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
35 Own result · 21 No full text of the sources · 16 Own interpretation · 9 Own method · 7 Sources not found · 7 Not checked yet · 2 No basis given · 1 Supported · 1 Partly supported · 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)
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- 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
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
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
“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
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
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 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
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- 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
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
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
“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
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
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
“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
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
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
“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
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
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
“as was understanding (r = .22, p < .03).”
§ Psychological, Relational, and Emotional Effects of Self-Disclosure After Conversations With a Chatbot > Results > Processes
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
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
“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
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- 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)
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably 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
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It 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
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It 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
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It 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
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It 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
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It 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
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It 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
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It 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
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
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
“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
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It 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
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It 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
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It 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
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It 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
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It 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
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It 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
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It 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
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It 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
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It 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
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably 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
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It 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
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably 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.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably 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
plainn = 13- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably 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
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably 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.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It 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
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably 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.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably 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
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably 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
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably 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
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It 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
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It 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
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably 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
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably 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
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably 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
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably 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
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably 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
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably 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
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It 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
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It 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
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It 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
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It 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
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It 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
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It 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
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It 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
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It 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
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably 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
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It 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
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably 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
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It 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
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 401–500 of 630
The AI Agent in the Room: Rethinking Consumer Decision‐Making in the Age of Autonomous AI
Bilgihan, A., Ostinelli, M., Lorenz, M. P., & Zhang, Y. (2026) · Psychology and Marketing · doi:10.1002/mar.70165 · Cited by 6
“…set goals, and disclose preferences, a process shaped by conversational norms (Hu et al. 2022; Panfili et al. 2021), self‐disclosure dynamics (Ho et al. 2018; Croes et al. 2024), and the degree to which consumers delegate versus specify (de Bellis and Venkataramani Johar 2020; Papneja and…”
Look into my eyes: a “faceless” avatar interviewer lowers reporting threshold for adult eyewitnesses
Hsu, C.-W., Gross, J., Colombo, M. S., & Hayne, H. (2023) · Memory & Cognition · doi:10.3758/s13421-023-01424-4 · Cited by 2
“Indeed, in some avatar studies, participants who were led to believe that an avatar interviewer was computer operated reported more will-ingness to disclose information and less intent to provide socially desirable information (Lucas et al., 2014; cf. Ho et al., 2018; Hsu et al., 2021).”
BackgroundMarkowitz, D. M. (2024) · Asian Communication Research · doi:10.20879/acr.2024.21.025 · Cited by 2
Geleceğin Dünyasında Dijital Bir Pazarlama Aracı: Avatar Pazarlama
Aksoy, M., & Yılmaz, Ö. (2024) · Özgür Yayınları eBooks · doi:10.58830/ozgur.pub587.c2432 · Cited by 2
Ferland, L., Owan, R., Kunkel, Z., Qu, H., Gini, M. L., & Koutstaal, W. (2025) · ACM Transactions on Interactive Intelligent Systems · doi:10.1145/3725738 · Cited by 2
“Other social processes, such as self-disclosure, have been shown to induce similar psychological benefits in the users of conversational systems as they do in human-human interactions [44], meaning that capitalization may be worth investigating as an aspect of system design.”
Wu, Z., Huang, D., & Shang, J. (2025) · International Journal of Hospitality Management · doi:10.1016/j.ijhm.2025.104449 · Cited by 2
Can large language models exhibit cognitive and affective empathy as humans?
Yu, T., Pan, S., Fan, C., Luo, S., Jin, Y., & Zhao, B. (2025) · Computers in Human Behavior Artificial Humans · doi:10.1016/j.chbah.2025.100233 · Cited by 9
Lee, D. N., Lee, S., Lim, H., & Hong, H. (2025) · International Journal of Human-Computer Studies · doi:10.1016/j.ijhcs.2025.103692 · Cited by 3
Liu, Y., Song, C., Huang, D., Liu, X., Li, Z., & Hu, B. (2025) · International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction · doi:10.1080/10447318.2025.2598675 · Cited by 2
“Regarding users’ emotional responses, evidence shows that emotional disclosure from the chatbots can enhance users’ positive affect (Ho et al., 2018), and that reciprocal self-disclosure from chatbots can effectively reduce stress and anxiety (Meng & Dai, 2021).”
