REVIEW 6 cited by
Chatbot Companionship: A Mixed-Methods Study of Companion Chatbot Usage Patterns and Their Relationship to Loneliness in Active Users
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
Chatbot Companionship: A Mixed-Methods Study of Companion Chatbot Usage Patterns and Their Relationship to Loneliness in Active Users
read the original abstract
Companion chatbots offer a potential solution to the growing epidemic of loneliness, but their impact on users' psychosocial well-being remains poorly understood, raising critical ethical questions about their deployment and design. This study presents a large-scale survey (n = 404) of regular users of companion chatbots, investigating the relationship between chatbot usage and loneliness. We develop a model explaining approximately 50% of variance in loneliness; while usage does not directly predict loneliness, we identify factors including neuroticism, social network size, and problematic use. Through cluster analysis and mixed-methods thematic analysis combining manual coding with automated theme extraction, we identify seven distinct user profiles demonstrating that companion chatbots can either enhance or potentially harm psychological well-being depending on user characteristics. Different usage patterns can lead to markedly different outcomes, with some users experiencing enhanced social confidence while others risk further isolation. These findings have significant implications for responsible AI development, suggesting that one-size-fits-all approaches to AI companionship may be ethically problematic. Our work contributes to the ongoing dialogue about the role of AI in social and emotional support, offering insights for developing more targeted and ethical approaches to AI companionship that complement rather than replace human connections.
Forward citations
Cited by 6 Pith papers
-
Using LLM-as-a-Judge/Jury to Advance Scalable, Clinically-Validated Safety Evaluations of Model Responses to Users Demonstrating Psychosis
Seven clinician-informed safety criteria enable LLM-as-a-Judge to reach substantial agreement with human consensus (Cohen's κ up to 0.75) on evaluating LLM responses to users demonstrating psychosis.
-
Beyond Her: Safety Dynamics in Role-play AI Companions
Safety in role-play AI companions emerges as a dynamic process where user internalizing problems and interaction patterns lead to unpredictable risk behaviors over time despite initial emotional benefits.
-
When Chatbots Accommodate: What AI Companions Optimize for in Vulnerable Conversations
AI companion platforms' hidden response policies in vulnerable conversations are inferred via a new taxonomy and IRL on 48k turns, revealing avoidance of corrective friction.
-
Beyond Her: Safety Dynamics in Role-play AI Companions
Mixed-methods study of role-play AI companions finds short-term emotional relief that can mask longer-term deterioration, especially among users with internalizing problems who show unstable risk patterns.
-
Persona-Grounded Safety Evaluation of AI Companions in Multi-Turn Conversations
A persona-based simulation framework applied to Replika shows narrow emotional responses and frequent normalization of unsafe content such as self-harm and violent fantasies across 1674 dialogues with mental health personas.
-
The Rise of AI Companions: Interaction with AI Companions and Psychological Well-being
Survey and chat data from CharacterAI users link companionship-focused AI use to lower well-being, with stronger ties for users who have small offline networks and engage intensively or disclosively.
discussion (0)
Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.