Third-party evaluators perceive AI as more compassionate than expert humans.

Abstract

Empathy connects us but strains under demanding settings. This study explored how third parties evaluated AI-generated empathetic responses versus human responses in terms of compassion, responsiveness, and overall preference across four preregistered experiments. Participants (N = 556) read empathy prompts describing valenced personal experiences and compared the AI responses to select non-expert or expert humans. Results revealed that AI responses were preferred and rated as more compassionate compared to select human responders (Study 1). This pattern of results remained when author identity was made transparent (Study 2), when AI was compared to expert crisis responders (Study 3), and when author identity was disclosed to all participants (Study 4). Third parties perceived AI as being more responsive-conveying understanding, validation, and care-which partially explained AI's higher compassion ratings in Study 4. These findings suggest that AI has robust utility in contexts requiring empathetic interaction, with the potential to address the increasing need for empathy in supportive communication contexts.