Lee, Y., Filieri, R., & Trim, P. R. J. (2026) · Internet Research · doi:10.1108/intr-01-2024-0035 · Cited by 4
Xu, B. (2026) · Learning and Motivation · doi:10.1016/j.lmot.2026.102249 · Cited by 3
Ma, L., Wang, Y., & Wang, Y. (2026) · Health Communication · doi:10.1080/10410236.2026.2660147 · Cited by 2
Talking about mental health with AI-based digital personas: Understanding what users disclose
Carre, N., Aghakhani, S., Šipošová, B., Polónyová, M. S., Pazderová, T., & Bunge, E. L. (2026) · Computers in Human Behavior Artificial Humans · doi:10.1016/j.chbah.2026.100311 · Cited by 3
AI companions as hyper-attachment and caregiving targets
Freitas, J. D. (2026) · Current Opinion in Psychology · doi:10.1016/j.copsyc.2026.102393 · Cited by 4
Conversational AI and Personal Growth: Insights from a Critical Integrative Review
Sharma, S., Vohra, P., & Vowels, L. M. (2026) · Behavioral Sciences · doi:10.3390/bs16050756 · Cited by 3
“Self-disclosure represents a key mechanism underlying these interactions (A. Ho et al., 2018; Kretzschmar et al., 2019).”
InfluentialLiebherr, M., Yankouskaya, A., Alshakhsi, S. A. A., Montag, C., & Ali, R. (2026) · Discover Artificial Intelligence · doi:10.1007/s44163-026-01781-4 · Cited by 2
“Recent empirical work demonstrates that conversational AI can elicit self-disclosure comparable to human interaction, evoke emotional responses similar to those in human relationships, and provide perceived social support that buffers against loneliness [65–67].”
Empathy in AI: Developing a Sentiment-Sensitive Chatbot through Advanced Natural Language Processing
(2024) · International Journal of Advanced Trends in Computer Science and Engineering · doi:10.30534/ijatcse/2024/071332024 · Cited by 2
“The authors of the research [2] completed an experiment regarding the performance of chatbots compared to human partners, and the result of this experiment provides a clear idea that the outcome remains consistent for both chatbots and humans.”
ResultCAN CHATBOTS WORK WELL WITH KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS?
(2020) · Issues in Information Systems · doi:10.48009/4_iis_2020_53-58 · Cited by 2
Govier, E. (2018) · Journal of Posthuman Studies · doi:10.5325/jpoststud.2.2.0003 · Cited by 2
Shaik, S. Z., Srinivasan, V., Peng, Y., Lee, M., & Davis, N. M. (2020) · Advances in intelligent systems and computing · doi:10.1007/978-3-030-63092-8_68 · Cited by 2
Triggered by Socialbots: Communicative Anthropomorphization of Bots in Online Conversations
Laaksonen, S.-M., Laitinen, K., Koivula, M., & Sihvonen, T. (2023) · Human-Machine Communication · doi:10.30658/hmc.6.8 · Cited by 9
“Although bots are technological artifacts, there is evidence of their social, emotional, and relational impact and support when they engage in discussions with humans (Beattie & High, 2022 ; Ho et al., 2018 ; Laitinen et al., 2021 ).”
Inteligencia Artificial en comunicación: una revisión bibliométrica en Web of Science
Pérez, C., & Perdomo, B. (2024) · Investigación Bibliotecológica Archivonomía Bibliotecología e Información · doi:10.22201/iibi.24488321xe.2024.99.58882 · Cited by 2
Gros, D., Li, Y., & Yu, Z. (2021) · arXiv (Cornell University) · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2106.02692 · Cited by 2
“Robot Disclosure: Other work has looked how systems disclosing their non-human identity affects the conversation (Mozafari et al., 2020; Ho et al., 2018).”
