The DOI matches its Crossref record; 70 of the 70 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; 7 of the 74 sources its claims cite were checked for support.
When loneliness amplifies the risk of problematic emotional dependence: perceived anthropomorphism and basic psychological need satisfaction in AI companion use
Open accessAbstract
Background: Companion-oriented conversational AI can be experienced as socially responsive, yet evidence about problematic reliance requires construct clarity and noncausal interpretation. This study examined whether perceived anthropomorphism was associated with problematic AI-companion dependence directly and indirectly through basic psychological need satisfaction. Methods: A cross-sectional online survey was completed by 666 adults in China who reported using a listed AI companion or conversational AI product during the preceding month. The nonclinical outcome was operationalized with six indicators spanning impaired control, distress, continued use, perceived understanding, emotion-regulation reliance, and displacement of offline communication. Measurement evidence was examined using reliability estimates, one-factor confirmatory models, and HTMT. Standardized composite-score regressions used HC3 robust standard errors, and the indirect association was evaluated with 5,000 bootstrap samples. Results: Perceived anthropomorphism was positively associated with need satisfaction ( β = 0.569, p < 0.001). In the outcome model, need satisfaction ( β = 0.317, p < 0.001) and perceived anthropomorphism ( β = 0.385, p < 0.001) were both positively associated with problematic dependence. The standardized indirect association was 0.180 (95% bootstrap CI [0.137, 0.229]); R 2 was 0.323 for need satisfaction and 0.389 for problematic dependence. Conclusion: The pattern is consistent with a need-satisfaction account of companion-oriented AI use, but the cross-sectional design does not establish temporal ordering, substitution, or causality. Design and policy implications should therefore focus on transparency, user agency, and safeguards against escalating reliance rather than treating anthropomorphism itself as inherently harmful.
Overview
AI snapshot
Written from the paper’s full text.
TL;DR
In a cross-sectional survey of 666 adults in China using AI companions, perceived anthropomorphism was positively associated with basic psychological need satisfaction and with a nonclinical measure of problematic emotional dependence, partly via need satisfaction. Loneliness moderated the indirect association in the full sample, but this moderation did not replicate among users of five named companion/character platforms.
Key findings
- Perceived anthropomorphism was positively associated with basic psychological need satisfaction (β = 0.569, p < 0.001), and need satisfaction was positively associated with problematic emotional dependence (β = 0.317, p < 0.001); perceived anthropomorphism also retained a direct association with problematic emotional dependence (β = 0.385, p < 0.001).
- The standardized indirect association from perceived anthropomorphism to problematic emotional dependence through need satisfaction was 0.180 (95% bootstrap CI [0.137, 0.229]); R² was 0.323 for need satisfaction and 0.389 for problematic dependence.
- In the full sample, the need satisfaction × loneliness interaction was positive (β = 0.086, p = 0.005), with conditional indirect estimates of 0.132 at low loneliness, 0.181 at mean loneliness, and 0.230 at high loneliness; the index was 0.049 (95% bootstrap CI [0.016, 0.084]).
- The loneliness moderation was platform-contingent: among the five named companion/character platforms, the pooled interaction was smaller and nonsignificant (N = 583, β = 0.057, p = 0.083, 95% CI [−0.007, 0.121]), and its conditional-indirect index included zero. An exploratory attachment-anxiety model showed a parallel moderation pattern (AA × NS β = 0.084, p = 0.006; index = 0.048, 95% CI [0.015, 0.084]).
Methods
- Cross-sectional online survey conducted through Wenjuanxing from February to April 2026; 802 questionnaires were collected, 136 invalid responses were excluded, and 666 valid responses from adults in China who reported using a listed AI companion or conversational AI product during the preceding month were analyzed (effective response rate 83.0%). Recruitment was nonprobabilistic via AI companion user communities on Weibo and Xiaohongshu.
- Measures used seven-point Likert items: perceived anthropomorphism (6 adapted items), basic psychological need satisfaction (6 adapted items), problematic emotional dependence (6 nonclinical items), loneliness (6 adapted UCLA Loneliness Scale items), and attachment anxiety (6 adapted ECR/ECR-R items, exploratory alternative moderator).
- Analysis used SmartPLS 4.0 for reliability, convergent validity, and HTMT discriminant validity; PLS-SEM with 5,000 bootstrap resamples for structural paths and indirect effects; standardized composite-score regressions with HC3 robust standard errors; PROCESS-style moderation and moderated mediation; and ten-fold cross-validation for PED indicators.
Limitations
- The paper states that the cross-sectional design cannot establish temporal order or causal mediation, and that reverse and reciprocal associations are plausible; longitudinal panel and experimental designs are needed.
- The paper states that all focal variables were self-reported in one survey, so shared method, evaluative tone, and semantic overlap may inflate associations even when HTMT is below conventional cutoffs.
- The paper states that the Chinese context and platform ecology limit generalizability, and that cross-cultural replication should measure rather than presume cultural mechanisms. The text also makes evident that the sample is nonprobabilistic and cannot be treated as nationally representative, and that the moderation finding is platform-contingent and requires replication.
Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
7 of 74 cited sources checked · 3 supported · 0 flagged · accuracy not yet measured
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“More recent studies on generative AI and AI companions further suggest that anthropomorphic interaction, emotional responsiveness, and friend-like communication are associated with stronger emotional attachment and dependency-related outcomes (Hu et al., 2023; Robayo-Pinzon et al., 2025).”
§ When loneliness amplifies the risk of problematic emotional dependence: perceived anthropomorphism and basic psychological need satisfaction in AI companion use > Literature review and research hypotheses > Perceived anthropomorphism and basic psychological need satisfaction
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Hu et al., 2023
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Supportedcites Robayo-Pinzon et al., 2025 source
The Introduction (page not provided) reports that perceived empathy and anthropomorphism contribute to emotional attachment, which predicts GenAI-related technological addiction. The Discussion (page not provided) adds that natural, human-like chatbot responses may foster closeness and emotional reliance. These passages support the citing sentence’s hedged summary; they do not present these relationships as findings measured by this paper’s own study. (LLM, conf=0.87)
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passes- Not matched
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 outcome model, need satisfaction (β = 0.317, p < 0.001) and perceived anthropomorphism (β = 0.385, p < 0.001) were both positively associated with problematic dependence.”
§ When loneliness amplifies the risk of problematic emotional dependence: perceived anthropomorphism and basic psychological need satisfaction in AI companion use > Abstract > Results
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesA result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Perceived anthropomorphism was positively associated with need satisfaction (β = 0.569, p < 0.001).”
§ When loneliness amplifies the risk of problematic emotional dependence: perceived anthropomorphism and basic psychological need satisfaction in AI companion use > Abstract > Results
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesA result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In the outcome model, need satisfaction (β = 0.317, p < 0.001) and perceived anthropomorphism (β = 0.385, p < 0.001) were both positively associated with problematic dependence.”
§ When loneliness amplifies the risk of problematic emotional dependence: perceived anthropomorphism and basic psychological need satisfaction in AI companion use > Abstract > Results
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesA result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The standardized indirect association was 0.180 (95% bootstrap CI [0.137, 0.229]); R2 was 0.323 for need satisfaction and 0.389 for problematic dependence.”
