Cited by 12Social Robot Interaction and HRIAI in Service InteractionsAttachment and Relationship Dynamics

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

A Longitudinal Randomized Control Study of Companion Chatbot Use: Anthropomorphism and Its Mediating Role on Social Impacts

Open access
Guingrich, Rose E., Graziano, Michael S. A.·2025·Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society

Abstract

Relationships with social artificial intelligence (AI) agents are on the rise. Most notably, people are forming relationships with companion chatbots such as Replika, a type of social AI agent that people can converse with via text or voice chat. These Large Language Model (LLM) chatbots are designed for companionship, and people have reported forming friendships, mentorships, and romantic partnerships with them. Concerns that companion chatbots may harm or replace real human relationships have been raised, but whether and how these social consequences occur remains unclear. Prior research suggests that people’s state of social need and their anthropomorphism of AI may play a role in how human-AI interaction impacts human-human interaction. In this longitudinal study (N = 183), participants were randomly assigned to a chatbot condition (text chat with a companion chatbot) or to a control condition (engage in text-based word games) in which they engaged in their daily task at least 10 minutes a day for 21 consecutive days. Participants completed four surveys during the 21 days, and engaged in audio recorded interviews on day 1 and 21. We investigated three primary questions. First, do daily interactions with a companion chatbot impact people’s social health and human relationships? Second, do people’s social states such the desire for social connection or loneliness predict anthropomorphism of the chatbot? Third, does anthropomorphism of the chatbot predict human-human social impacts? We found that people’s social health and relationships were not significantly impacted by companion chatbot interactions across 21 days of use. However, people who had a higher desire for social connection, but not higher loneliness, anthropomorphized the chatbot more. Those who anthropomorphized the chatbot more indicated that the human-chatbot interaction had greater impacts on their social interactions and relationships with family and friends. Via a mediation analysis, our results suggest that the impact of human-AI interaction on human-human social outcomes is mediated by the extent to which people anthropomorphize the AI agent, which may be motivated by a desire for social connection.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1609/aies.v8i2.36618

Cites

Statistics

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

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The text we found for this paper looks like another document, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The text we found for this paper looks like another document, so the self-check wasn’t run.

Citations

Cites

Still being checked.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Guingrich, R. E., & Graziano, M. S. A.
Affiliations
Princeton University (US)
Venue
Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society
Published
2025-10-15
Volume
8
Issue
2
Pages
1153-1153
ISSN
3065-8365 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4415230961
Cited by
12
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 12
Type
conference abstract
Language
en
Open access
Locations
Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI Ethics and Society (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • National Science Foundation
  • Princeton University
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Social Robot Interaction and HRI
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Marketing › AI in Service Interactions
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Attachment and Relationship Dynamics
Keywords
anthropomorphism, human-AI interaction, social needs, loneliness, social health, human-human relationship, mediation, large language model chatbots, Replika

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 second model labelled each claim on 2026-11-10 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).

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