CoChat
Sign Up
PreprintCited by 4Social Robot Interaction and HRIAI in Service InteractionsAttachment and Relationship Dynamics

The DOI matches its DataCite 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·arXiv
DOI 10.48550/arxiv.2509.19515arXiv 2509.19515
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Many Large Language Model (LLM) chatbots are designed and used 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. In the present longitudinal study ($N = 183$), participants were randomly assigned to a chatbot condition (text chat with a companion chatbot) or to a control condition (text-based word games) for 10 minutes a day for 21 days. Participants also completed four surveys during the 21 days and engaged in audio recorded interviews on day 1 and 21. Overall, social health and relationships were not significantly impacted by companion chatbot interactions across 21 days of use. However, a detailed analysis showed a different story. People who had a higher desire to socially connect also tended to anthropomorphize the chatbot more, attributing humanlike properties to it; and those who anthropomorphized the chatbot more also reported that talking to the chatbot had a greater impact on their social interactions and relationships with family and friends. Via a mediation analysis, our results suggest a key mechanism at work: the impact of human-AI interaction on human-human social outcomes is mediated by the extent to which people anthropomorphize the AI agent, which is in turn motivated by a desire to socially connect. In a world where the desire to socially connect is on the rise, this finding may be cause for concern.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

DataCite · 10.48550/arxiv.2509.19515

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The effects of AI companionship may be contingent on users' existing social circumstances, motivations, and the specific needs they bring to the interaction, rather than being inherently harmful.

    “These findings complicate the assumption that AI companionship is inherently harmful, suggesting instead that its effects may be contingent on users' existing social circumstances, motivations, and the specific needs they bring to the interaction (Liu et al., 2025; Guingrich, 2025).”

    From Intimate Strangers by Design: A Uses and Gratifications Analysis of AI Companionship (2026) · cites this paper as Guingrich, 2025

Self-check

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

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

No references could be resolved yet.

