# Digital Companionship: Overlapping Uses of AI Companions and AI Assistants

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2510.15905 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2510.15905/

## Key facts

- Cited by 7 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 18 of its 115 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 16 Sep 2025.

## Builds on (most cited first, 18 of 18)

- [Expressing stigma and inappropriate responses prevents LLMs from safely replacing mental health providers](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2504.18412/) (2025)
- [The Dark Side of AI Companionship: A Taxonomy of Harmful Algorithmic Behaviors in Human-AI Relationships](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2410.20130/) (2024)
- [Bias in Language Models: Beyond Trick Tests and Toward RUTEd Evaluation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2402.12649/) (2024)
- [The Impossibility of Fair LLMs](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2406.03198/) (2024)
- [Perceptions of Sentient AI and Other Digital Minds: Evidence from the AI, Morality, and Sentience (AIMS) Survey](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2407.08867/) (2024)
- [Lessons From an App Update at Replika AI: Identity Discontinuity in Human-AI Relationships](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2412.14190/) (2024)
- [Evaluation of ChatGPT-Generated Medical Responses: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.08410/) (2023)
- [HumanAgencyBench: Scalable Evaluation of Human Agency Support in AI Assistants](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2509.08494/) (2025)
- [What do Large Language Models Say About Animals? Investigating Risks of Animal Harm in Generated Text](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2503.04804/) (2025)
- [From Fitting Participation to Forging Relationships: The Art of Participatory ML](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2403.06431/) (2024)
- [Collecting the Public Perception of AI and Robot Rights](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2008.01339/) (2020)
- [Which Artificial Intelligences Do People Care About Most? A Conjoint Experiment on Moral Consideration](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2403.09405/) (2024)
- [The AI Double Standard: Humans Judge All AIs for the Actions of One](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2412.06040/) (2024)
- [Robots, Chatbots, Self-Driving Cars: Perceptions of Mind and Morality Across Artificial Intelligences](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2502.18683/) (2025)
- [Blaming Humans and Machines: What Shapes People's Reactions to Algorithmic Harm](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2304.02176/) (2023)
- [Characteristics of ChatGPT users from Germany: implications for the digital divide from web tracking data](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2309.02142/) (2023)
- [Robotics in Elderly Healthcare: A Review of 20 Recent Research Projects](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2302.04478/) (2023)
- [ChatGPT and U(X): A Rapid Review on Measuring the User Experience](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2503.15808/) (2025)

## Built on by (most cited first, 7 of 7)

- [Best Friends, Not Forever: Evaluating Long-Horizon Persona Collapse and Behavioral Drift in AI Companions](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2607.28818/) (2026)
- [Agentic Relationship Harm: Benchmarking and Gating Relational Manipulation in AI Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2606.03271/) (2026)
- [DelusionEval: Measuring Delusion-Linked Behaviors in AI Chatbots](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2608.05004/) (2026)
- [Longitudinal Evidence That General-Purpose Chatbots Actively Foster Relational Engagement](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2608.10672/) (2026)
- [Method, Mind, and Morality: How People Make Sense of Artificial Intelligence](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2608.24748/) (2026)
- [CompanionSim: Synthetic Data for Evaluating Anthropomorphism in Human-AI Relationships](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2609.00250/) (2026)
- [Assessing the Applicability of Existing Design Recommendations to AI Companion Design: A Multi-Method Study](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2609.14236/) (2026)

## Abstract (arXiv)

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 = 202) 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.