AI emotional support is better only when chosen, but shifts preferences even when it is not
Organizations: Imperial College Business School, Imperial College London · Harvard Business School AI Institute, Harvard University · MIT Media Lab, Massachusetts Institute of Technology · Department of Industrial Engineering and Management, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev ·
Abstract
People increasingly face a novel decision when seeking emotional support: human or AI. In existing studies, AI's empathic messages are rated as well as or better than humans'. But these studies either assigned the support source or honored people's choice. In real life, support is often incongruent with choice, as people want one source and receive the other. Across three experiments (N = 1,951), participants chose whether to share an emotional experience with a human or an AI, then were randomly assigned to a congruent or incongruent partner. AI support was rated as superior only among those who had chosen it. Yet regardless of congruence, interacting with AI increased willingness to choose it again. In a 28-day study with OpenAI (N = 981), daily conversations shifted preferences toward AI and away from humans, but only when conversations turned personal. Emotional support choices are thus path-dependent, progressively redirecting away from human connection.
Emotional Support Conversation
Emotional support conversation studies how people and AI systems provide empathetic, safe help through dialogue, including counseling, peer support, and companionship.
See all 60 papers