Research works printed but not linked: 45

  1. Bartneck, C.; Kuli´ c, D.; Croft, E.; and Zoghbi, S. 2009. Measurement Instruments for the Anthropomorphism, Animacy, Likeability, Perceived Intelligence, and Perceived Safety of Robots. International Journal of Social Robotics , 1(1): 71-81.
  2. Bartz, J. A.; Tchalova, K.; and Fenerci, C. 2016. Reminders of Social Connection Can Attenuate Anthropomorphism: A Replication and Extension of Epley, Akalis, Waytz, and Cacioppo (2008). Psychological Science , 27(12): 1644-1650.
  3. Baumeister, R. F.; and Leary, M. R. 1995. The Need to Belong: Desire for Interpersonal Attachments as a Fundamental Human Motivation. Psychological Bulletin , 117(3): 497-529.
  4. Br¨ une, M.; and Br¨ une-Cohrs, U. 2006. Theory of MindEvolution, Ontogeny, Brain Mechanisms and Psychopathology. Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews , 30(4): 437455.
  5. Cacioppo, J. T.; and Cacioppo, S. 2014. Social Relationships and Health: The Toxic Effects of Perceived Social Isolation. Social and Personality Psychology Compass , 8(2): 58-72.
  6. Carlson, J. A.; Sarkin, A. J.; Levack, A. E.; Sklar, M.; Tally, S. R.; Gilmer, T. P.; and Groessl, E. J. 2011. Evaluating a Measure of Social Health Derived from Two Mental Health Recovery Measures: The California Quality of Life (CAQOL) and Mental Health Statistics Improvement Program Consumer Survey (MHSIP). Community Mental Health Journal , 47(4): 454-462.
  7. Chandra, M.; Hernandez, J.; Ramos, G.; Ershadi, M.; Bhattacharjee, A.; Amores, J.; Okoli, E.; Paradiso, A.; Warreth, S.; and Suh, J. 2025. Longitudinal Study on Social and Emotional Use of AI Conversational Agent. arXiv:2504.14112. · arXiv
  8. Colombatto, C.; and Fleming, S. M. 2023. Folk Psychological Attributions of Consciousness to Large Language Models. Preprint, PsyArXiv.
  9. Croes, E. A. J.; and Antheunis, M. L. 2021. Can We Be Friends with Mitsuku? A Longitudinal Study on the Process of Relationship Formation between Humans and a Social Chatbot. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships , 38(1): 279-300.
  10. Epley, N.; Akalis, S.; Waytz, A.; and Cacioppo, J. T. 2008a. Creating Social Connection through Inferential Reproduction: Loneliness and Perceived Agency in Gadgets, Gods, and Greyhounds. Psychological Science , 19(2): 114-120.
  11. Epley, N.; Waytz, A.; and Cacioppo, J. T. 2007. On Seeing Human: A Three-Factor Theory of Anthropomorphism. Psychological Review , 114(4): 864-886.
  12. Eyssel, F.; and Reich, N. 2013. Loneliness Makes the Heart Grow Fonder (of Robots): On the Effects of Loneliness on Psychological Anthropomorphism. In Proceedings of the
  13. Eyssel, F. A.; and Pfundmair, M. 2015. Predictors of Psychological Anthropomorphization, Mind Perception, and the Fulfillment of Social Needs: A Case Study with a Zoomorphic Robot. 2015 24th IEEE International Symposium on Robot and Human Interactive Communication (RO-MAN) , 827-832.
  14. Fang, C. M.; Liu, A. R.; Danry, V.; Lee, E.; Chan, S. W. T.; Pataranutaporn, P.; Maes, P.; Phang, J.; Lampe, M.; Ahmad, L.; and Agarwal, S. 2025. How AI and Human Behaviors Shape Psychosocial Effects of Chatbot Use: A Longitudinal Randomized Controlled Study. arXiv:2503.17473. · arXiv
  15. Franke, T.; Attig, C.; and Wessel, D. 2019. A Personal Resource for Technology Interaction: Development and Validation of the Affinity for Technology Interaction (ATI) Scale. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction , 35(6): 456-467.
  16. Frith, C. 2002. Attention to Action and Awareness of Other Minds. Consciousness and Cognition: An International Journal , 11(4): 481-487.
  17. Gosling, S. D.; Rentfrow, P. J.; and Swann Jr., W. B. 2003. AVery Brief Measure of the Big-Five Personality Domains. Journal of Research in Personality , 37(6): 504-528.
  18. Gray, H. M.; Gray, K.; and Wegner, D. M. 2007. Dimensions of Mind Perception. Science , 315(5812): 619-619.
  19. Graziano, M. S. A. 2013. Consciousness and the Social Brain . Consciousness and the Social Brain. New York, NY, US: Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-992864-4.
  20. Guingrich, R. E.; and Graziano, M. S. A. 2025a. Chatbots as Social Companions: How People Perceive Consciousness, HumanLikeness, and Social Health Benefits in Machines. In Hacker, P., ed., Oxford Intersections: AI in Society . Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-894521-5.
  21. Guingrich, R. E.; and Graziano, M. S. A. 2025b. P(Doom) Versus AI Optimism: Attitudes Toward Artificial Intelligence and the Factors That Shape Them. Journal of Technology in Behavioral Science .
  22. Kim, H.-y.; and McGill, A. L. 2023. AI-induced Dehumanization. Journal of Consumer Psychology , n/a(n/a).
  23. Kothe, E. J.; and Ling, M. 2019. Retention of Participants Recruited to a Multi-Year Longitudinal Study via Prolific. Preprint, PsyArXiv.
  24. Koverola, M.; Kunnari, A.; Sundvall, J.; and Laakasuo, M. 2022. General Attitudes Towards Robots Scale (GAToRS): ANewInstrument for Social Surveys. International Journal of Social Robotics , 14(7): 1559-1581.