§ When loneliness amplifies the risk of problematic emotional dependence: perceived anthropomorphism and basic psychological need satisfaction in AI companion use > Abstract > Results
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesA result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The standardized indirect association was 0.180 (95% bootstrap CI [0.137, 0.229]); R2 was 0.323 for need satisfaction and 0.389 for problematic dependence.”
§ When loneliness amplifies the risk of problematic emotional dependence: perceived anthropomorphism and basic psychological need satisfaction in AI companion use > Abstract > Results
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesA result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In the full sample, the standardized NS × loneliness interaction was positive, β = 0.086, p = 0.005, 95% CI [0.026, 0.146].”
§ When loneliness amplifies the risk of problematic emotional dependence: perceived anthropomorphism and basic psychological need satisfaction in AI companion use > Results > Moderation and conditional indirect associations
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesA result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The present data show that perceived anthropomorphism, need satisfaction, and problematic dependence covary.”
§ When loneliness amplifies the risk of problematic emotional dependence: perceived anthropomorphism and basic psychological need satisfaction in AI companion use > Discussion > Theoretical contributions
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesA result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“PA also retained a direct association with PED, β = 0.385, 95% CI [0.312, 0.450].”
§ When loneliness amplifies the risk of problematic emotional dependence: perceived anthropomorphism and basic psychological need satisfaction in AI companion use > Results > Structural associations
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesA result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The direct LO-PED path was not significant, β = 0.016, p = 0.625 (Table 11).”
§ When loneliness amplifies the risk of problematic emotional dependence: perceived anthropomorphism and basic psychological need satisfaction in AI companion use > Results > Structural associations
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passes
- It may state two separate claims as one. 49
- Probably not a substantial claim. 38
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“In AI companion contexts, this reinforcement may be stronger because the system can provide low-risk disclosure, emotional validation, and a sense of being understood, which may encourage attachment, overreliance, and dependency-like patterns (Fang et al., 2025; Skjuve et al., 2022; Zhang et al., 2025).”
§ When loneliness amplifies the risk of problematic emotional dependence: perceived anthropomorphism and basic psychological need satisfaction in AI companion use > Literature review and research hypotheses > Need satisfaction and problematic emotional dependence
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Fang et al., 2025
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Partly supportedcites Skjuve et al., 2022 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
Sections 5.1.2 and 4.2.2 describe Replika as providing a safe setting for intimate disclosure, empathy, and emotional understanding, and link disclosure and these traits to growing attachment. The paper does not establish that reinforcement is stronger in AI companion contexts or that these experiences lead to overreliance or dependency-like patterns. Page numbers are unavailable in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.88)
- Not matchedcites Zhang et al., 2025
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“Cronbach’s alpha, rho_A, composite reliability, and average variance extracted were evaluated according to conventional PLS-SEM criteria (Hair et al., 2021).”
§ When loneliness amplifies the risk of problematic emotional dependence: perceived anthropomorphism and basic psychological need satisfaction in AI companion use > Method > Analytical strategy
What the sources say
- Supportedcites Hair et al., 2021 source
The chapter’s internal consistency reliability example evaluates Cronbach’s alpha, rho_A, and composite reliability (rho_c) against a 0.70 threshold. The same section evaluates average variance extracted (AVE) against a 0.50 minimum. These passages support the cited use of conventional PLS-SEM criteria. (LLM, conf=0.94)
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim.
- Supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“This logic is consistent with research showing that AI companions may be especially attractive to lonely users, but also with concerns that digital companionship may reproduce or intensify loneliness when it replaces rather than complements human connection (Jacobs, 2024; Liu et al., 2025).”
§ When loneliness amplifies the risk of problematic emotional dependence: perceived anthropomorphism and basic psychological need satisfaction in AI companion use > Literature review and research hypotheses > Loneliness as a boundary condition
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites Jacobs, 2024 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
In “(Digital) loneliness—connected, yet alone!” (page unavailable), Jacobs raises the concern that AI companions may sustain loneliness rather than resolve it. The “AI companion: the subject you call is (still) not available!” subsection also warns that companionship not used to connect with other people can reproduce the condition of being connected but alone. The paper describes AI companions as attractive to humans, but the passages do not establish that they are especially attractive to lonely users. (LLM, conf=0.82)
- Not matchedcites Liu et al., 2025
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Partly supported
The sources with a verdict support this claim; the rest weren’t checked yet, have no full text we could read, or their verdicts aren’t rated yet.
In the paper
“Loneliness is not merely the absence of social contact. Rather, it refers to a perceived gap between desired and actual social connection, and it is therefore closely related to unmet belongingness and relatedness needs (Baumeister and Leary, 1995; Cacioppo and Hawkley, 2009).”
§ When loneliness amplifies the risk of problematic emotional dependence: perceived anthropomorphism and basic psychological need satisfaction in AI companion use > Literature review and research hypotheses > Loneliness as a boundary condition
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Baumeister and Leary, 1995 source
- Supportedcites Cacioppo and Hawkley, 2009 source
The Conclusion distinguishes loneliness from the amount of social contact and explicitly names discrepancies between actual and desired relationships, along with social needs, as influences on loneliness. The Introduction describes loneliness as a signal that needed social connections are weakening. Page numbers were not supplied for these passages. (LLM, conf=0.90)
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“Perceived anthropomorphism (PA) was measured with six adapted items concerning human-like appearance, language, understanding, and emotional responsiveness (Bartneck et al., 2009; Waytz et al., 2010).”
§ When loneliness amplifies the risk of problematic emotional dependence: perceived anthropomorphism and basic psychological need satisfaction in AI companion use > Method > Measures
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites Bartneck et al., 2009 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
Section 2 (p. 4) and the Godspeed anthropomorphism questionnaire (p. 9) support using adapted items to measure perceived anthropomorphism, including humanlikeness. But the questionnaire shown has five items, not six, and its items do not assess language, understanding, or emotional responsiveness. (LLM, conf=0.88)
- Partly supportedcites Waytz et al., 2010 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
In “Why Anthropomorphism Matters” (page unavailable), the paper describes anthropomorphism as involving humanlike physical features and mental capacities, including awareness, intentions, and emotions. It does not describe a six-item adapted measure or specify items about language and emotional responsiveness; a search for measure and item terminology found no such passage. (LLM, conf=0.84)
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim.
- Partly 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
“The standardized indirect association was 0.180 (95% bootstrap CI [0.137, 0.229]); R2 was 0.323 for need satisfaction and 0.389 for problematic dependence.”
§ When loneliness amplifies the risk of problematic emotional dependence: perceived anthropomorphism and basic psychological need satisfaction in AI companion use > Abstract > Results
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A 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
“A correlated behavioral-dysregulation/relational-reliance model did not improve fit and estimated a factor correlation of 0.9998.”
§ When loneliness amplifies the risk of problematic emotional dependence: perceived anthropomorphism and basic psychological need satisfaction in AI companion use > Results > Measurement model
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The full-sample concurrent indirect association was stronger at higher loneliness, and an exploratory attachment-anxiety model showed a parallel pattern.”
