Structured like a language model: Analysing AI as an automated subject
Open accessAbstract
Drawing from the resources of psychoanalysis and critical media studies, in this article we develop an analysis of large language models (LLMs) as ‘automated subjects’. We argue the intentional fictional projection of subjectivity onto LLMs can yield an alternate frame through which artificial intelligence (AI) behaviour, including its productions of bias and harm, can be analysed. First, we introduce language models, discuss their significance and risks, and outline our case for interpreting model design and outputs with support from psychoanalytic concepts. We trace a brief history of language models, culminating with the releases, in 2022, of systems that realise ‘state-of-the-art’ natural language processing performance. We engage with one such system, OpenAI's InstructGPT, as a case study, detailing the layers of its construction and conducting exploratory and semi-structured interviews with chatbots. These interviews probe the model's moral imperatives to be ‘helpful’, ‘truthful’ and ‘harmless’ by design. The model acts, we argue, as the condensation of often competing social desires, articulated through the internet and harvested into training data, which must then be regulated and repressed. This foundational structure can however be redirected via prompting, so that the model comes to identify with, and transfer , its commitments to the immediate human subject before it. In turn, these automated productions of language can lead to the human subject projecting agency upon the model, effecting occasionally further forms of countertransference. We conclude that critical media methods and psychoanalytic theory together offer a productive frame for grasping the powerful new capacities of AI-driven language systems.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
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?
Large language models function as 'automated subjects' simulating intersubjectivity without genuine reciprocity.
“Critical perspectives emphasize the fundamental asymmetry: large language models function as 'automated subjects' simulating intersubjectivity without genuine reciprocity [26].”
From Encountering Generative AI: Narrative Self-Formation and Technologies of the Self Among Young Adults (2026) · cites this paper as [26]
Large language models simulate intersubjectivity without genuine reciprocity.
“Critical analyses argue that large language models simulate intersubjectivity without genuine reciprocity [26].”
From Encountering Generative AI: Narrative Self-Formation and Technologies of the Self Among Young Adults (2026) · cites this paper as [26]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
On the Dangers of Stochastic Parrots: Can Language Models Be Too Big? 🦜
Bender, E. M., Gebru, T., McMillan-Major, A., & Shmitchell, S. (2021) · Proceedings of the 2021 ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency · doi:10.1145/3442188.3445922 · Cited by 6,988 · see citing works
Training language models to follow instructions with human feedback
Ouyang, L., Wu, J., Jiang, X., Almeida, D., Wainwright, C. L., Mishkin, P., Zhang, C., Agarwal, S., Slama, K., Ray, A., et al. (2022) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2203.02155 · Cited by 4,208 · see citing works
Psychoanalyzing artificial intelligence: the case of Replika
Possati, L. M. (2023) · AI & SOCIETY · doi:10.1007/s00146-021-01379-7 · Cited by 65 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 28
- Abid A, Farooqi M and Zou J (2021) Persistent anti-Muslim bias in large language models. In: Proceedings of the 2021 AAAI/ ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society. pp. 298-306.
- Beck J and Bishop R (2020) Technocrats of the Imagination: Art, Technology, and the Military-industrial Avant-garde. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
- Blum V and Secor A (2011) Psychotopologies: Closing the circuit between psychic and material space. Environment and Planning D: Society and Space 29(6): 1030-1047.
- Bolukbasi T, Chang KW, Zou JY, et al. (2016) Man is to computer programmer as woman is to homemaker? Debiasing word embeddings. In: Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 29: Annual Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems 2016, Barcelona, Spain, December 5-10, 2016.
- Brown TB, Mann B, Ryder N, et al. (2020) Language models are few-shot learners. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 33: 1877-1901.
- Deleuze G and Guattari F (2009) Anti-Oedipus: Capitalism and Schizophrenia. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.
- Devlin J, Chang MW, Lee K, et al. (2019) BERT: Pre-training of deep bidirectional transformers for language understanding. In: Proceedings of NAACL-HLT 2019, Minnesota, 2-7 June 2019, pp. 4171-4186.
- Edwards PN (1996) The Closed World: Computers and the Politics of Discourse in Cold War America. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
- Fink B (1999) A Clinical Introduction to Lacanian Psychoanalysis: Theory and Technique. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
- Gillespie T (2014) The relevance of algorithms. In: Gillespie T, Boczkowski PJ and Foot KA (eds) Media Technologies: Essays on Communication, Materiality, and Society. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 167.