  25. Lieberz, J.; Shamay-Tsoory, S. G.; Saporta, N.; Esser, T.; Kuskova, E.; Stoffel-Wagner, B.; Hurlemann, R.; and Scheele, D. 2021. Loneliness and the Social Brain: How Perceived Social Isolation Impairs Human Interactions. Advanced Science , 8(21): 2102076.
  26. Maples, B.; Cerit, M.; Vishwanath, A.; and Pea, R. 2024. Loneliness and Suicide Mitigation for Students Using GPT3-enabled Chatbots. npj Mental Health Research , 3(1): 1-6.
  27. Nagel, T. 1974. What Is It Like to Be a Bat? The Philosophical Review , 83(4): 435-450.
  28. Nass, C.; Steuer, J.; and Siminoff, E. 1994. Computers Are Social Actors. In Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems - Proceedings , 204.
  29. O'Sullivan, R.; Burns, A.; Leavey, G.; Leroi, I.; Burholt, V.; Lubben, J.; Holt-Lunstad, J.; Victor, C.; Lawlor, B.; VilarCompte, M.; Perissinotto, C. M.; Tully, M. A.; Sullivan, M. P.; Rosato, M.; Power, J. M.; Tiilikainen, E.; and Prohaska, T. R. 2021. Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Loneliness and Social Isolation: A Multi-Country Study. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health , 18(19): 9982.
  30. Premack, D.; and Woodruff, G. 1978. Does the Chimpanzee Have a Theory of Mind? Behavioral and Brain Sciences , 1(4): 515-526.
  31. Prinz, W. 2017. Modeling Self on Others: An Import Theory of Subjectivity and Selfhood. Consciousness and Cognition: An International Journal , 49: 347-362.
  32. Reeves, B.; and Nass, C. 1996. The Media Equation: How People Treat Computers, Television, and New Media Like Real People and Pla. Bibliovault OAI Repository, the University of Chicago Press .
  33. Rosseel, Y. 2012. Lavaan: An R Package for Structural Equation Modeling. Journal of Statistical Software , 48: 136.
  34. Russell, D.; Peplau, L. A.; and Cutrona, C. E. 1980. The Revised UCLA Loneliness Scale: Concurrent and Discriminant Validity Evidence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology , 39(3): 472-480.
  35. Scott, A. E.; Neumann, D.; Niess, J.; and Wo´ zniak, P. W. 2023. Do You Mind? User Perceptions of Machine Consciousness. In Proceedings of the 2023 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems , CHI '23, 1-19. New York, NY, USA: Association for Computing Machinery. ISBN 978-1-4503-9421-5.
  36. Seyfarth, R. M.; and Cheney, D. L. 2013. Affiliation, Empathy, and the Origins of Theory of Mind. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America , 110(Suppl 2): 10349-10356.
  37. Skjuve, M.; Følstad, A.; and Brandtzæg, P. B. 2023. A Longitudinal Study of Self-Disclosure in Human-Chatbot Relationships. Interacting with Computers , 35(1): 24-39.
  38. Skjuve, M.; Følstad, A.; Fostervold, K. I.; and Brandtzaeg, P. B. 2022. A Longitudinal Study of Human-Chatbot Relationships. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies , 168: 102903.
  39. Tomova, L.; Andrews, J. L.; and Blakemore, S.-J. 2021. The Importance of Belonging and the Avoidance of Social Risk Taking in Adolescence. Developmental Review , 61: 100981.
  40. Tsoi, L.; Hamlin, J. K.; Waytz, A.; Baron, A. S.; and Young, L. L. 2021. A Cooperation Advantage for Theory of Mind in Children and Adults. https://guilfordjournals.com/doi/10.1521/soco.2021.39.1.19. · DOI
  41. Turkle, S. 2007. Authenticity in the Age of Digital Companions. Interaction Studies , 8(3): 501-517.
  42. Williams, K. D. 2009. Chapter 6 Ostracism: A Temporal Need-Threat Model. In Advances in Experimental Social Psychology , volume 41, 275-314. Academic Press.
  43. Wimmer, H.; and Perner, J. 1983. Beliefs about Beliefs: Representation and Constraining Function of Wrong Beliefs in Young Children's Understanding of Deception. Cognition , 13(1): 103-128.
  44. Xie, T.; and Pentina, I. 2022. Attachment Theory as a Framework to Understand Relationships with Social Chatbots: A Case Study of Replika. In Proceedings of the 55th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences , HICSS '55, 2046-2055. Hawaii, USA: Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences. ISBN 978-0-9981331-5-7.
  45. Young, A.; and Monroe, A. 2019. Autonomous Morals: Inferences of Mind Predict Acceptance of AI Behavior in Sacrificial Moral Dilemmas. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology , 85: 103870.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

  • Untitled work

    Eom, D., Renner, J., & Chinn, S. (2026) · arXiv (preprint)

Metadata

Authors
Guingrich, R. E., & Graziano, M. S. A.
ORCID
Venue
arXiv
Publisher
arXiv
Published
2025
ISSN
2331-8422 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.48550/arxiv.2509.19515
arXiv
2509.19515
OpenAlex
W4415272146
Cited by
4
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 4
Type
posted content
Language
en
Open access
Licence
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode
Locations
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (cc-by)
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 connectedness, interpersonal relationships, large language model chatbots, mediation, social health, family and friend relationships

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

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