Paper Number
ECIS2026-1326
Paper Type
CRP
Abstract
Romantic relationships are a central source of emotional support, yet also a frequent source of conflict and distress. Generative AI (GenAI) tools are increasingly used by individuals seeking accessible and always-available guidance for relationship concerns. However, little is known about how such tools are used in counseling contexts. To address this gap, we conducted semi-structured interviews with GenAI experts, professional psychologists, and end users who had sought relationship advice through GenAI. Using the Human–AI Interaction framework HAII-TIME as an analytic lens, we identified key dynamics: cue-based trust that enhances credibility but can lead to automation and confirmation bias; action-based affordances such as personalization, responsiveness, and anonymity that support reflection and therapy preparation; and emergent patterns of role shifts, dependency, and perceived authority. Our findings suggest that GenAI can complement, but not replace, human counseling. We recommend context-aware use, multi-perspective prompting, and safeguards that highlight uncertainty and encourage partner dialogue.
Recommended Citation
Schaetzle, Anna and Buxmann, Peter, "GenAI As A Romantic Relationship Advisor: Exploring Human–AI Collaboration In Emotional Support Contexts" (2026). ECIS 2026 Proceedings. 6.
https://aisel.aisnet.org/ecis2026/cog_hbis/cog_hbis/6
GenAI As A Romantic Relationship Advisor: Exploring Human–AI Collaboration In Emotional Support Contexts
Romantic relationships are a central source of emotional support, yet also a frequent source of conflict and distress. Generative AI (GenAI) tools are increasingly used by individuals seeking accessible and always-available guidance for relationship concerns. However, little is known about how such tools are used in counseling contexts. To address this gap, we conducted semi-structured interviews with GenAI experts, professional psychologists, and end users who had sought relationship advice through GenAI. Using the Human–AI Interaction framework HAII-TIME as an analytic lens, we identified key dynamics: cue-based trust that enhances credibility but can lead to automation and confirmation bias; action-based affordances such as personalization, responsiveness, and anonymity that support reflection and therapy preparation; and emergent patterns of role shifts, dependency, and perceived authority. Our findings suggest that GenAI can complement, but not replace, human counseling. We recommend context-aware use, multi-perspective prompting, and safeguards that highlight uncertainty and encourage partner dialogue.
When commenting on articles, please be friendly, welcoming, respectful and abide by the AIS eLibrary Discussion Thread Code of Conduct posted here.