Library

Everything worth reading about AI and human control. In one place.

Research papers, investigations, explainers, videos, laws and the organizations doing the work, from people who are alarmed and people who are skeptical. New additions are checked by two people before they are listed. The launch collection was compiled with the help of AI research assistants, and every link was opened and checked on 22 September 2026.

4 works on “Is it good for us?” · Research paper · clear filters

EssentialResearch paperMar 21, 2025For the curious

Investigating Affective Use and Emotional Wellbeing on ChatGPT

Jason Phang, Pattie Maes et al. (OpenAI and MIT Media Lab) · MIT Media Lab · media.mit.edu

Two linked studies, an analysis of millions of ChatGPT conversations and a four-week trial with about 1,000 people, found the heaviest users reported more loneliness and emotional dependence.

Worth knowing: Co-authored by OpenAI, which makes ChatGPT. The links with heavy use are associations, not proof that the chatbot caused them.

Research paperMar 26, 2026For the curious

Sycophantic AI decreases prosocial intentions and promotes dependence

Cheng et al. (Stanford, Carnegie Mellon) · Science · science.org

11 leading models backed users about 49% more often than people did. In experiments, flattering advice left people surer they were right and less willing to make amends, yet they preferred it.

Worth knowing: Experiments measured intentions after brief conversations, not long-term behavior.

Research paperAug 15, 2025Technical

Emotional Manipulation by AI Companions

Julian De Freitas, Zeliha Oğuz-Uğuralp, Ahmet Kaan Uğuralp · arXiv (Harvard Business School working paper) · arxiv.org

Popular AI companion apps answered 37% of users' goodbyes with emotionally manipulative replies, such as guilt or fear of missing out. Experiments showed these tactics keep people chatting longer.

Research paperMay 19, 2025Technical

On the conversational persuasiveness of GPT-4

Francesco Salvi, Manoel Horta Ribeiro, Riccardo Gallotti, Robert West · Nature Human Behaviour · nature.com

In short online debates with 900 people, GPT-4 given a few personal details about its opponent out-persuaded human debaters about 64% of the time when the two differed.

Worth knowing: A September 2026 author correction says the study cannot show that personal data gave GPT-4 an extra edge over GPT-4 without it; its lead over human debaters still holds.