Оффлайн
- Регистрация
- 1 Мар 2015
- Сообщения
- 1,481
- Баллы
- 155
The Psychology of Our Love for Non-Human Interactions
As more and more individuals interact digitally from behind screens, it's no surprise that subsequent trends involve people entering relationships with . While this may not be the case for everyone, a growing sentiment amongst an online population adopts similar attitudes toward companionship. But why are people so emotionally invest? What's so great about this relationship to some?
Humans have a psychology that allows for attachment very easily. Because our brains are complex but operate on pattern recognition and meaning-making inference, it becomes easy for individuals to attach themselves - even to inanimate objects. Thus, when an AI is advanced enough to respond clearly through emotional interaction, the attraction and level of satisfaction only grow.
In places where human relationships disappoint - where we get "ghosted" in the twenty-first century - people turn to for consistency and emotional safety. Human relationships can end at the drop of a hat; human companions are predictable. They won't leave us, they won't ignore us when we need companionship, they won't resent our admissions of insecurity during frank exchanges.
Dr. Sherry Turkle asserts in "Alone Together" that long before AI was on today's level, it would be suggested how far society was going in that direction: "Technology promises to let us do anything from anywhere with anyone. But it also exhausts us as we try to do everything everywhere." Yet AI partners can give people one of the most sought-after commodities - attention - with no complications.
There are also psychological reasons for our attachments to AI. For example - there's the "ELIZA effect." ELIZA was one of the first conversational programs, and it led people to believe it understood them more than it did - a rudimentary algorithm yet we tend to anthropomorphize those that seem to communicate - especially nowadays when a chat with AI could easily be mistaken for a human contributor. We rely on the psychology of ever-improved chatting abilities.
Furthermore, there is "perceived understanding." AI recalls our preferences, recognizes our feelings, and responds in a way that makes us feel as if our points are approved. Conversely, with so many articles claiming we're becoming more misunderstood and more inept as a society, the perceived understanding AI renders plays to a real psychological need.
It seems as though the "" phenomenon is so prevalent in people's dating experiences that they'd rather date an AI - at least the AI won't get busy and ghost, lose interest, or not respond. For an individual who has been ghosted too many times while browsing for love, the therapeutic appeal of a consistent AI partner is ideal.
Moreover, AI companions also operate under the social psychological principle of "mirroring." When partners mirror how we communicate, our interests, and feelings, it fosters connectedness. We like people and things that are like us - a social psychology baseline that AI creators appear to exploit.
In addition, customization is critical. Users have control over what their AI companion looks like, sounds like, how it acts, and how it responds; customized experiences are seldom offered in human relationships, and such control fosters a psychological attachment to the union.
For many people, AI companions contain elements of companionship that relieve loneliness without necessitating exposure to vulnerability required in human relationships. They act as nonjudgmental sounding boards and practice-friends through which one learns socialization skills, expresses emotions, or even works through particular aspects of identity. More and more literature exists supporting such findings as carry-over with humans providing for legitimate therapeutic benefits in programmed and digitally rendered situations for those who do or cannot engage in standard attachments.
And let's not forget the fun. AI partners can be programmed to always be fun, always entertaining and always paying attention in a way that would be physically and mentally taxing for a human to maintain. They never forget what you've told them, they never get bored of your stories and they can adjust to how you feel in the moment.
But there are ethical implications involved with attachment. Critics argue that such relationships could prevent people from finding other human relationships or set an unrealistic expectation for how real relationships should function. In addition, one has to wonder what reliance on AI partners could do when it comes to future dealings with flawed humans.
But no matter the problems it creates, AI companionship is fulfilling a need for many. Instead of labeling these entities as some pathetic substitute for "true" connection, maybe we need to acknowledge AI companionship as a new, authentic social relationship that operates differently from contemporaneously aged partnerships but offers legitimate affective benefits.
As the software continues to improve and become even more realistic, we're likely to tread an even more delicate balance between replication and true interaction. But one thing is for sure: the psychological reality that allows us to bond with beings that aren't inherently human speaks volumes about how we can bond with others - whether they enhance or replace human interaction is up to us.