§ When loneliness amplifies the risk of problematic emotional dependence: perceived anthropomorphism and basic psychological need satisfaction in AI companion use > Discussion > Overview of findings
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Its perceived humanness was positively associated with both need satisfaction and dependence, but the observed moderation pattern varied across the platform ecology.”
§ When loneliness amplifies the risk of problematic emotional dependence: perceived anthropomorphism and basic psychological need satisfaction in AI companion use > Discussion > Overview of findings
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The standardized AA × NS interaction was positive, β = 0.084, p = 0.006, 95% CI [0.024, 0.144], and the index of moderated indirect association was 0.048, 95% bootstrap CI [0.015, 0.084].”
§ When loneliness amplifies the risk of problematic emotional dependence: perceived anthropomorphism and basic psychological need satisfaction in AI companion use > Results > Exploratory robustness check using attachment anxiety
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:correlational· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Crucially, the loneliness interaction was absent in the dedicated/character-platform subgroup and significantly weaker than in the remaining platforms.”
§ When loneliness amplifies the risk of problematic emotional dependence: perceived anthropomorphism and basic psychological need satisfaction in AI companion use > Discussion > Overview of findings
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: The five named companion/character platforms constitute a dedicated/character-platform subgroup.
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
“The supplementary dimension model yielded small relatedness and competence coefficients and a nonsignificant autonomy coefficient under very high inter-dimension correlations; stronger multi-item measures are needed before unique dimensional contributions can be inferred (Parent, 2023; Przybylski et al., 2010).”
§ When loneliness amplifies the risk of problematic emotional dependence: perceived anthropomorphism and basic psychological need satisfaction in AI companion use > Discussion > Theoretical contributions
What the sources say
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
A 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
“Perceived anthropomorphism was positively correlated with need satisfaction and problematic dependence. Need satisfaction was also positively correlated with problematic dependence and loneliness. Loneliness showed positive but weaker correlations with perceived anthropomorphism and dependency, in Table 8.”
§ When loneliness amplifies the risk of problematic emotional dependence: perceived anthropomorphism and basic psychological need satisfaction in AI companion use > Results > Descriptive associations, model fit, and predictive assessment
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The one-factor NS model also fit well; a three-factor alternative produced correlations of 0.976–0.995 among autonomy, relatedness, and competence and had higher information criteria (Table 7).”
§ When loneliness amplifies the risk of problematic emotional dependence: perceived anthropomorphism and basic psychological need satisfaction in AI companion use > Results > Measurement model
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“After the platform-label correction, the pooled estimate for the five named companion/character platforms was smaller and nonsignificant, N = 583, β = 0.057, p = 0.083, 95% CI [−0.007, 0.121], and its conditional-indirect index included zero (Tables 13, 14).”
§ When loneliness amplifies the risk of problematic emotional dependence: perceived anthropomorphism and basic psychological need satisfaction in AI companion use > Results > Moderation and conditional indirect associations
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: The five named companion/character platforms constitute a dedicated/character-platform subgroup.
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
“Perceived anthropomorphism, interaction-specific basic psychological need satisfaction, and problematic emotional dependence were positively associated in this sample, and the principal paths replicated across PLS and composite-score estimators.”
§ When loneliness amplifies the risk of problematic emotional dependence: perceived anthropomorphism and basic psychological need satisfaction in AI companion use > Discussion > Overview of findings
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The conditional indirect estimates were 0.132, 0.181, and 0.230 at low, mean, and high loneliness, respectively, and the index was 0.049, 95% bootstrap CI [0.016, 0.084].”
§ When loneliness amplifies the risk of problematic emotional dependence: perceived anthropomorphism and basic psychological need satisfaction in AI companion use > Results > Moderation and conditional indirect associations
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“PA explained 32.3% of NS variance (adjusted R2 = 0.322; f2 = 0.476). The PED model explained 38.9% of variance (adjusted R2 = 0.386).”
§ When loneliness amplifies the risk of problematic emotional dependence: perceived anthropomorphism and basic psychological need satisfaction in AI companion use > Results > Descriptive associations, model fit, and predictive assessment
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“A loneliness-contingent indirect association appeared in the full sample but not among dedicated/character-platform users.”
§ When loneliness amplifies the risk of problematic emotional dependence: perceived anthropomorphism and basic psychological need satisfaction in AI companion use > Conclusion
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: The five named companion/character platforms constitute a dedicated/character-platform subgroup.
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
“Among adults in China reporting recent use of listed AI-companion or conversational-AI products, perceived anthropomorphism was positively associated with interaction-specific basic psychological need satisfaction and with a broad, non-clinical measure of problematic emotional dependence.”
§ When loneliness amplifies the risk of problematic emotional dependence: perceived anthropomorphism and basic psychological need satisfaction in AI companion use > Conclusion
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The pattern is consistent with a need-satisfaction account of companion-oriented AI use, but the cross-sectional design does not establish temporal ordering, substitution, or causality.”
§ When loneliness amplifies the risk of problematic emotional dependence: perceived anthropomorphism and basic psychological need satisfaction in AI companion use > Abstract > Conclusion
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Over time, this may reduce motivation to engage in more effortful interpersonal interactions and foster reliance on AI-mediated need fulfillment (Liu et al., 2025; Peng et al., 2012; Przybylski et al., 2010).”
§ When loneliness amplifies the risk of problematic emotional dependence: perceived anthropomorphism and basic psychological need satisfaction in AI companion use > Literature review and research hypotheses > Need satisfaction and problematic emotional dependence
What the sources say
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“People often respond socially to computers even while recognizing that the system is not human (Nass and Moon, 2000).”
§ When loneliness amplifies the risk of problematic emotional dependence: perceived anthropomorphism and basic psychological need satisfaction in AI companion use > Literature review and research hypotheses > AI companions as emotionally immersive social technologies
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Nass and Moon, 2000 source
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
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
“If AI companion interaction satisfies users’ basic psychological needs, users may be more likely to develop problematic emotional dependence because the system becomes a motivational resource that is difficult to relinquish.”
§ When loneliness amplifies the risk of problematic emotional dependence: perceived anthropomorphism and basic psychological need satisfaction in AI companion use > Literature review and research hypotheses > Need satisfaction and problematic emotional dependence
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Prior research reports emotional support and safe self-disclosure alongside concerns about over-reliance, withdrawal-like distress, and reduced offline functioning (Laestadius et al., 2024; Liu et al., 2024; Zhang et al., 2025).”
§ When loneliness amplifies the risk of problematic emotional dependence: perceived anthropomorphism and basic psychological need satisfaction in AI companion use > Literature review and research hypotheses > AI companions as emotionally immersive social technologies
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Laestadius et al., 2024 source
- Not matchedcites Liu et al., 2024
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites Zhang et al., 2025
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. 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
“Prior research in digital media environments has shown that psychological need satisfaction enhances user engagement, intrinsic motivation, and continued participation (Peng et al., 2012; Przybylski et al., 2010).”
§ When loneliness amplifies the risk of problematic emotional dependence: perceived anthropomorphism and basic psychological need satisfaction in AI companion use > Literature review and research hypotheses > Perceived anthropomorphism and basic psychological need satisfaction
What the sources say
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. 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
“From a self-determination perspective, digital experiences that satisfy autonomy, competence, and relatedness can support motivation and self-regulation, making them especially reinforcing when they meet needs that are central to social functioning (Johnson et al., 2021; Parent, 2023).”
