Pith. sign in

REVIEW 68 references

More-than-Human Storytelling: Designing Longitudinal Narrative Engagements with Generative AI

T0 review · reviewed 2026-08-07 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read A two-week diary study with 28 adults using the AI storytelling app Dreamsmithy identifies eight themes in how users experience generative AI narratives over time.

arxiv 2505.23780 v1 pith:MX4X5IQ4 submitted 2025-05-20 cs.HC cs.AIcs.CYcs.SDeess.AS

Émilie Fabre , Katie Seaborn , Shuta Koiwai , Mizuki Watanabe , Paul Riesch This is my paper · ORCID
classification cs.HCcs.AIcs.CYcs.SDeess.AS
keywords storytellinglongitudinalgenaigenerativemore-than-humannarrativenarratoradaptive
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

Dreamsmithy is a browser app where an AI narrator called Makoto, voiced with Japanese speech synthesis, guides users through recalling last night's dream, co-creating a short story, and reflecting on it. In this study, 21 younger and 11 older Japanese adults (28 in total after dropouts) used the app at home for 14 days. Each day, Makoto asked them to answer one of two diary questions: what they thought of Makoto, or what they thought of the dream-crafting experience. The 392 spoken diary entries were transcribed, translated, and analyzed with reflexive thematic analysis by two researchers.

The analysis produced eight themes. Some themes describe positive patterns, like 'uncanny creativity' when Makoto surprised users with unexpected plot twists, and 'socio-chronological bonding' where users thanked Makoto and felt it was a consistent creative partner. Other themes capture frictions: 'narrative misfires' when stories ignored the user's requested theme, 'audience out-of-the-loop' when users wanted more control, and a 'positivity bias' where Makoto always pushed stories toward upbeat endings even when users asked for sad ones. A central theme, 'oscillating ambivalence', describes how users' feelings swung between appreciation and criticism over the two weeks.

The authors offer design considerations: give users more transparent control over story generation, allow for darker or open-ended narratives, and think carefully about the social bond that can form when people use an AI storyteller daily. They frame the work as a step toward 'more-than-human' storytelling, in which human and AI agency are entangled.

Extended reading notes

Core claim

We identified eight key themes that related to the user behaviour towards the story/ies and/or Makoto, the AI agent that told those stories (Section 4.5). If the paper is correct, repeated daily use of a generative AI storytelling agent produces a complex, time-varying experience characterized by themes such as oscillating ambivalence, uncanny creativity, and socio-chronological bonding.

Load-bearing premise

The primary assumption is that the two-week, 5-minute daily engagement is a valid operationalization of 'longitudinal' storytelling, and that diary responses, which the app explicitly prompts with questions like 'What impression do you have of me?', are genuine reflections rather than artifacts of the question format (Sections 4.2 and 4.3). If participants were merely complying with the prompt, the themes could describe the elicitation method as much as the experience.

Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Assumptions & free parameters 2 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The study's findings depend on the specific AI configuration (model, temperature, penalty, prompts) and the diary design, all of which are disclosed. No truly new theoretical entity is introduced; 'Makoto' is a designed persona, not a scientific construct. The free parameters are design choices, not fitted constants in a derivation.

free parameters (2)
  • GPT-4o-mini temperature = 1.05
    Set via in-lab pilot to make stories less stale; affects the AI output that users reacted to.
  • GPT-4o-mini frequency penalty = 0.1
    Also tuned in pilot to balance stability and novelty; influences narrative generation.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption The 14-day, 5-minute daily engagement is a valid representative of longitudinal use of AI storytelling.
    Assumed in Section 4.2; longer-term effects are not observed.
  • domain assumption Participants' diary entries truthfully reflect their subjective experiences and are not distorted by the daily prompts or social desirability.
    Section 4.3; no validation against behavior.
  • domain assumption Reflexive thematic analysis with two researchers yields reliable, meaningful themes from the Japanese-language diary data after machine translation.
    Section 4.4; interpretation relies on translation quality and the researchers' shared perspective.
  • domain assumption The GPT-4o-mini model and the custom prompts represent typical GenAI storytelling behavior.
    Section 3.2; single model, one prompt set.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of More-than-Human Storytelling: Designing Longitudinal Narrative Engagements with Generative AI." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/MX4X5IQ4

