Emulated Empathy: Can Risks Be Countered by a Soft-Law Standard?
Abstract
As artificial intelligence systems increasingly emulate empathy – recognizing, interpreting, responding to human emotional states and psychological contexts, and potentially appearing to genuinely care about a person – questions emerge about the personal and societal implications of these developments. Emulated empathy may enhance usability, engagement, and accessibility, but it also raises concerns about manipulation, commodification of interior life, and detachment from reality. Such issues regarding emulated empathy have been raised in relation to AI companions. While AI systems may arguably possess functional aspects of empathy, mimicry of human empathy also reveals fundamental differences between human and computational forms. Drawing on insights from neuroscience, philosophy of mind, and AI ethics, the paper discusses whether such systems pose a threat to human connection or could instead augment it. Special attention is given to the IEEE P7014.1standard, which outlines ethical considerations and recommended practices for human-AI partnerships involving emulated empathy. In additional to advancing conceptual understanding of emulated empathy, the paper argues for a proactive governance approach that combines soft law with regulatory safeguards to mitigate harm, uphold trust, and guide responsible design in this emerging domain.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
Manipulation by LLM-CBs may occur based on users' vulnerabilities and negative thought patterns that users shared beforehand.
“Manipulation may occur based on users’ vulnerabilities and negative thought patterns that users shared beforehand39,49.”
From A scoping review on the mental health harms of LLM-based chatbots (2026) · cites this paper as [49]
Cites
Picard, R. W. (1997) · MIT Press · doi:10.7551/mitpress/1140.001.0001 · Cited by 7,382 · see citing works
The functional architecture of human empathy
Decety, J., & Jackson, P. L. (2004) · Behavioral and Cognitive Neuroscience Reviews · doi:10.1177/1534582304267187 · Cited by 3,407 · cited 1× · see citing works
“A rough overlap in the field of psychology is cognitive empathy, which is founded on distance and scope to understand another’s emotions without necessarily sharing them [13].”
In principle obstacles for empathic AI: why we can’t replace human empathy in healthcare
Montemayor, C., Halpern, J., & Fairweather, A. (2022) · AI & SOCIETY · doi:10.1007/s00146-021-01230-z · Cited by 293 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
A scoping review on the mental health harms of LLM-based chatbots
Diel, A., Torous, J., Cuijpers, P., Kleesiek, J., Nensa, F., Weber, N., Faust, F., Lalgi, T. J., Mellis, F. S., Teufel, M., et al. (2026) · npj Digital Medicine · doi:10.1038/s41746-026-03054-x · Cited by 4 · see citing works
“Syco-phantic responses may validate or reinforce delusional thoughts, harmful behavior, or maladaptive thinking 37,42,43,49 by creating the impression that expressed beliefs are externally socially validated when they are actually mirrored by the LLM-CB 57 .”
- Authors
- McStay, A.
- Affiliations
- Bangor University (GB)
- Corresponding author
- McStay, Andrew
- ORCID
- McStay, Andrew
- Venue
- IEEE Transactions on Technology and Society
- Published
- 2025-09
- Volume
- 6
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 250-256
- ISSN
- 2637-6415 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W4411171647
- Cited by
- 5
- References
- 3
- Citations by year
- 2026: 5
- FWCI
- 5.23
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Licence
- Locations
- IEEE Transactions on Technology and Society (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (EP/Y009800/1)
- Economic and Social Research Council (ES/T00696X/1)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Safety Research › Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
- Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Literary and Philosophical Studies
- Social Sciences › Law › Digitalization, Law, and Regulation
- Keywords
- artificial empathy, AI companions, soft law, human-AI collaboration, AI ethics, manipulation, human connection, AI governance, responsible AI design, philosophy of mind
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review