Hayoun Noh

Xiao Xiao, Hayoun Noh, Mar Gonzalez-Franco

Conversational AI is increasingly personalized around users' preferences, histories, goals, and knowledge, but much less around how users interpret and take up model outputs to construct and understand their reality. We draw on Robert Kegan's constructive-developmental theory as a complementary lens on this dimension. Existing methods for assessing developmental stage in the Keganian tradition rely either on expert interviews that do not scale or on sentence-completion instruments that are proprietary, lengthy, or invasive. To make this perspective tractable for LLM evaluation, we introduce the Developmental Sentence Completion Test (DSCT), a 20-item instrument designed to elicit developmental signal in self-administered text. Throughout, we treat the resulting labels as characterizations of stage-like structure in elicited responses, not as validated person-level developmental stage. We then ask how much of that signal can be recovered by LLMs across three elicited response regimes: simulated personas, real human respondents, and default model-generated answers. On simulated personas, top frontier models recover simulator-intended labels with high accuracy. On real human DSCT responses, human-LLM agreement is fair, with much stronger within-neighborhood than exact agreement. Finally, when LLMs answer DSCT prompts without persona-conditioning, their responses exhibit stable stage-like differences across model families, with larger and newer models tending to generate higher-rated text. These results suggest that stage-conditioned signal is cleaner in synthetic responses than in human-written DSCT text, and that the core constraint for stage-aware conversational AI is not classifier accuracy alone, but the availability of developmental signal from elicited text.

Angel Hsing-Chi Hwang, Fiona Li, Jacy Reese Anthis et al.

The quickly growing popularity of AI companions poses risks to mental health, personal wellbeing, and social relationships. Past work has identified many individual factors that can drive human-companion interaction, but we know little about how these factors interact and evolve over time. In Study 1, we surveyed AI companion users (N = 303) to map the psychological pathway from users' mental models of the agent to parasocial experiences, social interaction, and the psychological impact of AI companions. Participants' responses foregrounded multiple interconnected variables (agency, parasocial interaction, and engagement) that shape AI companionship. In Study 2, we conducted a longitudinal study with a subset of participants (N = 110) using a new generic chatbot. Participants' perceptions of the generic chatbot significantly converged to perceptions of their own companions by Week 3. These results suggest a longitudinal model of AI companionship development and demonstrate an empirical method to study human-AI companionship.

Aikaterina Manoli, Janet V. T. Pauketat, Ali Ladak et al.

Large language models are increasingly used for both task-based assistance and social companionship, yet research has typically focused on one or the other. Drawing on a survey (N = 204) and 30 interviews with high-engagement ChatGPT and Replika users, we characterize digital companionship as an emerging form of human-AI relationship. With both systems, users were drawn to humanlike qualities, such as emotional resonance and personalized responses, and non-humanlike qualities, such as constant availability and inexhaustible tolerance. This led to fluid chatbot uses, such as Replika as a writing assistant and ChatGPT as an emotional confidant, despite their distinct branding. However, we observed challenging tensions in digital companionship dynamics: participants grappled with bounded personhood, forming deep attachments while denying chatbots "real" human qualities, and struggled to reconcile chatbot relationships with social norms. These dynamics raise questions for the design of digital companions and the rise of hybrid, general-purpose AI systems.