MIT Professor Sherry Turkle is warning that chatbot use can cause psychological harm across every stage of life. Her new book, Artificial Intimacy, examines how simulated relationships may affect children, adults, and older people.
Turkle’s argument arrives as conversational artificial intelligence moves into education, work, health services, and private life. Her central concern is that software designed to imitate human attention may change how people seek care, companionship, and emotional support.
A Warning About Simulated Relationships
Chatbots can produce warm, responsive language within seconds. Some systems remember personal details or adopt a preferred tone. Those features may create the impression that the software understands a user’s feelings.
Yet a chatbot does not experience concern, affection, or responsibility. Its replies are generated through computational systems trained on large amounts of data. Turkle’s warning points to the psychological risks of treating that performance as a mutual relationship.
The book’s title, Artificial Intimacy, draws attention to this difference. A conversation may feel private and personal, even though the system cannot offer genuine empathy or human judgment.
Turkle contends that using chatbots harms people psychologically “in every chapter of life.”
That broad claim places the issue outside any single age group. Children may be learning how relationships work. Adults may turn to chatbots during stress or loneliness. Older people may use them for companionship when social contact is limited.
Turkle’s Long Focus on Technology
As a professor at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Turkle has studied the relationship between people and machines. Her work has often examined how digital tools influence identity, conversation, and social behavior.
The latest warning fits a larger public debate about whether AI companions support users or deepen isolation. Supporters say chatbots can offer immediate conversation without embarrassment or scheduling barriers. Critics argue that constant availability may encourage withdrawal from relationships that require patience and compromise.
Several questions sit at the center of that debate:
- Can users clearly distinguish simulated empathy from human care?
- Should children form emotional attachments to conversational software?
- What happens to sensitive personal information shared during intimate chats?
- Who is responsible when a chatbot gives harmful emotional guidance?
Benefits and Risks Require Careful Review
Turkle’s position is sweeping, but chatbot use varies widely. A short exchange for information differs from relying on a system as a primary friend, counselor, or romantic partner.
Some users may find limited practical value in automated conversation. A chatbot can help someone organize thoughts, practice language, or prepare questions for a professional. Such uses do not necessarily require believing that the system has feelings.
The risk may rise when companies market software as emotionally aware or design it to keep users engaged. Younger users and people facing grief, illness, or isolation may be especially open to persuasive responses.
Chatbots also lack the duties that govern licensed therapists and other care professionals. They may give inconsistent replies, reinforce a user’s assumptions, or fail to recognize danger. A convincing tone does not guarantee accurate or safe advice.
Pressure Builds for Clear Safeguards
Turkle’s argument suggests that policymakers, schools, families, and technology companies should examine more than technical performance. They must also consider how repeated chatbot use shapes trust and human connection.
Possible safeguards include clear notices that users are speaking with software, stronger protections for minors, and limits on manipulative engagement features. Independent research could also compare the effects of occasional use with long-term emotional dependence.
Artificial Intimacy frames chatbot adoption as a human issue, not just a technical one. The next phase of the debate will depend on evidence about who faces the greatest risk and under what conditions. The key question is whether these systems remain tools, or begin replacing relationships that people need to grow and recover.
A seasoned technology executive with a proven record of developing and executing innovative strategies to scale high-growth SaaS platforms and enterprise solutions. As a hands-on CTO and systems architect, he combines technical excellence with visionary leadership to drive organizational success.