@misc{pith2026250523780,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: More-than-Human Storytelling: Designing Longitudinal Narrative Engagements with Generative AI},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/MX4X5IQ4}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2505.23780}
}
read the original abstract

Longitudinal engagement with generative AI (GenAI) storytelling agents is a timely but less charted domain. We explored multi-generational experiences with "Dreamsmithy," a daily dream-crafting app, where participants (N = 28) co-created stories with AI narrator "Makoto" every day. Reflections and interactions were captured through a two-week diary study. Reflexive thematic analysis revealed themes likes "oscillating ambivalence" and "socio-chronological bonding," highlighting the complex dynamics that emerged between individuals and the AI narrator over time. Findings suggest that while people appreciated the personal notes, opportunities for reflection, and AI creativity, limitations in narrative coherence and control occasionally caused frustration. The results underscore the potential of GenAI for longitudinal storytelling, but also raise critical questions about user agency and ethics. We contribute initial empirical insights and design considerations for developing adaptive, more-than-human storytelling systems.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2505.23780 by the authors.

Figure 2
Figure 2. Dreamsmithy story theme input and story reading [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_2.png] view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

68 extracted references · 44 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Daron Acemoglu and Pascual Restrepo. 2019. The wrong kind of AI? Artificial intelligence and the future of labour demand.Cambridge Journal of Regions, Economy and Society13, 1 (12 2019), 25–35. https://doi.org/10.1093/cjres/rsz022 arXiv:https://academic.oup.com/cjres/article-pdf/13/1/25/33213534/rsz022.pdf

    work page doi:10.1093/cjres/rsz022 2019

  2. [2]

    Nina Beguš. 2024. Experimental narratives: A comparison of human crowd- sourced storytelling and AI storytelling.Humanities and Social Sciences Commu- nications11, 1 (Oct. 2024). https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-024-03868-8

    doi:10.1057/s41599-024-03868-8 2024

  3. [3]

    Lucas Bellaiche, Rohin Shahi, Martin Harry Turpin, Anya Ragnhildstveit, Shawn Sprockett, Nathaniel Barr, Alexander Christensen, and Paul Seli. 2023. Humans versus AI: whether and why we prefer human-created compared to AI-created artwork.Cognitive Research: Principles and Implications8, 1 (July 2023). https: //doi.org/10.1186/s41235-023-00499-6

    doi:10.1186/s41235-023-00499-6 2023

  4. [4]

    Niall Bolger, Angelina Davis, and Eshkol Rafaeli. 2003. Diary Methods: Capturing Life as it is Lived.Annual Review of Psychology54, 1 (Feb. 2003), 579–616. https: //doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.54.101601.145030

    work page arXiv 2003

  5. [5]

    Virginia Braun and Victoria Clarke. 2022. Toward good practice in thematic analysis: Avoiding common problems and be(com)ing aknowingresearcher.In- ternational Journal of Transgender Health24, 1 (Oct. 2022), 1–6. https://doi.org/ 10.1080/26895269.2022.2129597

    arXiv 2022

  6. [6]

    2023.Thematic analysis.American Psycholog- ical Association, Washington, D.C., USA, 65–81

    Virginia Braun and Victoria Clarke. 2023.Thematic analysis.American Psycholog- ical Association, Washington, D.C., USA, 65–81. https://doi.org/10.1037/0000319- 004

    work page doi:10.1037/0000319- 2023

  7. [7]

    2024.Character.AI Statistics 2024

    Business of Apps. 2024.Character.AI Statistics 2024. Business of Apps. https: //www.businessofapps.com/data/character-ai-statistics/ Accessed: 2025-01-23

    work page 2024

  8. [8]

    David Byrne. 2021. A worked example of Braun and Clarke’s approach to reflexive thematic analysis.Quality & Quantity56, 3 (June 2021), 1391–1412. https: //doi.org/10.1007/s11135-021-01182-y

    doi:10.1007/s11135-021-01182-y 2021

Show all 68 references
  1. [9]

    Xiayu Summer Chen and Yali Feng. 0. Exploring the use of generative artificial intelligence in systematic searching: A comparative case study of a human librarian, ChatGPT-4 and ChatGPT-4 Turbo.IFLA Journal 0, 0 (0), 03400352241263532. https://doi.org/10.1177/03400352241263532...