BackgroundCan Large Language Models Exhibit Cognitive and Affective Empathy as Humans?Preprint
Pan, S., Fan, C., Zhao, B., Luo, S., & Jin, Y. (2024) · doi:10.31219/osf.io/w5rsu · Cited by 2
Linnemann, G. A., & Reimann, L. (2024) · Preprints.org · doi:10.20944/preprints202406.1586.v1 · Cited by 2
Shankar, R., Devi, F., & Xu, Q. (2025) · medRxiv · doi:10.1101/2025.06.22.25330071 · Cited by 2
“Early research suggests that users may form emotional bonds with AI chatbots and virtual agents, experiencing them as empathetic, nonjudgmental, and trustworthy [8,9].”
Araujo, T., & Bol, N. (2025) · Computers in Human Behavior Artificial Humans · doi:10.1016/j.chbah.2025.100178 · Cited by 2
Listening-oriented response generation by exploiting user responses
Bang, J., Han, S., & Lee, J.-H. (2020) · Pattern Recognition Letters · doi:10.1016/j.patrec.2020.10.007 · Cited by 3
Agency in Computer-Mediated Communication: Bots and US Political Elections
Piercy, C. W., Bisel, R. S., & Treem, J. W. (2022) · Emerald Group Publishing Limited eBooks · doi:10.1108/978-1-80071-597-420221032 · Cited by 1
Apriliani, D., Handayani, S. F., & Saputra, I. T. (2023) · Techno Com · doi:10.33633/tc.v22i4.9155 · Cited by 1
“Hasilnya diperoleh bahwa percakapan antara manusia maupun chatbot sama-sama efektif dalam menciptakan manfaat emosional, relasional, dan psikologis [11].”
BackgroundBankacılık Sektöründe Yapay Zekâ Çalışmalarının Bibliyometrik Analizi
Zeybek, F., & HASIRCI, İ. (2024) · Özgür Yayınları eBooks · doi:10.58830/ozgur.pub587.c2430 · Cited by 1
Teknolojik Yeniliklerin Türk Bankacılık Sektörüne Yansımaları
Özaydin, M. E. (2024) · Özgür Yayınları eBooks · doi:10.58830/ozgur.pub587.c2431 · Cited by 1
Boz, B., & Boz, H. (2024) · Özgür Yayınları eBooks · doi:10.58830/ozgur.pub587.c2435 · Cited by 2
User Needs and Benefits of Mental Health Chatbots: Text-Mining Analysis of Mobile Apps Reviews
Kang, D.-Y., & Ki, E. (2025) · International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction · doi:10.1080/10447318.2025.2490866 · Cited by 1
Yu, W. (2025) · Journalism and Media · doi:10.3390/journalmedia6020082 · Cited by 1
Agent AI Becomes Next Addictive Disorder
Chen, A. P. S. (2025) · International Conference on Computing and Artificial Intelligence (ICCAI) · doi:10.1109/iccai66501.2025.00044 · Cited by 1
“Over-reliance on AAI as a source of emotional support may lead to a decline in communication skills and emotional expression abilities in real social situations [25].”
Qin, E. L., & Lin, Z. (2026) · Humanities and Social Sciences Communications · doi:10.1057/s41599-026-07682-2 · Cited by 3
“Existing research on human-AI interactions has consistently documented how users tend to anthropomorphize empathetic AI companions and develop parasocial relationships with them (Ho et al., 2018; Pentina et al., 2023).”
Cheng, W.-H., Lee, Y., Jamieson, J., Wang, W.-H., & Lin, W. (2025) · Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction · doi:10.1145/3757517 · Cited by 1
“More recent work has found that individuals form perceptions of computerized agents similarly to how they perceive human interactions [44, 63].”
