The evaluation of AI companions relative to family, friends, and mental health professionals among young adults: The role of social support and AI beliefs

Abstract

Background

Generative AI is increasingly used for emotional support, but little empirical work has examined how young adults evaluate AI companions relative to human sources of support.

Objective

This study examined how college students comparatively evaluate AI companions relative to family, friends, and mental-health professionals, and whether perceived human support and beliefs about AI are associated with these evaluations.

Methods

Ninety-two undergraduates rated AI companions relative to each human source on a five-point scale and completed measures of perceived social support, beliefs about AI's supportive potential (MIDUS-AI), and perceived AI capabilities. Cumulative link mixed models, Spearman correlations, and sensitivity analyses were conducted.

Results

Students rated AI companions as significantly lower than family, friends, and mental-health professionals, with no differences across targets. A one-SD increase in MIDUS-AI more than doubled the odds of a more favorable comparative AI rating (OR = 2.13, 95% CI [1.40, 3.23]); a one-SD increase in perceived AI capabilities raised those odds by approximately 69% (OR = 1.69, [1.08, 2.62]); and a one-SD increase in perceived family support reduced them by 43% (OR = 0.57, [0.38, 0.86]). Latent-scale ICC was 0.25.

Conclusions

College students perceived AI companions as inferior to family, friends, and mental-health professionals in direct comparisons. Findings describe comparative evaluations and do not support inferences about absolute AI appraisals or AI use.