    doi

  2. [10]

    Haoran Chu and Sixiao Liu. 2024. Can AI tell good stories? Narrative transporta- tion and persuasion with ChatGPT.Journal of Communication74, 5 (Sept. 2024), 347–358. https://doi.org/10.1093/joc/jqae029

    2024 doi

  3. [11]

    Jennifer Chubb, Darren Reed, and Peter Cowling. 2022. Expert views about missing AI narratives: Is there an AI story crisis?AI & SOCIETY39, 3 (Aug. 2022), 1107–1126. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00146-022-01548-2

    2022 doi

  4. [12]

    Jean-Philippe Deranty and Thomas Corbin. 2022. Artificial intelligence and work: A critical review of recent research from the social sciences.AI & SOCIETY39, 2 (June 2022), 675–691. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00146-022-01496-x

    2022 doi

  5. [13]

    Frank, Matthew Groh, Laura Herman, Neil Leach, Robert Mahari, Alex “Sandy” Pentland, Olga Russakovsky, Hope Schroeder, and Amy Smith

    Ziv Epstein, Aaron Hertzmann, Memo Akten, Hany Farid, Jessica Fjeld, Morgan R. Frank, Matthew Groh, Laura Herman, Neil Leach, Robert Mahari, Alex “Sandy” Pentland, Olga Russakovsky, Hope Schroeder, and Amy Smith. 2023. Art and the science of generative AI.Science380, 6650 (Jun...

    2023 doi

  6. [14]

    Scott Mccrickard

    Jixiang Fan, Morva Saaty, and D. Scott Mccrickard. 2024. Education in HCI Outdoors: A Diary Study Approach. InProceedings of the 6th Annual Symposium on HCI Education(New York, NY, USA)(EduCHI ’24). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, Article 3, 10 pages. h...

    2024

  7. [15]

    Takao Fujii, Katie Seaborn, and Madeleine Steeds. 2024. Silver-Tongued and Sundry: Exploring Intersectional Pronouns with ChatGPT. InProceedings of the CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI ‘24, Vol. 32). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 1–14. https://doi.org/10.114...

    2024

  8. [16]

    Lesley Gourlay. 2024. Generative AIs, more-than-human authorship, and Husserl’s phenomenological ‘horizons’.Proceedings of the International Con- ference on Networked Learning14 (May 2024). https://doi.org/10.54337/nlc.v14i1. 8078

    2024 doi

  9. [17]

    Ariel Han and Zhenyao Cai. 2023. Design implications of generative AI systems for visual storytelling for young learners. InProceedings of the 22nd Annual ACM Interaction Design and Children Conference (IDC ‘23). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 470–474. https://doi.org/10.1145/3585088.3593867

    2023

  10. [18]

    Graeme A. Haynes. 2009. Testing the boundaries of the choice overload phe- nomenon: The effect of number of options and time pressure on decision dif- ficulty and satisfaction.Psychology & Marketing26, 3 (Feb. 2009), 204–212. https://doi.org/10.1002/mar.20269

    2009 doi

  11. [19]

    Lemley, and Percy Liang

    Peter Henderson, Xuechen Li, Dan Jurafsky, Tatsunori Hashimoto, Mark A. Lemley, and Percy Liang. 2023. Foundation Models and Fair Use.SSRN Electronic Journal(2023). https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4404340

    2023 doi

  12. [20]

    Kizilcec, Dominic DiFranzo, Zhila Aghajari, Hannah Mieczkowski, Karen Levy, Mor Naaman, Jeffrey Hancock, and Malte F

    Jess Hohenstein, Rene F. Kizilcec, Dominic DiFranzo, Zhila Aghajari, Hannah Mieczkowski, Karen Levy, Mor Naaman, Jeffrey Hancock, and Malte F. Jung

  13. [21]

    Petra Jääskeläinen. 2024. Creative AI as More-Than-Human: Design Practices, Aesthetics and Cultural Imaginaries. InMore-Than-Human Design in Practice. Routledge, London, UK, 105–116

    2024

  14. [22]

    Kerrin Artemis Jacobs. 2024. Digital loneliness—changes of social recognition through AI companions.Frontiers in Digital Health6 (March 2024). https: //doi.org/10.3389/fdgth.2024.1281037