Sadralashrafi, S., Neyens, D. M., & Lee, Y. (2025) · Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting · doi:10.1177/10711813251359995 · Cited by 1
“14 ) H e a l t h c a r e c h a t b o t s p r o v i d e m o r e c o n s i s t e n t i n f o r m a t i o n t h a n c li n i c i a n s . health concerns, especially those tied to embarrassment or stigma (Ho et al., 2018; Kim et al., 2024).”
Privacy and Transparency in Human-Robot Conversations: Effects on Self-Disclosure
Zhong, X., Maure, R., & Bruno, B. (2025) · IEEE RO-MAN · doi:10.1109/ro-man63969.2025.11217835 · Cited by 1
“Verbal reciprocity [12], [21] Non-verbal reciprocity [26] Interaction time [13], [14] Interaction topics [13], [20], [27] People’s personality [20] Agent’s (facial) presentation [15], [19], [22], [23] to reflect on how much and how deeply they disclosed [13]–[16].”
Tang, H., Li, Y., Tan, X., & Chen, L. (2025) · AI & Society · doi:10.1007/s00146-025-02712-0 · Cited by 1
How AI can make us more moral: capturing and applying common sense morality
Kallay, H. (2025) · AI and Ethics · doi:10.1007/s43681-025-00883-6 · Cited by 1
One-Sided Parasociality with AI
Degen, J. L. (2025) · Palgrave Studies in Cyberpsychology. · doi:10.1007/978-3-032-07438-6_5 · Cited by 2
Jeon, E., Kim, J. J., & Park, Y. (2026) · International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction · doi:10.1080/10447318.2025.2610445 · Cited by 1
“Experimental and longitudinal evidence indicates that disclosure to chatbots can rival disclosure to humans and can persist over time, albeit with variation across individuals and situations (Ho et al., 2018).”
Adolescent Perceptions of an Online Safety Chatbot: Survey Study
Charles, M., Sauer, J. D., Roehrer, E., Prichard, J., Watters, P., & Scanlan, J. D. (2026) · JMIR Human Factors · doi:10.2196/71498 · Cited by 2
The Imitation of Intimacy: Comparing Satisfaction in Intimate Human and AI Companion Relationships
Masterson, A. M., Ye, X., Li, Y., & Robert, L. (2026) · ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (HRI) · doi:10.1145/3776734.3794515 · Cited by 1
“This technological leap has fueled the proliferation of social chatbots designed specifically for emotional connection [23], and companionship [55].”
Wang, J.-X., Xue, Y., Zhang, Y.-T., Kuai, S., & Xie, X.-C. (2026) · Acta Psychologica · doi:10.1016/j.actpsy.2026.106752 · Cited by 1
Hwang, Y.-Y., Fahrner, V. M., Horstmann, K. T., & Hassenzahl, M. (2026) · International Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/3772318.3790737 · Cited by 2
“So far, LLM-based CAs have been shown to facilitate self-disclosure [61] and to influence users’ attitudes and intentions in domains such as politics, health, and social issues [59, 87, 92, 113, 119].”
