.”
BackgroundInfluentialOrden-Mejía, M. A., & Huertas, A. (2022) · Anatolia · doi:10.1080/13032917.2022.2072918 · Cited by 22
“Some studies have focused on understanding the effects of empathy and the emotions generated in human-chatbot communication (Alam et al., 2018; Ho et al., 2018; Portela & Granell-Canut, 2017).”
BackgroundHenkel, T., Linn, A. J., & van der Goot, M. J. (2023) · Lecture notes in computer science · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-25581-6_6 · Cited by 22
“This is in line with studies that indicate high WSD to an empathic chatbot [10, 25, 32, 58].”
Lei, X., & Liu, F. (2024) · International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction · doi:10.1080/10447318.2024.2316368 · Cited by 21
“Likewise, the reciprocal self-disclosure between users and robots can foster liking and intimacy, yielding positive outcomes for user experience (Ho et al., 2018; Meng & Dai, 2021; Mou et al., 2023).”
Metadata
- Authors
- Ho, A., Hancock, J., & Miner, A. S.
- Affiliations
- Stanford University (US)
- Department of Communication, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA
- Stanford Medicine (US)
- Corresponding author
- Ho, Annabell
- Venue
- Journal of Communication
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2018-05-30
- Volume
- 68
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 712-733
- ISSN
- 0021-9916 (ISSN-L)
- 1460-2466
- PMC
- PMC6074615
- OpenAlex
- W2806569034
- Cited by
- 629
- References
- 67
- Citations by year
- 2026: 153 · 2025: 109 · 2024: 103 · 2023: 74 · 2022: 74 · 2021: 52 · 2020: 48 · 2019: 12 · 2018: 4
- FWCI
- 39.26
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- Journal of Communication (publishedVersion)
- Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- National Science Foundation
- National Institutes of Health
- National Center for Advancing Translational Science (KL2TR001083, UL1TR001085)
- Clinical and Translational Science (KL2TR001083, UL1TR001085)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Social Robot Interaction and HRI
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Attachment and Relationship Dynamics
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Marketing › AI in Service Interactions
- Keywords
- self-disclosure, chatbots, human-computer interaction, emotional disclosure, interpersonal relationships
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.
A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-11-09, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).
A second model labelled each claim on 2026-11-09 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).
Cited sources are checked with a language model’s help (gpt-6-sol).
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