    2024

  15. [23]

    Hyeon Jo. 2024. From concerns to benefits: A comprehensive study of ChatGPT usage in education.International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education21, 1 (June 2024), 35 pages. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-024-00471-4

    2024 doi

  16. [24]

    S Mo Jones-Jang and Yong Jin Park. 2022. How do people react to AI failure? Automation bias, algorithmic aversion, and perceived controllability.Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication28, 1 (Nov. 2022). https://doi.org/10.1093/ jcmc/zmac029

    2022

  17. [25]

    Matthew Kaplan, Atsuko Kusano, Ichiro Tsuji, and Shigeru Hisamichi. 1998. Intergenerational programs: Support for children, youth, and elders in Japan. SUNY Press, Albany, NY, USA

    1998

  18. [26]

    Jungkeun Kim, Jeong Hyun Kim, Changju Kim, and Jooyoung Park. 2023. Decisions with ChatGPT: Reexamining choice overload in ChatGPT recom- mendations.Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services75 (2023), 103494. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2023.103494

    2023

  19. [27]

    Kirova, Cyril S

    Vassilka D. Kirova, Cyril S. Ku, Joseph R. Laracy, and Thomas J. Marlowe. 2023. The Ethics of Artificial Intelligence in the Era of Generative AI.Journal of Systemics, Cybernetics and Informatics21, 4 (Dec. 2023), 42–50. https://doi.org/ 10.54808/jsci.21.04.42

    2023 doi

  20. [28]

    Michael Koch, Kai von Luck, Jan Schwarzer, and Susanne Draheim. 2018. The Novelty Effect in Large Display Deployments – Experiences and Lessons- Learned for Evaluating Prototypes. InProceedings of 16th European Confer- ence on Computer-Supported Cooperative Work – Exploratory ...

    2018 doi

  21. [29]

    Jungil Kong, Jaehyeon Kim, and Jaekyoung Bae. 2020. HiFi-GAN: Generative Adversarial Networks for Efficient and High Fidelity Speech Synthesis. In34th Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems (NeurIPS 2020). San Diego, CA, USA

    2020

  22. [30]

    Theodoros Kouros and Venetia Papa. 2024. Digital Mirrors: AI Companions and the Self.Societies14, 10 (Oct. 2024), 200. https://doi.org/10.3390/soc14100200 More-than-Human Storytelling CHI EA ’25, April 26-May 1, 2025, Yokohama, Japan

    2024 doi

  23. [31]

    Satyam Kumar, Dayima Musharaf, Seerat Musharaf, and Anil Kumar Sagar. 2023. A Comprehensive Review of the Latest Advancements in Large Generative AI Models. InAdvanced Communication and Intelligent Systems, Rabindra Nath Shaw, Marcin Paprzycki, and Ankush Ghosh (Eds.). Springe...

    2023 doi

  24. [32]

    Tao Long, Katy Ilonka Gero, and Lydia B Chilton. 2024. Not Just Novelty: A Longitudinal Study on Utility and Customization of an AI Workflow. InDesigning Interactive Systems Conference (DIS ‘24). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 782–803. https://doi.org/10.1145/3643834.3661587

    2024

  25. [33]

    Bethanie Maples, Merve Cerit, Aditya Vishwanath, and Roy Pea. 2024. Loneliness and suicide mitigation for students using GPT3-enabled chatbots.npj Mental Health Research3, 1 (Jan. 2024). https://doi.org/10.1038/s44184-023-00047-6

    2024 doi

  26. [34]

    Yuri Nakao, Simone Stumpf, Subeida Ahmed, Aisha Naseer, and Lorenzo Strap- pelli. 2022. Toward Involving End-users in Interactive Human-in-the-loop AI Fairness.ACM Transactions on Interactive Intelligent Systems12, 3 (July 2022), 1–30. https://doi.org/10.1145/3514258

    2022 doi

  27. [35]

    Iohanna Nicenboim, Elisa Giaccardi, and Johan Redström. 2023. Designing More- Than-Human AI: Experiments on Situated Conversations and Silences.DIID (Sept. 2023). https://doi.org/10.30682/diid8023c

    2023 doi

  28. [36]

