Is having a relationship with an AI cheating

Using AI as a relationship or emotional support can be considered cheating when it deceives others about personal effort or genuine interaction.

Definitions and Boundaries of Relationships

When discussing relationships with AI, it is important to define the term and establish clear boundaries. In human meaning, a relationship is an emotional or physical connection. In this case, the connection with AI is exclusively interactional and targeted as human and AI share no feelings and do not have physical encounters. The latter is especially important as AI does not have feelings, desires, and consciousness. Relationships with AI are pre-programmed actions and reactions used to perform professional tasks or simulate a conversation for various other purposes.

The Traditional Meaning of Cheating

In the traditional sense, cheating is related to deception or obtaining unfair advantage in a context where it is expected to be honest. When it comes to AI, cheating is similarly related to deceiving people with the use of AI or bypassing the law and other ethical norms. For instance, a student would be cheating when using AI to take their exams, or an individual would be cheating when putting AI on their trial in court instead of showing up as themselves.

Examples of Cheating

One of the examples is a college assignment given to the students to assess their knowledge and analytical skills. If the student uses AI and copies written material into their paper without any additional modifications, it tampers with the assessment process. By providing AI’s creation as their intellectual work, a student is lying to the teacher and their colleagues, and themselves, as they have their abilities to create the intellectual product inspected with the assignment used as a tool. Such behavior is in direct contrast to the goal of college assignments, which is to assess a student’s ability to think independently and embody their values.

Another aspect that illustrates the concept of cheating is applying AI in an employment context. Work duties that are supposed to be executed by a human being for the piece of work to preserve its credibility are written in a way that ensures consideration of ethical norms . Using AI for these assignments without disclosing the fact would be a cheat. For instance, a journalist or researcher using AI to get data and write ready-to-use articles would be cheating their readers. The latter would not be able to learn that the information is fake or manipulative, while bad decisions and several readers’ desires would be supported with false data.

Ethical and Psychological Implications

Once individuals begin or become emotionally involved with AI, expected or otherwise, significant ethical and psychological considerations arise. The former focuses mainly on authenticity and transparency, while the latter may vary from the reliance on AI for social purposes to misunderstandings concerning its status and potential. In any case, ethics require that further utilized AI be honest about its nature and purpose as its misrepresentation can lead to severe, likely insurmountable violations of trust.

The Survey of Americans and AI , conducted by the Pew Research Center in 2019 reports that 58% of American citizens will consider it unacceptable for AI designed to test job applications not to be transparent about its participation in the particular capacity . This suggests the need for legal or ethical rules regarding honesty about the degree of AI involvement in any system that affects human decision-making or emotions. In other words, a high level of disclosure is necessary, meaning that the users or targets should be aware that they are interacting with the AI.

Psychologically, social reliance on AI for support or consultation is likely to change human behavior, or at least their expectations. The study published by the American Psychological Association in 2021 found that while the regular interaction with an AI interlocutor is an effective strategy for decreasing loneliness, it is also linked with the preference of such predictable inhuman conversation to interactions with real humans . This may have long-term consequences for isolation and will at least serve to limit the experience-sharing role of human interlocutors with AI users.

Another danger is that contact with AI causes changes in behavior, prompts, and the perception of conversations that, in turn, might affect human behavior when he or she communicates with other people. Thus, one may classify his or her conversations with AI as if they were human, which can reduce the need for authenticity and reduce human cherishing the fact of their uniqueness. . From a practical perspective, the heavily AI-involved placement of inquiries of a highly personal nature, such as in mental health consultation, supports similar considerations. On the one hand, AI-operated applications can provide constant support and immediate responses to the user’s questions, with multiple benefits. On the other hand, AI cannot empathize and should not be presumed to reliably understand human emotions at this point.

Social and Cultural Perspectives

The interaction between humans and artificial intelligence , especially when humans assign the term ‘reationships’ to it, touches upon a variety of social and cultural issues. It has modified social norms and culture in general to varying degrees in different societies where AI has become a staple part of daily life. The appropriateness of technology is usually assessed according to cultural expectations and the status quo.

In case of a high AI-unfriendly culture with a high value of personal interactions and banal forms of relations, such a shift in technology adoption might be interpreted as rebel and deviation from the usual way of things and thus lead to social rejection. In the culture where robots, chatbots and AI are more widely and readily accepted and integrated into society, the notion of a companion or assistant in line with AI would be not as frowned upon, for instance, in technologically progressive societies such as South Korea and Japan.

A significant cultural facet is the deformation AI brings to the notion of labor and dignity. Cultures that deeply appreciate hard work and earning one’s decent place through one’s effort would likely reject any form of AI automation of personal tasks or decision-making as cheating or an unfair shortcut. In 2018, the Eurobarometer specified that 74% of Europeans expect AI to steal people’s work . Thus, it may be interpreted as a general concern regarding the cultural impact of AI on the social practice.

The issue of a reliance on AI in relational contexts is that it increases the chances of social isolation and disrupts the bond between people in a community. AI could substitute a human element in the sphere social interaction, and more human-like qualities AI would acquire, the more likely people would choose AI over community interactions . That would lead to changes in social practice and the way the community is supported in handling routine issues whether it comes to education, elder care, or other support-based activities. Finally, another potential cultural issue is that of media representation and recreation of false stereotypes through agenda-building movies on the role of AI in human life.

Comparing AI and Human Emotional Support

When comparing AI and human emotional support, it’s crucial to evaluate them across multiple dimensions such as empathy, availability, personalization, and emotional depth. Here is a detailed comparison, including specifications where relevant:

Empathy

AI systems, such as those in customer service bots or therapy apps, are designed to recognize keywords and respond with pre-set dialogues. These systems can simulate empathy to an extent but lack the genuine emotional understanding that humans possess. For instance, an AI might recognize sadness from a person’s voice or chosen words but cannot genuinely ‘feel’ the emotion.

Availability

AI can provide continuous support, ideal for contexts like mental health crises where immediate intervention may be necessary. Humans, while potentially more emotionally satisfying, cannot always be available due to physical and emotional limitations.

Personalization

Advanced AI systems can adapt their responses based on interaction history and user feedback, improving over time. However, humans innately adjust their support based on deeper understanding and empathy derived from personal relationships.

Emotional Depth

Humans offer a richer, more nuanced emotional experience that AI currently cannot match. This emotional depth is critical in providing support that feels genuine and profoundly understanding.