Who Am I When You're a Bot? Relational Identity and AI Companions
Leuenberger, M. (2026) · Journal of Applied Philosophy · doi:10.1002/japp.70094 · Cited by 1
Huang, J., Zhu, G., Luo, Y., Lü, J., & Wang, Q. (2026) · Information Technology and People · doi:10.1108/itp-08-2024-0978 · Cited by 1
Cao, B., Wen, C., Scherr, S., Kobayashi, T., & Jiang, L. C. (2026) · International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction · doi:10.1080/10447318.2026.2664702 · Cited by 2
Roumeliotis, K. I., Zestas, O. N., Kyriakou, K.-I. D., Soumis, D. N., Kapellaki, S., Seklou, K., & Tselikas, N. D. (2026) · Array · doi:10.1016/j.array.2026.100933 · Cited by 1
Phạm, M., Ha, Y. K., Nguyen, P. H., Nguyen, V. T. H., & Dinh, T. K. T. (2026) · Acta Psychologica · doi:10.1016/j.actpsy.2026.107218 · Cited by 1
The Ethical Interaction Trilogy Among Companies, Customers, and AI-Chatbots
Ragab, F. A., & Belal, M. (2026) · Advances in computational intelligence and robotics book series · doi:10.4018/979-8-3373-3361-8.ch005 · Cited by 1
Seeking Late Night Life Lines: Experiences of Conversational AI Use in Mental Health Crisis
Ajmani, L., Ghosh, A., Kaveladze, B. T., Kim, E., Namuduri, K., Nguyen, T., Okoli, E., Schleider, J. L., Ford, D., & Suh, J. (2026) · ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency (FAccT) · doi:10.1145/3805689.3812256 · Cited by 6
Pinna, M., Galletta, S., Ash, E., & Elmer, T. (2026) · JMIR Formative Research · doi:10.2196/85427 · Cited by 1
Algorithmic accommodation: linguistic alignment in human-AI relational engagement
Li, H., & Zhang, R.-W. (2026) · Communication and Change · doi:10.1007/s44382-026-00032-5 · Cited by 2
“On the one hand, a growing body of work documents substantial levels of personal and intimate self-disclosure to conversational agents, especially when interactions are sustained over time (Ho et al., 2018; Ta et al., 2020).”
Li, X., Cui, W., Olatunji, S., & Piercy, C. W. (2026) · International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction · doi:10.1080/10447318.2026.2692012 · Cited by 1
Agential harms of chatbots: an ethical perspective
MirzaeiGhazi, S., & Osman, M. (2026) · AI and Ethics · doi:10.1007/s43681-026-01240-x · Cited by 1
“…are increasingly integrated into various aspects of daily life, serving as personal companions, health advisors, career guides, customer support, and even as substitutes for human romantic relationships, with their capabilities extending to voice assistants [10, 43 , 45 , 47, 62 , 119 , 124].”
Zhai, J., & Zhang, J. (2026) · International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction · doi:10.1080/10447318.2026.2707698 · Cited by 1
Liu, P. L., & Yeo, T. E. D. (2026) · International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction · doi:10.1080/10447318.2026.2719169 · Cited by 1
Chatbots by business vis-à-vis consumers: A new form of power and information asymmetry
Dāvida, Z. (2021) · SHS Web of Conferences · doi:10.1051/shsconf/202112905002 · Cited by 1
“For example, social chatbots are designed to act as social actors (Ho et al., 2018) where users may form social-emotional relationships (Bickmore et al., 2010).”
BackgroundSelf-Disclosure or Disclosing Personal Information
Maíz-Arévalo, C. (2023) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-52931-3_2 · Cited by 1
Patel, K. (2024) · Advances in computational intelligence and robotics book series · doi:10.4018/979-8-3693-1830-0.ch005 · Cited by 1
Von Mails, Kamera bis hin zu Chatbots
Eichenberg, C., & Krusche, J. (2025) · Beratung aktuell · doi:10.30820/1437-3181-2025-2-29 · Cited by 1
“Unter-suchungen zeigen zudem, dass Nutzer:innen durch Selbstoffen-barung gegenüber Chatbots ähnliche psychologische Vorteile er-fahren können wie im Gespräch mit Menschen – und dies, ohne dass eine klassische therapeutische Bindung zwingend erforderlich ist (Ho et al., 2018)”
Criticism From Artificial Agents: Prior Interaction Reduces Negative Effects
Jin, B. (2019) · Communication Research Reports · doi:10.1080/08824096.2019.1578953 · Cited by 1
“Ho et al. (2018) showed the importance of emotional communication in psychological and relational outcomes between humans and chatbots.”
