The DOI matches its Crossref record.
The Second Self: Computers and the Human Spirit
Abstract
A new edition of the classic primer in the psychology of computation, with a new introduction, a new epilogue, and extensive notes added to the original text. In The Second Self, Sherry Turkle looks at the computer not as a "tool," but as part of our social and psychological lives; she looks beyond how we use computer games and spreadsheets to explore how the computer affects our awareness of ourselves, of one another, and of our relationship with the world. "Technology," she writes, "catalyzes changes not only in what we do but in how we think." First published in 1984, The Second Self is still essential reading as a primer in the psychology of computation. This twentieth anniversary edition allows us to reconsider two decades of computer culture—to (re)experience what was and is most novel in our new media culture and to view our own contemporary relationship with technology with fresh eyes. Turkle frames this classic work with a new introduction, a new epilogue, and extensive notes added to the original text. Turkle talks to children, college students, engineers, AI scientists, hackers, and personal computer owners—people confronting machines that seem to think and at the same time suggest a new way for us to think—about human thought, emotion, memory, and understanding. Her interviews reveal that we experience computers as being on the border between inanimate and animate, as both an extension of the self and part of the external world. Their special place betwixt and between traditional categories is part of what makes them compelling and evocative. (In the introduction to this edition, Turkle quotes a PDA user as saying, "When my Palm crashed, it was like a death. I thought I had lost my mind.") Why we think of the workings of a machine in psychological terms—how this happens, and what it means for all of us—is the ever more timely subject of The Second Self.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Users understand that generative AI entities are relational artifacts.
“Instead, users understand that generative AI entities are relational artifacts (Turkle, 2005).”
From Artificial intelligence and unconditional love: the rise of generative AI as an alternative form of mental health support (2026) · cites this paper as Turkle, 2005
Citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
What is AI Literacy? Competencies and Design Considerations
Long, D., & Magerko, B. (2020) · Proceedings of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/3313831.3376727 · Cited by 3,241
Interactions with robots: the truths we reveal about ourselves
Broadbent, E. (2017) · Annual Review of Psychology · doi:10.1146/annurev-psych-010416-043958 · Cited by 547
In principle obstacles for empathic AI: why we can’t replace human empathy in healthcare
Montemayor, C., Halpern, J., & Fairweather, A. (2022) · AI & SOCIETY · doi:10.1007/s00146-021-01230-z · Cited by 293
Finding Love in Algorithms: Deciphering the Emotional Contexts of Close Encounters with AI Chatbots
Li, H., & Zhang, R. (2024) · doi:10.31219/osf.io/xd4k7 · Cited by 150
If software is narrative: Joseph Weizenbaum, artificial intelligence and the biographies of ELIZA
Natale, S. (2019) · New Media & Society · doi:10.1177/1461444818804980 · Cited by 126
Hong, J. W., Peng, Q., & Williams, D. (2021) · New Media & Society · doi:10.1177/1461444820925798 · Cited by 102
Miller, V., Hill, M. J., & Moreira, T. (2026) · Communication and Change · doi:10.1007/s44382-026-00036-1 · Cited by 2
Metadata
- Authors
- Turkle, S.
- Publisher
- The MIT Press
- Published
- 2005-09-30
- Cited by
- 573
- References
- 0
- Language
- en
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