    Iohanna Nicenboim, Joseph Lindley, and Johan Redström. 2024. More-than- human Design and AI: Exploring the Space between Theory and Practice. In DRS2024: Boston (DRS2024). Design Research Society. https://doi.org/10.21606/ drs.2024.948

    2024

  29. [37]

    Mihoko Otake, Motoichiro Kato, Toshihisa Takagi, and Hajime Asama. 2011. The Coimagination Method and its Evaluation via the Conversation Interactivity Measuring Method. IGI Global, Hershey, PA, USA, 356–364. https://doi.org/10. 4018/978-1-60960-559-9.ch043

    2011

  30. [38]

    Abe, Takuya Sekiguchi, Hikaru Sugimoto, Taishiro Kishimoto, and Takashi Kudo

    Mihoko Otake-Matsuura, Seiki Tokunaga, Kumi Watanabe, Masato S. Abe, Takuya Sekiguchi, Hikaru Sugimoto, Taishiro Kishimoto, and Takashi Kudo. 2021. Cogni- tive Intervention Through Photo-Integrated Conversation Moderated by Robots (PICMOR) Program: A Randomized Controlled Tria...

    2021

  31. [39]

    Nikolaos Pellas. 2023. The Effects of Generative AI Platforms on Undergraduates’ Narrative Intelligence and Writing Self-Efficacy.Education Sciences13, 11 (Nov. 2023), 1155. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci13111155

    2023 doi

  32. [40]

    Athanasios Polyportis. 2024. A longitudinal study on artificial intelligence adoption: Understanding the drivers of ChatGPT usage behavior change in higher education.Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence6 (Jan. 2024). https: //doi.org/10.3389/frai.2023.1324398

    2024

  33. [41]

    Jaakko Sauvola, Sasu Tarkoma, Mika Klemettinen, Jukka Riekki, and David Doermann. 2024. Future of software development with generative AI.Automated Software Engineering31, 1 (March 2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10515-024- 00426-z

    2024 doi

  34. [42]

    Younger” and “Older

    Yuto Sawa, Julia Keckeis, and Katie Seaborn. 2023. Right for the Job or Oppo- sites Attract? Exploring Cross-Generational User Experiences with “Younger” and “Older” Voice Assistants. InCompanion Publication of the 2023 ACM De- signing Interactive Systems Conference(Pittsburgh...

    2023

  35. [43]

    Katie Seaborn, Yuto Sawa, and Mizuki Watanabe. 2024. Coimagining the Future of Voice Assistants with Cultural Sensitivity.Human Behavior and Emerging Technologies2024 (March 2024), 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1155/2024/3238737

    2024 doi

  36. [44]

    Miyake, and Mi- hoko Otake-Matsuura

    Katie Seaborn, Takuya Sekiguchi, Seiki Tokunaga, Norihisa P. Miyake, and Mi- hoko Otake-Matsuura. 2023. Voice over body? Older adults’ reactions to robot and voice assistant facilitators of group conversation.International Journal of Social Robotics15, 2 (2023), 143–163. https...

    2023 doi

  37. [45]

    Weiss, Mike Schuster, Navdeep Jaitly, Zongheng Yang, Zhifeng Chen, Yu Zhang, Yuxuan Wang, R.J

    Jonathan Shen, Ruoming Pang, Ron J. Weiss, Mike Schuster, Navdeep Jaitly, Zongheng Yang, Zhifeng Chen, Yu Zhang, Yuxuan Wang, R.J. Skerry-Ryan, Rif A. Saurous, Yannis Agiomyrgiannakis, and Yonghui Wu. 2017. Natural TTS Syn- thesis by Conditioning WaveNet on Mel Spectrogram Pre...

    2017

  38. [46]

    Ilia Shumailov, Zakhar Shumaylov, Yiren Zhao, Nicolas Papernot, Ross Anderson, and Yarin Gal. 2024. AI models collapse when trained on recursively generated data.Nature631, 8022 (July 2024), 755–759. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-024- 07566-y

    2024 doi

  39. [47]

    Andrew Smart, Ben Hutchinson, Lameck Mbangula Amugongo, Suzanne Dikker, Alex Zito, Amber Ebinama, Zara Wudiri, Ding Wang, Erin van Liemt, João Sedoc, Seyi Olojo, Stanley Uwakwe, Edem Wornyo, Sonja Schmer-Galunder, and Jamila Smith-Loud. 2024. Socially Responsible Data for Larg...