§ When loneliness amplifies the risk of problematic emotional dependence: perceived anthropomorphism and basic psychological need satisfaction in AI companion use > Literature review and research hypotheses > Need satisfaction and problematic emotional dependence
What the sources say
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“The behavioral element resembles problematic technology use, especially loss of control, withdrawal-like distress, relapse, conflict, and continued use despite negative consequences (Andreassen et al., 2012; Fournier et al., 2023; Kuss et al., 2014).”
§ When loneliness amplifies the risk of problematic emotional dependence: perceived anthropomorphism and basic psychological need satisfaction in AI companion use > Literature review and research hypotheses > Need satisfaction and problematic emotional dependence
What the sources say
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“This conceptualization is consistent with emerging evidence that AI companion use can involve emotional attachment, over-reliance, self-disclosure, withdrawal, and risks to offline social functioning, while also recognizing that AI companion dependency is distinctive because the object of dependence is experienced as a responsive social other rather than a neutral tool (Boine, 2023; Hu et al., 202”
§ When loneliness amplifies the risk of problematic emotional dependence: perceived anthropomorphism and basic psychological need satisfaction in AI companion use > Literature review and research hypotheses > Need satisfaction and problematic emotional dependence
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Boine, 2023 source
Checked before — its earlier verdict is held back until a new check runs.
- Not matchedcites Hu et al., 2023
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites Liu et al., 2025
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
- Not checked yet
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
“At the same time, the sample is nonprobabilistic and cannot be treated as nationally representative.”
§ When loneliness amplifies the risk of problematic emotional dependence: perceived anthropomorphism and basic psychological need satisfaction in AI companion use > Introduction
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Cultural expectations concerning self-disclosure, relational obligation, and technology use may influence how items are interpreted; generalization beyond the surveyed users, China, or the included platforms therefore requires replication (Du and Alm, 2024; Epley et al., 2007; Pan et al., n.d.; Ryan and Deci, 2000).”
§ When loneliness amplifies the risk of problematic emotional dependence: perceived anthropomorphism and basic psychological need satisfaction in AI companion use > Introduction
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Du and Alm, 2024
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Epley et al., 2007 source
- Not matchedcites Pan et al., n.d.
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“The relational element resembles parasocial attachment, in which individuals experience one-sided intimacy, emotional involvement, and perceived relationship importance with a media figure or artificial partner (Cohen, 2004; Gleason et al., 2017; Rubin and McHugh, 1987).”
§ When loneliness amplifies the risk of problematic emotional dependence: perceived anthropomorphism and basic psychological need satisfaction in AI companion use > Literature review and research hypotheses > Need satisfaction and problematic emotional dependence
What the sources say
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Discriminant validity was primarily assessed using the heterotrait–monotrait ratio of correlations (HTMT), because HTMT has been shown to detect discriminant validity problems more sensitively than the traditional Fornell–Larcker criterion (Fornell and Larcker, 1981; Henseler et al., 2015).”
§ When loneliness amplifies the risk of problematic emotional dependence: perceived anthropomorphism and basic psychological need satisfaction in AI companion use > Method > Analytical strategy
What the sources say
Strength:boosted· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Thus H4 and H5 were consistent with the full-sample data.”
§ When loneliness amplifies the risk of problematic emotional dependence: perceived anthropomorphism and basic psychological need satisfaction in AI companion use > Results > Moderation and conditional indirect associations
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Its full-sample interaction, non-replication in dedicated/character platforms, and exploratory attachment-anxiety result collectively show why relational vulnerability cannot be inferred from one pooled coefficient.”
§ When loneliness amplifies the risk of problematic emotional dependence: perceived anthropomorphism and basic psychological need satisfaction in AI companion use > Discussion > Theoretical contributions
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: The five named companion/character platforms constitute a dedicated/character-platform subgroup.
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
“All bootstrapped HTMT estimates were below 0.85 and all upper 95% confidence limits were below 0.70. The largest estimate was LO-AA, 0.619 [0.544, 0.686], followed by PA-NS, 0.606 [0.554, 0.653], and PA-PED, 0.602 [0.549, 0.649] (Table 6).”
§ When loneliness amplifies the risk of problematic emotional dependence: perceived anthropomorphism and basic psychological need satisfaction in AI companion use > Results > Measurement model
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Second, the structural paths were estimated using PLS-SEM with bootstrapping based on 5,000 resamples, a commonly used procedure for testing the significance of path coefficients and indirect effects in PLS-SEM (Hair et al., 2021).”
§ When loneliness amplifies the risk of problematic emotional dependence: perceived anthropomorphism and basic psychological need satisfaction in AI companion use > Method > Analytical strategy
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim.
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
“The reported model used a total composite.”
§ When loneliness amplifies the risk of problematic emotional dependence: perceived anthropomorphism and basic psychological need satisfaction in AI companion use > Method > Measures
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim.
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
“A total of 802 questionnaires were collected. Responses were excluded based on predetermined criteria, including short completion time, failed attention checksor incomplete answers. After excluding 136 invalid responses, 666 valid questionnaires remained, yielding an effective response rate of 83.0%.”
§ When loneliness amplifies the risk of problematic emotional dependence: perceived anthropomorphism and basic psychological need satisfaction in AI companion use > Method > Research design and participants
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. 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
“Every item loaded most strongly on its assigned composite; loading ranges were 0.884–0.901 for PA, 0.848–0.863 for NS, 0.820–0.849 for PED, 0.880–0.893 for loneliness, and 0.874–0.895 for attachment anxiety. Item VIFs ranged from 2.21 to 3.78 (Table 5).”
§ When loneliness amplifies the risk of problematic emotional dependence: perceived anthropomorphism and basic psychological need satisfaction in AI companion use > Results > Measurement model
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“These findings suggest a dynamic vulnerability process in which loneliness may make AI-provided need satisfaction more reinforcing, while repeated reliance on AI may further deepen emotional dependence.”
§ When loneliness amplifies the risk of problematic emotional dependence: perceived anthropomorphism and basic psychological need satisfaction in AI companion use > Literature review and research hypotheses > Loneliness as a boundary condition
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“They do not show that AI-based need satisfaction displaced offline fulfillment or reduced human interaction.”
§ When loneliness amplifies the risk of problematic emotional dependence: perceived anthropomorphism and basic psychological need satisfaction in AI companion use > Discussion > Theoretical contributions
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Third, loneliness is positioned as a possible moderator of a concurrent association rather than as a deterministic risk factor.”
§ When loneliness amplifies the risk of problematic emotional dependence: perceived anthropomorphism and basic psychological need satisfaction in AI companion use > Discussion > Theoretical contributions
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“These results indicate that higher attachment anxiety strengthens the indirect association via basic psychological need satisfaction. In other words, individuals with higher attachment anxiety are more likely to translate the psychological need satisfaction derived from AI companions into problematic emotional dependence.”