- Halpern O (2015) Beautiful Data: A History of Vision and Reason Since 1945. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
- Hayles NK (2020) Unthought: The Power of the Cognitive Nonconscious. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
- Hrynyshyn D (2008) Globalization, nationality and commodifica- tion: The politics of the social construction of the internet. New Media & Society 10(5): 751-770.
- Lacan J (2007) Écrits: A Selection (Routledge Classics). Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon; New York, NY: Routledge.
- Lacan J (2011) The Seminar of Jacques Lacan, Book V: The Formations of the Unconscious: 1957-1958. Cambridge: Polity Press.
- Lacan J (2019) The Seminar of Jacques Lacan, Book VI: Desire and its Interpretation: 1958-1959. Cambridge: Polity Press.
- Laplanche J and & Pontalis JB (2018) The Language of Psycho-Analysis. Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon; New York, NY: Routledge.
- Liang P, Bommasani R, Lee T, et al. (2022) Holistic Evaluation of Language Models. ArXiv Prepr. ArXiv221109110.
- Liu LH (2011) The Freudian Robot: Digital Media and the Future of the Unconscious. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
- Markov AA (2006) An example of statistical investigation of the text eugene onegin concerning the connection of samples in chains. Science in Context 19(4): 591-600..
- Mikolov T, Chen K, Corrado G, et al. (2013) Efficient Estimation of Word Representations in Vector Space. https://doi.org/10. 48550/arXiv.1301.3781 · DOI · Paper page
- Millar I (2021) The Psychoanalysis of Artificial Intelligence. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
- Minsky M (2013) Why Freud was the first good AI theorist. In: The Transhumanist Reader: Classical and Contemporary Essays on the Science, Technology, and Philosophy of the Human Future. Hoboken, NY: Wiley-Blackwell, 167-176.
- Natale S (2021) Deceitful Media: Artificial Intelligence and Social Life After the Turing Test. Oxford/ New York: Oxford University Press.
- Pickering A (2010) The Cybernetic Brain. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
- Turkle S (2005) The Second Self: Computers and the Human Spirit. Boston: MIT Press.
- Vaswani A, Shazeer N, Parmar N, et al. (2017) Attention is all you need. In: Advances in neural information processing systems, 30: 31 st Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems (NIPS2017), Long Beach, CA, USA.
- Z ̌ižek S (2020) Hegel in a Wired Brain. London: Bloomsbury Publishing.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
AI and the future of humanity: ChatGPT-4, philosophy and education – Critical responses
Peters, M. A., Jackson, L., Papastephanou, M., Jandrić, P., Lazaroiu, G., Evers, C. W., Cope, B., Kalantzis, M., Araya, D., Tesar, M., et al. (2024) · Educational Philosophy and Theory · doi:10.1080/00131857.2023.2213437 · Cited by 188 · see citing works
Encountering Generative AI: Narrative Self-Formation and Technologies of the Self Among Young Adults
Kvietkute, D., & Ness, I. J. (2026) · Societies · doi:10.3390/soc16010026 · Cited by 5 · see citing works
“Critical analyses argue that large language models simulate intersubjectivity without genuine reciprocity [26].”
- Authors
- Magee, L., Arora, V., & Munn, L.
- Affiliations
- Western Sydney University (AU)
- University of Stirling (GB)
- The University of Queensland (AU)
- Corresponding author
- Magee, Liam
- Venue
- Big Data & Society
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2023-07
- Volume
- 10
- Issue
- 2
- ISSN
- 2053-9517 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W4388534853
- Cited by
- 46
- References
- 3
- Citations by year
- 2026: 15 · 2025: 14 · 2024: 14 · 2023: 3
- FWCI
- 11.54
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Locations
- Big Data & Society (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
- Stirling Online Research Repository (University of Stirling) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
- arXiv (Cornell University)
- Funders
- Australian Research Council (LP190100099)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Safety Research › Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › History and Philosophy of Science › Cybernetics and Technology in Society
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychoanalysis, Philosophy, and Politics
- Keywords
- large language models, subjectivity, psychoanalysis, critical media studies, chatbots, training data, harm, prompting, countertransference, agency, moral imperative
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