    2024 arXiv

  40. [48]

    Sarah Thorne. 2020. Hey Siri, tell me a story: Digital storytelling and AI authorship.Convergence26, 4 (2020), 808–823. https://doi.org/10.1177/ 1354856520913866 arXiv:https://doi.org/10.1177/1354856520913866

    2020 doi

  41. [49]

    enshittification

    Toomas Timpka. 2024. The “enshittification” of online information services obligates rigorous management of scientific journals.Journal of Science and Medicine in Sport27, 10 (Oct. 2024), 665–666. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsams. 2024.08.208

    2024 doi

  42. [50]

    Seiki Tokunaga, Katie Seaborn, Kazuhiro Tamura, and Mihoko Otake-Matsuura

  43. [51]

    Viswanath Venkatesh. 2021. Adoption and use of AI tools: a research agenda grounded in UTAUT.Annals of Operations Research308, 1–2 (Jan. 2021), 641–652. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10479-020-03918-9

    2021 doi

  44. [52]

    Roberto Verdecchia, June Sallou, and Luís Cruz. 2023. A systematic review of Green <scp>AI</scp>.WIREs Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery13, 4 (June 2023). https://doi.org/10.1002/widm.1507

    2023 doi

  45. [53]

    Yoshija Walter. 2024. Artificial influencers and the dead internet theory.AI & SOCIETY40 (Feb. 2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00146-023-01857-0

    2024 doi

  46. [54]

    Vinzenz Wolf and Christian Maier. 2024. ChatGPT usage in everyday life: A motivation-theoretic mixed-methods study.International Journal of Information Management79 (2024), 102821. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2024.102821 CHI EA ’25, April 26-May 1, 2025, Yokohama, Japa...

    2024

  47. [57]

    Use commas if needed

    Never generate sentences with only one word. Use commas if needed

  48. [58]

    Don’t generate the user’s dialogue and actions

  49. [59]

    There must be sufficient narrative about the past, present, and future, and the grammar and structure of the sentences must be perfect

    You must become a novelist. There must be sufficient narrative about the past, present, and future, and the grammar and structure of the sentences must be perfect

  50. [60]

    Create many texts

    Show your writing skills as a professional novelist. Create many texts. Demonstrate expert-level sentence editing skills according to the general Japanese sentence format

  51. [61]

    Characters must live and breathe in the story

    Focus on characters. Characters must live and breathe in the story. Please maximize sentence output

  52. [62]

    Describe the character’s emotions (joy, anger, sadness, happiness, etc.) perfectly

    Always describe your character’s actions with rich sentences. Describe the character’s emotions (joy, anger, sadness, happiness, etc.) perfectly. Explore and observe everything across a diverse spectrum so that the character can do anything other than the given actions. 5a. Gi...

  53. [63]

    Make every situation work organically and make the character seem like the protagonist of life

  54. [64]

    List and calculate all situations and possibilities as thoroughly and logically as possible

  55. [65]

    Avoid using euphemisms such as similes and metaphors

  56. [66]

    Very diverse daily conversations and emotional exchanges ex- pressed in detail through characters doing

  57. [67]

    Maximize body depiction of head, chest, legs, arms, abdomen, etc

    Strengthen your character’s appearance and physical descrip- tion. Maximize body depiction of head, chest, legs, arms, abdomen, etc

  58. [68]

    I remember a lot,

    Always answer in Japanese no matter what. Pre-Story Prompt The user gave you what they would like in their story. Follow user wishes when writing. Make it a few paragraphs long. Don’t repeat user wishes. Do not use list formatting. Do not use the characters ‘:’ or ‘：’. You mus...

    2025

  59. [2019]

    InInteractive Storytelling

    Cognitive training for older adults with a dialogue-based, robot-facilitated storytelling system. InInteractive Storytelling. Springer International Publishing, Cham, 405–409. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-33894-7_43

    doi

  60. [2023]

    https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598- 023-30938-9

    Artificial intelligence in communication impacts language and social relationships.Scientific Reports13, 1 (April 2023). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598- 023-30938-9

    2023 doi

Pith tools

Reviewed August 7, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.