Aug 2026· Pakistan Journal of Positive Psychology· Vol 3, pp. 244-252· 0 citations· 21 references
TL;DR
Perceived understanding in AI conversations is a psychologically constructed experience that is driven by interactional design, not by machine understanding, which not only boosts user engagement and trust but also introduces the risk of emotional over-attribution and reliance on AI systems.
Abstract
The recent advancements in conversational artificial intelligence have developed systems that are able to mimic human conversation, which can create the perception of hearing or understanding from a machine. This situation poses significant psychological issues about the nature of how human understanding is generated with AI, even though it doesn't have a real brain. What are the psychological mechanisms in relation to a perceived understanding when engaging in AI conversation and what are the key interactional factors that help create this experience? A conceptual mixed-methods approach was used that involved the results of human–computer interaction research, social psychology, and computational linguistics. It involved secondary empirical literature analysis and modelling of perceived understanding as a function of language alignment, contextual coherence, personalization, response timing and anthropomorphic cues. The findings suggest that high linguistic alignment, contextual coherence and adaptive personalization are important factors for perceived understanding. Faster response times and anthropomorphic design attributes contribute further toward social presence and emotional interaction. Together, these factors create a sense of empathy and understanding, leading users to attribute awareness to an algorithmic system where none exists. Based on the above findings, the study concludes that perceived understanding in AI conversations is a psychologically constructed experience that is driven by interactional design, not by machine understanding. This not only boosts user engagement and trust but also introduces the risk of emotional over-attribution and reliance on AI systems.
An understanding gap is illuminated: user attributions are partly guided by epistemic orientation and experiential ascriptions that make sophisticated simulation appear as understanding, especially in affective interaction, raising urgent questions about epistemic trust, relational vulnerability, and the ethics of AI c...
Erez Firt, Rinat B. Rosenberg-Kima· AI & SOCIETY· 0 citations
People frequently encounter minor aversive experiences-such as rude interactions or social slights-that, while not major events, can still affect psychological well-being. In this research, we examine how people experience and perceive social support from artificial intelligence (AI) following such experiences. Drawing...
Roshni Raveendhran, Trevor A. Foulk· Journal of Personality and S...· 0 citations
An integrative narrative review of interdisciplinary evidence on AI psychological companionship concludes that AI companions are consequential relational technologies whose net effect on public mental health will depend on deliberate scientific, ethical, and regulatory choices.
Sofia Elias, Nurul Aisyah Kamrozzaman· International journal of res...· 0 citations
Large language models increasingly elicit responses that exceed instrumental use, inviting users to relate to conversational systems as if they possessed an inner perspective, memory, and affective responsiveness. This paper argues that the relevant phenomenon is not adequately captured by the binary between machine se...
David Leucas, Sylvia Iasulaitis, Helena de Medeiros Caseli· 2026 14th International Conf...· 0 citations
It is demonstrated that participants showed greater attitude change toward their partner's counterattitudinal position when their partner was framed as an AI (vs. a human) and this occurs because people tend to view AI as inherently less persuadable than humans.
Geoff Tomaino, Sung-Jin Jung· Journal of Personality and S...· 0 citations