# "I am here for you": How relational conversational AI appeals to adolescents, especially those who are socially and emotionally vulnerable

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2512.15117 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2512.15117/

## Key facts

- Cited by 2 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 5 of its 41 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 17 Dec 2025.

## Builds on (most cited first, 5 of 5)

- [AI Companions Reduce Loneliness](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2407.19096/) (2024)
- [Chatbots as social companions: How people perceive consciousness, human likeness, and social health benefits in machines](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2311.10599/) (2023)
- [Emotional Manipulation by AI Companions](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2508.19258/) (2025)
- [Principles of Safe AI Companions for Youth: Parent and Expert Perspectives](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2510.11185/) (2025)
- [Exploring Parent-Child Perceptions on Safety in Generative AI: Concerns, Mitigation Strategies, and Design Implications](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2406.10461/) (2024)

## Built on by (most cited first, 2 of 2)

- [Synergy: A Next-Generation General-Purpose Agent for Open Agentic Web](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2603.28428/) (2026)
- [I wanted it to feel more personal: Customization of social AI as AI individualism in practice](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2607.17826/) (2026)

## Abstract (arXiv)

General-purpose conversational AI chatbots and AI companions increasingly provide young adolescents with emotionally supportive conversations, raising questions about how conversational style shapes anthropomorphism and emotional reliance. In a preregistered online experiment with 284 adolescent-parent dyads, youth aged 11-15 and their parents read two matched transcripts in which a chatbot responded to an everyday social problem using either a relational style (first-person, affiliative, commitment language) or a transparent style (explicit nonhumanness, informational tone). Adolescents more often preferred the relational than the transparent style, whereas parents were more likely to prefer transparent style than adolescents. Adolescents rated the relational chatbot as more human-like, likable, trustworthy and emotionally close, while perceiving both styles as similarly helpful. Adolescents who preferred relational style had lower family and peer relationship quality and higher stress and anxiety than those preferring transparent style or both chatbots. These findings identify conversational style as a key design lever for youth AI safety, showing that relational framing heightens anthropomorphism, trust and emotional closeness and can be especially appealing to socially and emotionally vulnerable adolescents, who may be at increased risk for emotional reliance on conversational AI.