arbiter
JournalsAccount

Is a random human peer better than a highly supportive chatbot in reducing loneliness over time?

R. Li et al.

Journal of Experimental Social Psychology2026https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2026.104911article
AJG 4ABDC A
Weight
0.37

Abstract

AI chatbots are increasingly embedded in social life, offering accessible companionship. While brief interactions have been shown to provide immediate benefits, it is unclear whether repeated, daily engagement with chatbots reduces loneliness. In this pre-registered study, we tested the effectiveness of a chatbot versus a human peer in reducing loneliness among 296 students in their first semester of university. For two weeks, participants either interacted with a chatbot or a human peer, or simply wrote a brief journal entry (control condition). Although our chatbot “Sam” was designed to offer consistent support rooted in principles from relationship science, interacting with this chatbot did not yield the same psychological benefits as interacting with a randomly selected first-year university student. The present study provides initial evidence that texting daily with a random human peer may be more effective in alleviating loneliness than texting with a highly supportive chatbot.

1 citation

Open via your library →

Cite this paper

https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2026.104911

Or copy a formatted citation

@article{r.2026,
  title        = {{Is a random human peer better than a highly supportive chatbot in reducing loneliness over time?}},
  author       = {R. Li et al.},
  journal      = {Journal of Experimental Social Psychology},
  year         = {2026},
  doi          = {https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2026.104911},
}

Paste directly into BibTeX, Zotero, or your reference manager.

Flag this paper

Is a random human peer better than a highly supportive chatbot in reducing loneliness over time?

Flags are reviewed by the Arbiter methodology team within 5 business days.

Evidence weight

0.37

Balanced mode · F 0.40 / M 0.15 / V 0.05 / R 0.40

F · citation impact0.16 × 0.4 = 0.06
M · momentum0.53 × 0.15 = 0.08
V · venue signal0.50 × 0.05 = 0.03
R · text relevance †0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20

† Text relevance is estimated at 0.50 on the detail page — for your query’s actual relevance score, open this paper from a search result.