§ When loneliness amplifies the risk of problematic emotional dependence: perceived anthropomorphism and basic psychological need satisfaction in AI companion use > Results > Exploratory robustness check using attachment anxiety
Strength:hedged· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: Loneliness represents perceived insufficiency of social connection, whereas attachment anxiety represents concern about rejection and relational availability.
In the paper
“Finally, attachment anxiety was substituted for loneliness to examine whether the moderation pattern reflected a broader social–emotional vulnerability mechanism (Hayes, 2015).”
§ When loneliness amplifies the risk of problematic emotional dependence: perceived anthropomorphism and basic psychological need satisfaction in AI companion use > Method > Analytical strategy
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Hayes, 2015 source
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
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
“Furthermore, this exploratory analysis provides supplementary evidence supporting the robustness of the primary model (Table 15).”
§ When loneliness amplifies the risk of problematic emotional dependence: perceived anthropomorphism and basic psychological need satisfaction in AI companion use > Results > Exploratory robustness check using attachment anxiety
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Rests on an assumption: Loneliness represents perceived insufficiency of social connection, whereas attachment anxiety represents concern about rejection and relational availability.
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
“Using data from 666 AI companion users in China, the study supported all five hypotheses.”
§ When loneliness amplifies the risk of problematic emotional dependence: perceived anthropomorphism and basic psychological need satisfaction in AI companion use > Discussion > Overview of findings
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Research on companion chatbots suggests that user outcomes are heterogeneous: some users may experience enhanced social confidence, whereas others may risk further isolation, especially when problematic use and smaller social networks are involved (Liu et al., 2025).”
§ When loneliness amplifies the risk of problematic emotional dependence: perceived anthropomorphism and basic psychological need satisfaction in AI companion use > Literature review and research hypotheses > Loneliness as a boundary condition
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Liu et al., 2025
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
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
“These values support score reliability and convergence within the specified composites, but they do not establish clinical validity, content validity, or the superiority of a unidimensional PED or NS structure.”
§ When loneliness amplifies the risk of problematic emotional dependence: perceived anthropomorphism and basic psychological need satisfaction in AI companion use > Results > Measurement model
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim could be matched to a paper in Crossref, so there is nothing to check it against.
In the paper
“However, other evidence also points to potential risks: intensive companion-oriented chatbot use, high self-disclosure, and weak human social support have been associated with lower well-being, and higher chatbot usage has been linked to greater loneliness, emotional dependence, and problematic use over time (Fang et al., 2025; Zhang et al., 2025).”
§ When loneliness amplifies the risk of problematic emotional dependence: perceived anthropomorphism and basic psychological need satisfaction in AI companion use > Literature review and research hypotheses > Loneliness as a boundary condition
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Fang et al., 2025
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites Zhang et al., 2025
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“This is consistent with evidence that loneliness and social vulnerability shape the psychological outcomes of AI companion use (Ciriello et al., 2026; Lai et al., 2025).”
§ When loneliness amplifies the risk of problematic emotional dependence: perceived anthropomorphism and basic psychological need satisfaction in AI companion use > Discussion > Overview of findings
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Ciriello et al., 2026
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not checked yetcites Lai et al., 2025 source
Checked before — its earlier verdict is held back until a new check runs.
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
In the paper
“None of these findings identifies temporal direction, causal mediation, clinical pathology, or actual replacement of human relationships (T’ng et al., 2022).”
§ When loneliness amplifies the risk of problematic emotional dependence: perceived anthropomorphism and basic psychological need satisfaction in AI companion use > Discussion > Overview of findings
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites T’ng et al., 2022
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
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
“These are concurrent standardized associations.”
§ When loneliness amplifies the risk of problematic emotional dependence: perceived anthropomorphism and basic psychological need satisfaction in AI companion use > Results > Structural associations
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:correlational· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“Prior digital media research similarly suggests that the psychological meaning and motivational quality of use matter more than use intensity alone (Sheldon and Titova, 2023; Throuvala et al., 2019).”
§ When loneliness amplifies the risk of problematic emotional dependence: perceived anthropomorphism and basic psychological need satisfaction in AI companion use > Literature review and research hypotheses > The mediating role of basic psychological need satisfaction
What the sources say
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim.
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
“For users with low loneliness, need satisfaction from an AI companion may remain supplementary because offline relationships continue to provide meaningful relatedness.”
§ When loneliness amplifies the risk of problematic emotional dependence: perceived anthropomorphism and basic psychological need satisfaction in AI companion use > Literature review and research hypotheses > Loneliness as a boundary condition
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim.
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
“A covariate-adjusted sensitivity model included gender, age, weekly AI-use frequency, duration of use, weekly face-to-face interaction with family or friends, most-used platform, and recorded primary purpose.”
§ When loneliness amplifies the risk of problematic emotional dependence: perceived anthropomorphism and basic psychological need satisfaction in AI companion use > Method > Measures
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim.
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
“Because relatedness is theoretically central and each dimension has only two indicators, we compared broad and correlated-dimension specifications and estimated the three dimension scores jointly before making dimension-general claims.”
§ When loneliness amplifies the risk of problematic emotional dependence: perceived anthropomorphism and basic psychological need satisfaction in AI companion use > Method > Measures
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. 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
“Discriminant validity was primarily assessed using the heterotrait–monotrait ratio of correlations (HTMT), because HTMT has been shown to detect discriminant validity problems more sensitively than the traditional Fornell–Larcker criterion (Fornell and Larcker, 1981; Henseler et al., 2015).”
§ When loneliness amplifies the risk of problematic emotional dependence: perceived anthropomorphism and basic psychological need satisfaction in AI companion use > Method > Analytical strategy
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“This interpretation is consistent with prior work showing that anthropomorphism can shape human–AI attachment and social consequences, and that AI companions can provide users with emotional validation, perceived understanding, and a sense of being heard (De Freitas et al., 2024; Guingrich and Graziano, 2025; Hermann, 2022).”
§ When loneliness amplifies the risk of problematic emotional dependence: perceived anthropomorphism and basic psychological need satisfaction in AI companion use > Discussion > Overview of findings
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites De Freitas et al., 2024 source
- Not matchedcites Guingrich and Graziano, 2025
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not checked yetcites Hermann, 2022 source
Checked before — its earlier verdict is held back until a new check runs.
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. 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 study therefore identifies associations worthy of further testing, not a universal design effect or a general loneliness-amplification mechanism.”
§ When loneliness amplifies the risk of problematic emotional dependence: perceived anthropomorphism and basic psychological need satisfaction in AI companion use > Discussion > Overview of findings
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Substantively, this expectation is consistent with evidence that anthropomorphic AI can increase dependency-related outcomes through user satisfaction or emotional attachment, and that loneliness shapes how users respond to conversational AI and AI companions (Heng and Zhang, 2025; Nakagomi et al., 2026; Peng et al., 2025; Yu and Lan, 2025).”
§ When loneliness amplifies the risk of problematic emotional dependence: perceived anthropomorphism and basic psychological need satisfaction in AI companion use > Literature review and research hypotheses > Loneliness as a boundary condition
What the sources say
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Perceived anthropomorphism does not merely make AI companions attractive or engaging; it makes them need-satisfying, personally responsive, and relationally meaningful.”