BackgroundJulia, J., Heuer, T., Schiering, I., & Gerndt, R. (2019) · Mensch und Computer (MuC) · doi:10.1145/3340764.3344916 · Cited by 1
“Forscher der Standford University konnten zeigen, dass die Interaktion mit einem Chatbot ähnliche Effekte haben kann, wie bei einem realen Gesprächspartner [18].”
BackgroundLange, B. P., Bayirli, A., & Schwab, F. (2020) · Studies in Communication Sciences · doi:10.24434/j.scoms.2020.02.001 · Cited by 1
Lin, S. S. ‐., & Liu, E. T.-H. (2021) · Asia Pacific Journal of Counselling and Psychotherapy · doi:10.1080/21507686.2021.1960398 · Cited by 1
“2011; Ho et al., 2018; Li et al., 2011).”
Putri, A., Halida, H., Dewantara, J. A., Yulia, K. T., Herlinda, H., Ningsih, Y., & Ardiyanti, R. (2023) · JURNAL EDUCATION AND DEVELOPMENT · doi:10.37081/ed.v11i2.4561 · Cited by 1
Elphick, C., Minhas, R., & Shaw, J. (2020) · doi:10.31234/osf.io/zsrp6 · Cited by 1
Emotional Disclosure: Rethinking the Ways Masculinity Impacts the Willingness to be Vulnerable
Fyfe, A. C. (2021) · doi:10.46569/20.500.12680/5t34sr341 · Cited by 1
Configurational Effects for Enhancing the Social Acceptance of Cultural Heritage Virtual HumansPreprint
Li, J., & Kim, K. (2024) · Research Square · doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-3705830/v1 · Cited by 2
The Authenticity Paradox of Political Ai Chatbots on Voters’ Candidate PerceptionsPreprint
Lee, Y.-H., & Yuan, C. W. (2024) · SSRN Electronic Journal · doi:10.2139/ssrn.5074078 · Cited by 1
A Systematic Literature Review and Multi-Stakeholder Ethical Framework for Social ChatbotsPreprint
Piispanen, J.-R., Myllyviita, T., Vakkuri, V., & Rousi, R. (2025) · SSRN Electronic Journal · doi:10.2139/ssrn.5220728 · Cited by 1
Human–Robot Communication and Organization–Public Relationships
Oh, J., & Ki, E. (2025) · Wiley eBooks · doi:10.1002/9781394275434.ch9 · Cited by 1
Designing Conversational Agents to Encourage User Narrative and Self-Reflection in Mental Wellbeing
Park, S. H. (2020) · Seoul National University Open Repository (Seoul National University)
Banks, J., & Ouytsel, J. V. (2020) · Technology Mind and Behavior · doi:10.1037/tmb0000008.supp
Liang, K.-H., Shi, W., Oh, Y., Zhang, J., & Yu, Z. (2021) · arXiv (Cornell University)
Hernández-Carvajal, E. A., & Gómez–Ramírez, D. A. J. (2021) · Studies in systems, decision and control · doi:10.1007/978-3-030-69744-0_27
Park, N., Kim, Y., Jang, E., Lee, J., & Choi, E.-J. (2021) · Korean Journal of Journalism & Communication Studies · doi:10.20879/kjjcs.2021.65.5.010
“또한 호와 동료들(Ho et al., 2018)은 이용자의 자기노출이친밀도와 호감도, 그리고 유희성을증진시킨다고밝혔으며, 정서 적반응도긍정적으로변화되었다고설명했다.”
InfluentialIs a good bot better than a mediocre human?: Chatbots as alternative sources of social connectionPreprint
Folk, D. P., Yu, S., & Dunn, E. W. (2022) · PsyArXiv (OSF Preprints) · doi:10.31234/osf.io/xunsy · Cited by 1
“In a study utilizing this methodology, participants interacted via text with a partner who they believed was either a chatbot or a human (Ho et al., 2018).”
