# Beyond Feeling Better: Capability-Sustaining Emotional Dialogue as a Longitudinal Research Paradigm

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2607.27851 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2607.27851/

## Key facts

- No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 10 of its 39 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 30 Jul 2026.

## Builds on (most cited first, 10 of 10)

- [Towards Emotional Support Dialog Systems](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2106.01144/) (2021)
- [Improving Multi-turn Emotional Support Dialogue Generation with Lookahead Strategy Planning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2210.04242/) (2022)
- [PAL: Persona-Augmented Emotional Support Conversation Generation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2212.09235/) (2022)
- [Neural steering vectors reveal dose and exposure-dependent impacts of human-AI relationships](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2512.01991/) (2025)
- [Who's in Charge? Disempowerment Patterns in Real-World LLM Usage](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2601.19062/) (2026)
- [HEART: A Unified Benchmark for Assessing Humans and LLMs in Emotional Support Dialogue](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2601.19922/) (2026)
- [Understanding Teen Overreliance on AI Companion Chatbots Through Self-Reported Reddit Narratives](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2507.15783/) (2025)
- ["Death" of a Chatbot: Investigating and Designing Toward Psychologically Safe Endings for Human-AI Relationships](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2602.07193/) (2026)
- [Auditing Stealth Sycophancy in Mental-Health Dialogue: Structured Clinical-State Diagnostics and Clean Matched Benchmarks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2605.03472/) (2026)
- [When Seekers Are Hard to Help: Evaluating Emotional Support Dialogue Systems in Worst-Case Interactions](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2605.28228/) (2026)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Emotional dialogue research includes two influential strategy traditions. Empathetic dialogue prioritizes understanding a speaker's emotional experience. Emotional support conversation selects and sequences support for the seeker's current needs. Sustained use introduces a further goal. Effective support should sustain users' capacities for emotion regulation, coping, self-endorsed decisions, and social connection across the interaction lifecycle. We propose capability-sustaining emotional dialogue (CSED) as a longitudinal research paradigm that aligns supportive strategy with this goal and organizes data, models, system design, evaluation, and governance around repeated use, non-use, transition, and termination. A targeted literature-and-corpus audit motivates this position. In a PRISMA-ScR-guided sample, 95% of 60 system-building papers pursue relief-oriented goals. None evaluates capability or longitudinal outcomes, and only 1 considers dependency, autonomy, or termination risk. In 300 ESConv supporter turns, capability-relevant functions appear in 43.0%, while generic suggestions account for 22.0%, compared with 4.0% reappraisal, 6.7% self-efficacy support, and 0.3% boundary behavior. We release a protocol for extending the audit to model behavior. An illustrative process model connects latent user capability to six design commitments, four evaluation timescales, and lifecycle constraints. The resulting agenda makes CSED testable across data, policy design, training, evaluation, and governance.