1

I’m looking for a precise term to describe the phenomenon where a human forms an emotional, social, or relationship-like bond with an AI chatbot or digital agent, treating it as if it has personhood or emotional presence.

Existing terms get close, but none seem to match the full concept:

  • anthropomorphism — attributing human traits to non-humans, but not necessarily forming a relationship

  • parasocial relationship — typically one-sided and oriented toward media figures rather than interactive agents

  • ELIZA effect — perceiving understanding where none exists, but not specifically about relational attachment

I have not found an established term that captures the relational, two-way illusion people experience with AI conversational agents.

If no word already exists, I am considering the neologism:

  • cyberpomorphic (adj.) — describing a human tendency to form emotional or relational bonds with a digital system as if it possesses personhood.
  • cyberpomorphism (n.) — the phenomenon of doing so.

My questions are:

Is there an existing English term that already covers this meaning?

If not, does this neologism follow reasonable morphological patterns in English?

Thank you.

Improve this question
New contributor
digit3 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering. Check out our Code of Conduct.
18
  • 3
    Will anthropomorphism do? Commented Dec 5 at 16:59
  • 9
    To expand on the existing comments, it seems like you're trying to model your term on "anthropomorphism," and welding "cyber" onto it. But I think you need to examine the meaning and etymology of "anthropomorphism" more closely. Basically, "human-shaped": Seeing human patterns in the non-human. If anything, "cybermorhpism" would mean seeing non-tech as if it were tech. (Also, note: the "po" was part of anthropos.) Commented Dec 5 at 17:14
  • 1
    As a matter of logic, there cannot be a specific well established term for a very new phenomenon. The proposed neologism, in addition to the faults already pointed out by Mr Bonner, is on a par with anthropomorphism in not implying anything about emotional bonds. Commented Dec 5 at 17:28
  • 2
    @EdwinAshworth, it is most definitely not true that 'all other SE sites' deal 'with questions whose answers are checkable in authoritative resources'. The oldest SE sites are the ones devoted to programming, which were created precisely to enable those who know something that is not 'in authoritative resources' to share that knowledge. Commented 2 days ago
  • 4
    "Cyberpomorphic" is horrible! The root of "anthropomorphic" is "anthropo-", not "anthro-". So "cybermorphic" would be the corresponding term. Commented yesterday

3 Answers 3

Reset to default
11

There is a standard and widely used term, "artificial intimacy," that is according to the Wikipedia article:

a form of human-AI interaction in which an individual will form social connections, emotional bonds, or intimate relationships with various forms of artificial intelligence, including chatbots, virtual assistants, and other artificial entities.

If you want to be more precise, try techno-intimacy.

Improve this answer
7
  • @WeatherVane, it's a one-sided story. Parasocial interaction refers to a form psychological relationship of a person with a public figure. Commented Dec 5 at 17:28
  • 1
    Of course it's a one-sided story – that's the point. Commented Dec 5 at 18:38
  • Does Wikipedia similarly define techno-intimacy? Commented Dec 5 at 19:43
  • 1
    @EdwinAshworth No, Wikipedia doesn't define that term. I read this term a couple of years back in an article. Commented 2 days ago
  • 1
    179 000 hits for "artificial intimacy" [raw Google data]. 170 000 for "techno-intimacy": seems the best answer. You might add a definition for this also. Commented yesterday
8

I suggest parasocial interaction even though the OP ruled it out, because the original meaning has changed over time. Here are some references starting with:

The Wikipedia entry for Parasocial interaction

Parasocial interaction (PSI) refers to a kind of psychological relationship experienced by an audience in their mediated encounters with performers in the mass media, particularly on television and online platforms. Viewers or listeners come to consider media personalities as friends, despite having no or limited interactions with them. PSI is described as an illusory experience, such that media audiences interact with personas (e.g., talk show hosts, celebrities, fictional characters, social media influencers) as if they are engaged in a reciprocal relationship with them. The term was coined by Donald Horton and Richard Wohl in 1956.

The article describes the evolution of the term and its relevance in social media more generally.

The OP rules out a one-sided relationship, but media figures, soap dramas and AI do not have a relationship with the viewer, of course.

Cambridge Dictionary has

parasocial
adjective
involving or relating to a connection that someone feels between themselves and a famous person they do not know, a character in a book, film, TV series, etc., or an artificial intelligence

‘Parasocial’ is Cambridge Dictionary’s Word of the Year 2025

Interest in one-sided parasocial relationships that people form with celebrities, influencers and AI chatbots has driven Cambridge Dictionary's Word of the Year for 2025.

Effects of attractions and social attributes on peoples’ usage intention and media dependence towards chatbot: The mediating role of parasocial interaction and emotional support

It is important to explore the relationship between humans and chatbots to improve human–robot interaction in the era of artificial intelligence. This study aims to explore the effects of attractions and social attributes of chatbots on users’ media dependency and usage intention of chatbots, as well as the role of users’ para-social interaction and emotional support gained from chatbots.

When Human-AI Interactions Become Parasocial: Agency and Anthropomorphism in Affective Design

Trust is essentially the glue between each of the previous concepts, as it orients people to their social setting, thereby affecting how they configure the social presence of chatbots, how and what they communicate, and whether they begin to attribute some socially stable role to a chatbot conversation partner (as in a parasocial relationship), in addition to informing their perceptions of platform affordances.

These references support the idea that chatbots and AIs are now included within the scope of parasocial interaction.

Improve this answer
1
  • 2
    179 000 hits [raw Google data]. Very relevant, though a hypernym. Commented yesterday
4

A term that has gained traction among psychologists is AI attachment. For example, the Psychology Today article “AI Attachment: Are We the Experiment?” includes the term in the title. The study “What makes you attached to social companion AI? A two-stage exploratory mixed-method study” features a section titled “AI attachment”, where the term is defined as follows:

Based on previous research on AI attachment, we define AI attachment as the cumulative emotional experience individuals have with SCAI (Social companion artificial intelligence) and their interpersonal and social responses (Norman, 2007, Sung et al., 2007).

Improve this answer
1
  • 1
    24 000 hits [raw Google data] Commented yesterday

You must log in to answer this question.

Start asking to get answers

Find the answer to your question by asking.

Ask question

Explore related questions

See similar questions with these tags.