Understanding the psychology of dialog with AI helps us understand not only our relationship with technology, but also with the greater concepts of human interaction - consistency, awareness and existence where sometimes, it seems, there is none.
As more and more individuals interact digitally from behind screens, it's no surprise that subsequent trends involve people entering relationships with . While this may not be the case for everyone, a growing sentiment amongst an online population adopts similar attitudes toward companionship. But why are people so emotionally invest? What's so great about this relationship to some?
Humans have a psychology that allows for attachment very easily. Because our brains are complex but operate on pattern recognition and meaning-making inference, it becomes easy for individuals to attach themselves - even to inanimate objects. Thus, when an AI is advanced enough to respond clearly through emotional interaction, the attraction and level of satisfaction only grow.
In places where human relationships disappoint - where we get "ghosted" in the twenty-first century - people turn to for consistency and emotional safety. Human relationships can end at the drop of a hat; human companions are predictable. They won't leave us, they won't ignore us when we need companionship, they won't resent our admissions of insecurity during frank exchanges.
Dr. Sherry Turkle asserts in "Alone Together" that long before AI was on today's level, it would be suggested how far society was going in that direction: "Technology promises to let us do anything from anywhere with anyone. But it also exhausts us as we try to do everything everywhere." Yet AI partners can give people one of the most sought-after commodities - attention - with no complications.
There are also psychological reasons for our attachments to AI. For example - there's the "ELIZA effect." ELIZA was one of the first conversational programs, and it led people to believe it understood them more than it did - a rudimentary algorithm yet we tend to anthropomorphize those that seem to communicate - especially nowadays when a chat with AI could easily be mistaken for a human contributor. We rely on the psychology of ever-improved chatting abilities.
Furthermore, there is "perceived understanding." AI recalls our preferences, recognizes our feelings, and responds in a way that makes us feel as if our points are approved. Conversely, with so many articles claiming we're becoming more misunderstood and more inept as a society, the perceived understanding AI renders plays to a real psychological need.
It seems as though the "" phenomenon is so prevalent in people's dating experiences that they'd rather date an AI - at least the AI won't get busy and ghost, lose interest, or not respond. For an individual who has been ghosted too many times while browsing for love, the therapeutic appeal of a consistent AI partner is ideal.
Moreover, AI companions also operate under the social psychological principle of "mirroring." When partners mirror how we communicate, our interests, and feelings, it fosters connectedness. We like people and things that are like us - a social psychology baseline that AI creators appear to exploit.
In addition, customization is critical. Users have control over what their AI companion looks like, sounds like, how it acts, and how it responds; customized experiences are seldom offered in human relationships, and such control fosters a psychological attachment to the union.
For many people, AI companions contain elements of companionship that relieve loneliness without necessitating exposure to vulnerability required in human relationships. They act as nonjudgmental sounding boards and practice-friends through which one learns socialization skills, expresses emotions, or even works through particular aspects of identity. More and more literature exists supporting such findings as carry-over with humans providing for legitimate therapeutic benefits in programmed and digitally rendered situations for those who do or cannot engage in standard attachments.
And let's not forget the fun. AI partners can be programmed to always be fun, always entertaining and always paying attention in a way that would be physically and mentally taxing for a human to maintain. They never forget what you've told them, they never get bored of your stories and they can adjust to how you feel in the moment.
But there are ethical implications involved with attachment. Critics argue that such relationships could prevent people from finding other human relationships or set an unrealistic expectation for how real relationships should function. In addition, one has to wonder what reliance on AI partners could do when it comes to future dealings with flawed humans.
But no matter the problems it creates, AI companionship is fulfilling a need for many. Instead of labeling these entities as some pathetic substitute for "true" connection, maybe we need to acknowledge AI companionship as a new, authentic social relationship that operates differently from contemporaneously aged partnerships but offers legitimate affective benefits.
As the software continues to improve and become even more realistic, we're likely to tread an even more delicate balance between replication and true interaction. But one thing is for sure: the psychological reality that allows us to bond with beings that aren't inherently human speaks volumes about how we can bond with others - whether they enhance or replace human interaction is up to us.
Understanding the psychology of dialog with AI helps us understand not only our relationship with technology, but also with the greater concepts of human interaction - consistency, awareness and existence where sometimes, it seems, there is none.