BackgroundLi, L., & Zhou, W. G. (2022) · Journal of Education Humanities and Social Sciences · doi:10.54097/ehss.v2i.783
Lange, B. P., Jonas, H., & Schwab, F. (2023) · Studies in Communication Sciences · doi:10.24434/j.scoms.2023.02.2809
A Review of the Use of Neural Models of Language and Conversation to Support Mental Health
Callejas, Z., Fernández-Martínez, F., Esposito, A. A., & Griol, D. (2023) · Smart innovation, systems and technologies · doi:10.1007/978-981-99-3592-5_31
Chatbot Deteksi Awal Gangguan Kecemasan Menggunakan Dialogflow
Hidayat, R. R., Fikry, M., & Yusra, Y. (2023) · JTT (Jurnal Teknologi Terpadu) · doi:10.32487/jtt.v11i2.1867
“Chatbot dapat mempengaruhi pengungkapan emosional seseorang [11].”
Chatbots Like Siri: Your Digital Assistant
Crowder, J. A. (2023) · Synthesis lectures on engineering, science, and technology · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-45509-4_6
An Analysis of Journalists Coping Strategies in the Face of ChatGPT
Niu, J. (2023) · Lecture Notes in Education Psychology and Public Media · doi:10.54254/2753-7048/25/20230531
“The dialogue of this software has a certain continuity, and you can have an in-depth discussion with it [9].”
BackgroundKim∥, J. T., & Choi, D. Y. (2023) · Asia-pacific Journal of Convergent Research Interchange · doi:10.47116/apjcri.2023.11.23
Oh, J., & Lim, S. (2024) · SSRN Electronic Journal · doi:10.2139/ssrn.4809351
PORTRAIT STUDENTS' SELF-DISCLOSURE IN JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOLS PONTIANAK CITY
Halida, H., Wicaksono, L., Syawaluddin, S., Sendayu, F. S., & Dharmayanti, P. A. (2024) · Jurnal Visi Ilmu Pendidikan · doi:10.26418/jvip.v16i2.78570
“Individual self-disclosure in communication is something that should be underlined, because individuals who are skilled in expressing themselves to others make the individual more confident (Ho et al., 2018; Hoogerheide et al., 2016).”
BackgroundSiyu, M., & Mayu, K. (2024) · SSRN Electronic Journal · doi:10.2139/ssrn.4866963
An Intensive Role of Chatbot Services in the field of Healthcare
Edison, D., Goswami, S., Janakiraman, V., Almusawi, M., Kuppuraj, T., & Ramesh, A. (2024) · International Conference on Advance Computing and Innovative Technologies in Engineering (ICACITE) · doi:10.1109/icacite60783.2024.10617084
Brock, L. A., Bortoli, L. Â. D., Bellei, E. A., & Marchi, A. C. B. D. (2024) · Universal Access in the Information Society · doi:10.1007/s10209-024-01144-9
“Additionally, users often put extra effort into word choice to ensure conversational agents understand them, which can also increase stress [10, 19].”
Hakkı, O., & Torun, N. K. (2024) · Özgür Yayınları eBooks · doi:10.58830/ozgur.pub587.c2429
Teknolojik İnovasyon Perspektifinde İşsizliğin Evrimi
Özaydın, O. (2024) · Özgür Yayınları eBooks · doi:10.58830/ozgur.pub587.c2434
Müzelerde Pazarlama ve Dijitalleşme
Diker, O. (2024) · Özgür Yayınları eBooks · doi:10.58830/ozgur.pub587.c2437
Bicil, İ. M. (2024) · Özgür Yayınları eBooks · doi:10.58830/ozgur.pub587.c2433
Toplumsal Analizlerde Makine Öğrenmesi
Seymen, Ö. F. (2024) · Özgür Yayınları eBooks · doi:10.58830/ozgur.pub587.c2428
Lai, Y., Panagiotopoulos, P., & Lioliou, E. (2025) · SSRN Electronic Journal · doi:10.2139/ssrn.5139268
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