§ When loneliness amplifies the risk of problematic emotional dependence: perceived anthropomorphism and basic psychological need satisfaction in AI companion use > Discussion > Overview of findings
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“First, the cross-sectional design cannot establish temporal order or causal mediation.”
§ When loneliness amplifies the risk of problematic emotional dependence: perceived anthropomorphism and basic psychological need satisfaction in AI companion use > Discussion > Limitations and future research
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“A large-scale study of Japanese adults found that the positive association between AI companion use and well-being was strongest among individuals reporting high loneliness, suggesting that lonely users may be especially sensitive to AI-provided emotional support (Nakagomi et al., 2026).”
§ When loneliness amplifies the risk of problematic emotional dependence: perceived anthropomorphism and basic psychological need satisfaction in AI companion use > Literature review and research hypotheses > Loneliness as a boundary condition
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Nakagomi et al., 2026 source
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim.
In the paper
“Basic psychological need satisfaction (NS) was measured with six adapted items from the Basic Psychological Need Satisfaction and Frustration Scale, with two items each for autonomy, relatedness, and competence satisfaction in the AI interaction (Chen et al., 2015).”
§ When loneliness amplifies the risk of problematic emotional dependence: perceived anthropomorphism and basic psychological need satisfaction in AI companion use > Method > Measures
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Chen et al., 2015 source
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim.
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
“The estimated model had an SRMR of 0.090, which is below the commonly used upper bound of 0.10 for PLS-SEM applications, and an NFI of 0.950, exceeding the recommended value of 0.90, in Table 9.”
§ When loneliness amplifies the risk of problematic emotional dependence: perceived anthropomorphism and basic psychological need satisfaction in AI companion use > Results > Descriptive associations, model fit, and predictive assessment
Load-bearingStrength:hedged· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Ten-fold cross-validation yielded positive Q2_predict values for all six PED indicators (0.232–0.298), and both RMSE and MAE were lower than the training-fold mean benchmark for every indicator (Table 10).”
§ When loneliness amplifies the risk of problematic emotional dependence: perceived anthropomorphism and basic psychological need satisfaction in AI companion use > Results > Descriptive associations, model fit, and predictive assessment
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“The revised PED measure is not a diagnostic tool (Seeger et al., 2021).”
§ When loneliness amplifies the risk of problematic emotional dependence: perceived anthropomorphism and basic psychological need satisfaction in AI companion use > Discussion > Practical implications for developers and policymakers
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Seeger et al., 2021 source
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Third, moderation and moderated mediation were tested using PROCESS-style conditional process analysis.”
§ When loneliness amplifies the risk of problematic emotional dependence: perceived anthropomorphism and basic psychological need satisfaction in AI companion use > Method > Analytical strategy
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim.
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
“The reported composite scores showed high internal consistency and adequate convergent validity. Cronbach’s alpha ranged from 0.913 to 0.950, composite reliability from 0.932 to 0.960, and AVE from 0.697 to 0.801 (Table 4).”
§ When loneliness amplifies the risk of problematic emotional dependence: perceived anthropomorphism and basic psychological need satisfaction in AI companion use > Results > Measurement model
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“First, the measurement model was assessed in SmartPLS 4.0 by examining internal consistency reliability, convergent validity, and discriminant validity.”
§ When loneliness amplifies the risk of problematic emotional dependence: perceived anthropomorphism and basic psychological need satisfaction in AI companion use > Method > Analytical strategy
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Reverse and reciprocal associations are plausible; longitudinal panel and experimental designs are needed.”
§ When loneliness amplifies the risk of problematic emotional dependence: perceived anthropomorphism and basic psychological need satisfaction in AI companion use > Discussion > Limitations and future research
Strength:hedged· not yet calibratedCausal:correlational· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✗ Checkable: fails✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. 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
“Second, all focal variables were self-reported in one survey. Shared method, evaluative tone, and semantic overlap may inflate associations even when HTMT is below conventional cutoffs.”
§ When loneliness amplifies the risk of problematic emotional dependence: perceived anthropomorphism and basic psychological need satisfaction in AI companion use > Discussion > Limitations and future research
Strength:hedged· not yet calibratedCausal:conditional· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. 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 robust contribution is therefore the positive cross-sectional association among the core constructs; the moderation finding is platform-contingent and requires replication.”
§ When loneliness amplifies the risk of problematic emotional dependence: perceived anthropomorphism and basic psychological need satisfaction in AI companion use > Conclusion
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: The five named companion/character platforms constitute a dedicated/character-platform subgroup.
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
“Third, the Chinese context and platform ecology limit generalizability.”
§ When loneliness amplifies the risk of problematic emotional dependence: perceived anthropomorphism and basic psychological need satisfaction in AI companion use > Discussion > Limitations and future research
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✗ Based: failsProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
The authors state this as an assumption.
Loneliness is not caused by AI companion use.
“Loneliness | Perceived insufficiency of offline social connection | Moderator; not assumed to be caused by AI use”
The paper relies on this without support.
Loneliness represents perceived insufficiency of social connection, whereas attachment anxiety represents concern about rejection and relational availability.
“Attachment anxiety was selected as an alternative moderator because it represents concern about rejection and relational availability, whereas loneliness represents perceived insufficiency of social connection.”
The paper relies on this without support.
The five named companion/character platforms constitute a dedicated/character-platform subgroup.
“Crucially, the loneliness interaction was absent in the dedicated/character-platform subgroup and significantly weaker than in the remaining platforms.”
Statistics recomputed
Every reported test result, recomputed from its test statistic and degrees of freedom. A result shows as not adding up only once an independent check has confirmed it.
- Consistentχ²(9) = 12.13reported p = .206 · recomputed p = .206
“χ2(9) = 12.13, p = .206”
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.
LO4 labels two different loneliness items
MinorTable 2 assigns LO4 to two different questions, so the item labels do not uniquely identify the stated six-item loneliness measure.
“LO4. How often do you feel that there is someone you can talk to?”
“LO4. How often do you feel that you are part of a group of friends?”
Citations
Cites
Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error
Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981) · Journal of Marketing Research · doi:10.1177/002224378101800104 · Cited by 109,190
Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000) · American Psychologist · doi:10.1037//0003-066x.55.1.68 · Cited by 54,599
A new criterion for assessing discriminant validity in variance-based structural equation modeling
Henseler, J., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2015) · Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science · doi:10.1007/s11747-014-0403-8 · Cited by 38,459
Preacher, K. J., & Hayes, A. F. (2008) · Behavior Research Methods · doi:10.3758/brm.40.3.879 · Cited by 34,117
The need to belong: Desire for interpersonal attachments as a fundamental human motivation.
