DURHAM, England: Some of us now use generative artificial intelligence (gen AI) to talk through difficult feelings. We may ask a chatbot to write an email or plan a holiday, but we also tell it that we have had a rotten day or feel anxious about a presentation.
A 2025 US survey of 1,058 people aged 12 to 21 found that 13 per cent had sought advice from gen AI when feeling sad, angry or nervous. Among those aged 18 to 21, the figure was 22 per cent. These findings suggest that turning to gen AI for emotional or mental health support is already relatively common among young people.
So is gen AI a poor substitute for a friend? Human-written replies may seem the obvious source of greater support.
However, in some experiments, including our own, people have rated gen AI responses more highly.
PROVIDING "ACTIONABLE SUPPORT"
Our team at the universities of Manchester and Durham conducted five experiments comparing emotional-support messages written by people with those produced by large language models (LLMs), the systems behind chatbots such as ChatGPT.
In one experiment, 390 participants imagined situations involving anger, sadness or fear. They then read either a human-written or gen AI response without being told its source. For the anger and fear scenarios, participants rated the gen AI messages as more emotionally supportive. There was no reliable difference for sadness.
Gen AI messages also improved some of the emotions participants reported, although the pattern varied. In the fear scenario, for example, they increased calm more than human messages but did not produce a greater reduction in fear itself.
Our findings fit a recent review of 23 studies. Overall, people tended to rate gen AI messages as more empathic, meaning that they appeared understanding and caring, than human-written ones. Researchers call this the “AI advantage”.
One possible reason is consistency. Gen AI can produce a structured response on demand, while people may feel tired or unsure what to say. It also tends to include a concrete suggestion that the recipient can follow.
Our experiments tested possible explanations for this advantage. In one experiment, explicitly acknowledging and validating the recipient’s feelings did not account for the greater emotional improvement associated with gen AI.
Two further experiments found stronger evidence for what we called “actionable suppo...





English (US)