REVIEW 3 cited by
Why human-AI relationships need socioaffective alignment
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
read the original abstract
Humans strive to design safe AI systems that align with our goals and remain under our control. However, as AI capabilities advance, we face a new challenge: the emergence of deeper, more persistent relationships between humans and AI systems. We explore how increasingly capable AI agents may generate the perception of deeper relationships with users, especially as AI becomes more personalised and agentic. This shift, from transactional interaction to ongoing sustained social engagement with AI, necessitates a new focus on socioaffective alignment-how an AI system behaves within the social and psychological ecosystem co-created with its user, where preferences and perceptions evolve through mutual influence. Addressing these dynamics involves resolving key intrapersonal dilemmas, including balancing immediate versus long-term well-being, protecting autonomy, and managing AI companionship alongside the desire to preserve human social bonds. By framing these challenges through a notion of basic psychological needs, we seek AI systems that support, rather than exploit, our fundamental nature as social and emotional beings.
Forward citations
Cited by 3 Pith papers
-
Talking Spell: A Wearable System Enabling Real-Time Anthropomorphic Voice Interaction with Everyday Objects
Talking Spell is a wearable system that detects objects, creates an anthropomorphic persona for each, and lets users hold voice conversations with them via a touch-triggered wand.
-
Lessons from a Chimp: AI "Scheming" and the Quest for Ape Language
Research on AI 'scheming' repeats the methodological errors of 1970s ape language studies, relying on anecdote and mentalistic interpretation instead of controlled, theory-driven tests.
-
Bridging the Gap: In-Context Learning for Modeling Human Disagreement
Across four open-source LLMs and three subjective-task datasets, in-context learning with multi-perspective prompts improves aggregated-label predictions in zero-shot, but disaggregated hard and soft label predictions...
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.