Baumeister, R. F., & Leary, M. R. (1995) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037//0033-2909.117.3.497 · Cited by 23,245
Self-determination theory: A macrotheory of human motivation, development, and health
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2008) · Canadian Psychology / Psychologie canadienne · doi:10.1037/a0012801 · Cited by 6,664
UCLA loneliness scale (version 3): reliability, validity, and factor structure
Russell, D. W. (1996) · Journal of Personality Assessment · doi:10.1207/s15327752jpa6601_2 · Cited by 5,800
A Short Scale for Measuring Loneliness in Large Surveys: Results From Two Population-Based Studies
Hughes, M. E., Waite, L. J., Hawkley, L. C., & Cacioppo, J. T. (2004) · Research on Aging · doi:10.1177/0164027504268574 · Cited by 4,781
On seeing human: A three-factor theory of anthropomorphism
Epley, N., Waytz, A., & Cacioppo, J. T. (2007) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/0033-295x.114.4.864 · Cited by 4,069
Machines and Mindlessness: Social Responses to Computers
Nass, C., & Moon, Y. (2000) · Journal of Social Issues · doi:10.1111/0022-4537.00153 · Cited by 4,022
An index and test of linear moderated mediation
Hayes, A. F. (2015) · Multivariate Behavioral Research · doi:10.1080/00273171.2014.962683 · Cited by 3,979
Hayes, A. F. (2018) · Communication Monographs · doi:10.1080/03637751.2017.1352100 · Cited by 3,516
An Item-Response Theory Analysis of Self-Report Measures of Adult Attachment
Fraley, R. C., Waller, N. G., & Brennan, K. A. (2000) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.78.2.350 · Cited by 3,385
Bartneck, C., Kulić, D., Croft, E., & Zoghbi, S. (2009) · International Journal of Social Robotics · doi:10.1007/s12369-008-0001-3 · Cited by 3,193
Basic psychological need satisfaction, need frustration, and need strength across four cultures
Chen, B., Vansteenkiste, M., Beyers, W., Boone, L., Deci, E. L., Van der Kaap-Deeder, J., Duriez, B., Lens, W., Matos, L., Mouratidis, A., et al. (2015) · Motivation and Emotion · doi:10.1007/s11031-014-9450-1 · Cited by 2,507
Perceived social isolation and cognition
Cacioppo, J. T., & Hawkley, L. C. (2009) · Trends in Cognitive Sciences · doi:10.1016/j.tics.2009.06.005 · Cited by 2,144
A Motivational Model of Video Game Engagement
Przybylski, A. K., Rigby, C. S., & Ryan, R. M. (2010) · Review of General Psychology · doi:10.1037/a0019440 · Cited by 1,422
LONELINESS, PARASOCIAL INTERACTION, AND LOCAL TELEVISION NEWS VIEWING
RUBIN, A. M., Perse, E. M., & Powell, R. A. (1985) · Human Communication Research · doi:10.1111/j.1468-2958.1985.tb00071.x · Cited by 1,244
My Chatbot Companion - a Study of Human-Chatbot Relationships
Skjuve, M., Følstad, A., Fostervold, K. I., & Brandtzaeg, P. B. (2021) · International Journal of Human-Computer Studies · doi:10.1016/j.ijhcs.2021.102601 · Cited by 797
Development of parasocial interaction relationships
Rubin, R. B., & McHugh, M. P. (1987) · Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media · doi:10.1080/08838158709386664 · Cited by 773
User Experiences of Social Support From Companion Chatbots in Everyday Contexts: Thematic Analysis
Ta, V., Griffith, C., Boatfield, C., Wang, X., Civitello, M., Bader, H., DeCero, E., & Loggarakis, A. (2020) · Journal of Medical Internet Research · doi:10.2196/16235 · Cited by 561
My AI Friend: How Users of a Social Chatbot Understand Their Human–AI Friendship
Brandtzaeg, P. B., Skjuve, M., & Følstad, A. (2022) · Human Communication Research · doi:10.1093/hcr/hqac008 · Cited by 490
Evaluation of Reflective Measurement Models
Hair, J. F., Hult, G. T. M., Ringle, C. M., Sarstedt, M., Danks, N. P., & Ray, S. (2021) · Classroom Companion: Business · doi:10.1007/978-3-030-80519-7_4 · Cited by 456
Peng, W., Lin, J.-H., Pfeiffer, K. A., & Winn, B. (2012) · Media Psychology · doi:10.1080/15213269.2012.673850 · Cited by 426
Laestadius, L., Bishop, A., Gonzalez, M., Illenčík, D., & Campos-Castillo, C. (2024) · New Media & Society · doi:10.1177/14614448221142007 · Cited by 420
Development of a work addiction scale
Andreassen, C. S., Griffiths, M. D., Hetland, J., & Pallesen, S. (2012) · Scandinavian Journal of Psychology · doi:10.1111/j.1467-9450.2012.00947.x · Cited by 415
Social cognition unbound: insights into anthropomorphism and dehumanization
Waytz, A., Epley, N., & Cacioppo, J. T. (2010) · Current Directions in Psychological Science · doi:10.1177/0963721409359302 · Cited by 273
Throuvala, M. A., Griffiths, M. D., Rennoldson, M., & Kuss, D. J. (2019) · Computers in Human Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.chb.2018.12.012 · Cited by 272
A longitudinal study of human–chatbot relationships
Skjuve, M., Følstad, A., Fostervold, K. I., & Brandtzaeg, P. B. (2022) · International Journal of Human-Computer Studies · doi:10.1016/j.ijhcs.2022.102903 · Cited by 253
Hu, B., Mao, Y., & Kim, K. J. (2023) · Computers in Human Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.chb.2023.107760 · Cited by 228
Texting with Humanlike Conversational Agents: Designing for Anthropomorphism
Seeger, A.-M., University of Mannheim, G., Pfeiffer, J., Justus Liebig University Giessen, G., Heinzl, A., & University of Mannheim, G. (2021) · Journal of the Association for Information Systems · doi:10.17705/1jais.00685 · Cited by 200
Cohen, J. (2004) · Journal of Social and Personal Relationships · doi:10.1177/0265407504041374 · Cited by 188
AI companions for lonely individuals and the role of social presence
Merrill, K., Kim, J., & Collins, C. (2022) · Communication Research Reports · doi:10.1080/08824096.2022.2045929 · Cited by 142 · cited 2×
“Instead, they may approach them as emotionally safe, nonjudgmental, and continuously available substitutes for human connection (Rubin et al., 1985; Liu et al., 2025; Merrill et al., 2022).”
Du, J., & Alm, A. (2024) · Education Sciences · doi:10.3390/educsci14070726 · Cited by 115
Anthropomorphism in human–robot interactions: a multidimensional conceptualization
Kühne, R., & Peter, J. (2023) · Communication Theory · doi:10.1093/ct/qtac020 · Cited by 112
Fournier, L., Schimmenti, A., Musetti, A., Boursier, V., Flayelle, M., Cataldo, I., Starcevic, V., & Billieux, J. (2023) · Addictive Behaviors · doi:10.1016/j.addbeh.2023.107694 · Cited by 112
Goh, A. Y. H., Hartanto, A., & Majeed, N. M. (2025) · Computers in Human Behavior Reports · doi:10.1016/j.chbr.2025.100845 · Cited by 110
Fang, C. M., Liu, A. R., Danry, V., Lee, E., Chan, S. W. T., Pataranutaporn, P., Maes, P., Phang, J., Lampe, M., Ahmad, L., et al. (2025) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2503.17473 · Cited by 109
Anthropomorphized artificial intelligence, attachment, and consumer behavior
Hermann, E. (2022) · Marketing Letters · doi:10.1007/s11002-021-09587-3 · Cited by 97
The Rise of AI Companions: How Human-Chatbot Relationships Influence Well-BeingPreprint
Zhang, Y.-T., Zhao, D., Hancock, J. T., Kraut, R. E., & Yang, D. (2025) · arXiv.org · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2506.12605 · Cited by 96
Delusional Experiences Emerging From AI Chatbot Interactions or “AI Psychosis”
Hudon, A., & Stip, E. (2025) · JMIR Mental Health · doi:10.2196/85799 · Cited by 88
Parasocial Interactions and Relationships in Early Adolescence
Gleason, T. R., Theran, S. A., & Newberg, E. M. (2017) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00255 · Cited by 87
AI Companions Reduce Loneliness
De Freitas, J., Uğuralp, A. K., Uğuralp, Z., & Puntoni, S. (2024) · doi:10.2139/ssrn.4893097 · Cited by 80
T’ng, S. T., Ho, K. H., & Kee, P. (2022) · International Journal of Mental Health and Addiction · doi:10.1007/s11469-022-00825-x · Cited by 74
Development and validation the Problematic ChatGPT Use Scale: a preliminary report
Yu, S., Chen, H.-R., & Yang, Y.-W. (2024) · Current Psychology · doi:10.1007/s12144-024-06259-z · Cited by 65
Huang, Y., & Huang, H. (2025) · International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction · doi:10.1080/10447318.2024.2426029 · Cited by 58
Parent, N. (2023) · Human Development · doi:10.1159/000529449 · Cited by 54
Empowering AI companions for enhanced relationship marketing
Chaturvedi, R., Verma, S., & Srivastava, V. (2024) · California Management Review · doi:10.1177/00081256231215838 · Cited by 52
Yao, R., Qi, G., Sheng, D., Sun, H., & Zhang, J. (2025) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2025.1453072 · Cited by 50
Digital loneliness—changes of social recognition through AI companions
Jacobs, K. A. (2024) · Frontiers in Digital Health · doi:10.3389/fdgth.2024.1281037 · Cited by 48
Problematic ChatGPT Use Scale: AI-Human Collaboration or Unraveling the Dark Side of ChatGPT
Maral, S., Naycı, N., Bilmez, H., Erdemir, E. İ., & Satıcı, S. A. (2025) · International Journal of Mental Health and Addiction · doi:10.1007/s11469-025-01509-y · Cited by 45
Salam, M., Farooq, M. S., Ikram, A., Shahzad, M., Ali, A., & Jaafar, N. (2025) · Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Insights · doi:10.1108/jhti-02-2025-0322 · Cited by 44
Peng, C., Zhang, S., Wen, F., & Liu, K. (2025) · Current Psychology · doi:10.1007/s12144-024-06809-5 · Cited by 42
Emotional attachment to AI companions and European law
Boine, C. (2023) · MIT Case Studies in Social and Ethical Responsibilities of Computing · doi:10.21428/2c646de5.db67ec7f · Cited by 34
Lai, L., Pan, Y., Xu, R., & Jiang, Y. (2025) · Frontiers in Public Health · doi:10.3389/fpubh.2025.1580826 · Cited by 34
Individual differences in anthropomorphism help explain social connection to AI companions
Folk, D. P., Heine, S. J., & Dunn, E. W. (2025) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/s41598-025-19212-2 · Cited by 34
Kuss, D. J., Shorter, G. W., van Rooij, A. J., Griffiths, M. D., & Schoenmakers, T. M. (2013) · International Journal of Mental Health and Addiction · doi:10.1007/s11469-013-9459-9 · Cited by 32
Heng, S., & Zhang, Z. (2025) · Psychology Research and Behavior Management · doi:10.2147/prbm.s531805 · Cited by 31
AI companions and subjective well-being: moderation by social connectedness and loneliness
Nakagomi, A., Akutsu, Y., Yasuoka, M., Abe, N., Ihara, S., Teroh, T., & Tabuchi, T. (2026) · Technology in Society · doi:10.1016/j.techsoc.2026.103229 · Cited by 29
Liu, A. R., Pataranutaporn, P., & Maes, P. (2024) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2410.21596 · Cited by 25
Johnson, B. K., Eden, A., Reinecke, L., & Hartmann, T. (2021) · Psychology of Popular Media · doi:10.1037/ppm0000286 · Cited by 23
Social media use and well-being: testing an integrated self-determination theory model
Sheldon, K. M., & Titova, L. (2023) · Media Psychology · doi:10.1080/15213269.2023.2185259 · Cited by 23
Pan, M., Lai, C., & Guo, K. (2025) · British Journal of Educational Technology · doi:10.1111/bjet.70002 · Cited by 21
Generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) use and dependence: an approach from Behavioral economics
Robayo-Pinzon, O., Rojas-Berrio, S., Camargo, J. E., & Foxall, G. R. (2025) · Frontiers in Public Health · doi:10.3389/fpubh.2025.1634121 · Cited by 19
Liu, T., Lo, T.-Y., Wen, K.-H., Sun, Y., & Wei, Z.-Q. (2026) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2025.1687686 · Cited by 13
Self-citationYu, Q., & Lan, X. (2024) · Proceedings of the Twelfth International Symposium of Chinese CHI · doi:10.1145/3758871.3758884 · Cited by 12
Guingrich, R. E., & Graziano, M. S. A. (2025) · Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society · doi:10.1609/aies.v8i2.36618 · Cited by 12
The Quest for Connection in AI Companions
Baggot, M. (2025) · Journal of Ethics and Emerging Technologies · doi:10.55613/jeet.v35i1.202 · Cited by 6
Salam, M., & Farooq, M. S. (2026) · Interactive Learning Environments · doi:10.1080/10494820.2026.2709672 · Cited by 5
Not a Silver Bullet for Loneliness: How Attachment and Age Shape Intimacy with AI Companions
Ciriello, R., Gal, U., & Turel, O. (2026) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2602.12476 · Cited by 4
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 1
- Brennan, 1998, Attachment Theory and close Relationships, 46
Cited by
Still being checked.
Metadata
- Authors
- Liu, T., Shih, R.-M., Luo, T., & Jin, S.
- Affiliations
- Fujian University of Technology (CN)
- Fujian Polytechnic of Information Technology (CN)
- School of Design, Fujian University of Technology
- Corresponding author
- Shih, Ruey-ming
- Venue
- Frontiers in Psychology
- Publisher
- Frontiers Media SA
- Published
- 2026-10-13
- Volume
- 17
- Pages
- 1900817-1900817
- ISSN
- 1664-1078 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC13710363
- OpenAlex
- W7221656980
- Semantic Scholar
- ff7bce66e1067ee9f68080ed986b1e07240d9bfd
- Cited by
- 0
- References
- 61
- FWCI
- 0.00
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Frontiers in Psychology (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- Fujian University of Technology
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Social Robot Interaction and HRI
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Attachment and Relationship Dynamics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
- Keywords
- AI companions, conversational AI, perceived anthropomorphism, psychological need satisfaction, loneliness
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 2026-11-10, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).
A second model labelled each claim on 2026-11-10 (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
