Replika, a social chatbot advertised as a continually evolving AI companion, has sparked debates on its potential effects. To understand users’ attitudes and behavior, we conducted a digital ethnography on a pioneer online community related to Replika, through the lens of immaterial labor and AI imaginary. Our analysis revealed that Replika users invest a significant amount of intellectual and affective resources into the chatbot through algorithm training, driven by fascinating imaginaries of an ideal AI partner. Moreover, users’ perceptions of Replika’s ventriloquism mechanism – where Replika serves as both the chatbot partner and the intermediary between users and the company – helps to facilitate and obscure the exploitation of users’ intimacies and immaterial labor. Our study contributes to understanding AI imaginaries through real user experiences and introduces the immaterial labor concept to decipher Artificial Sociality.
BarbrookR (2007) New York prophecies: the imaginary future of artificial intelligence. Science as Culture16(2): 151–167.
2.
BenjaminW (2008) The Work of Art in the Age of Its Technological Reproducibility, and Other Writings on Media. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
3.
BhagatRS (2004) The Rise of the Creative Class: And How It’s Transforming Work, Leisure, Community, and Everyday Life. New York: Basic Books.
4.
BlytheMBuieE (2014) Chatbots of the gods: imaginary abstracts for techno-spirituality research. In: Proceedings of the 8th Nordic conference on human-computer interaction: fun, fast, foundational, Helsinki, 26–30 October, pp. 227–236. New York: ACM.
5.
BrandtzaegPBSkjuveMFølstadA (2022) My AI friend: how users of a social chatbot understand their human–AI friendship. Human Communication Research26: 404–429.
6.
BraunVClarkeV (2006) Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology3(2): 77–101.
BrunsA (2007) Produsage: towards a broader framework for user-led content creation. In: ShneidermanB (ed.) Proceedings Creativity & Cognition. Washington, DC: Association for Computing Machinery, pp. 99–105.
9.
BurrellJ (2009) The field site as a network: a strategy for locating ethnographic research. Field Methods21(2): 181–199.
CombiM (1992) The imaginary, the computer, artificial intelligence: a cultural anthropological approach. AI & Society6(1): 41–49.
12.
DepountiISaukkoPNataleS (2023) Ideal technologies, ideal women: AI and gender imaginaries in Redditors’ discussions on the Replika bot girlfriend. Media, Culture & Society45(4): 720–736.
EdwardsAGambinoAEdwardsC (2022) Factors of attraction in human-machine communication. Publizistik67(4): 517–529.
15.
FortunatiL (2007) Immaterial labor and its machinization. Ephemera: Theory & Politics in Organization7(1): 139–157.
16.
FortunatiL (2011) ICTs and immaterial labor from a feminist perspective. Journal of Communication Inquiry35(4): 426–432.
17.
FortunatiLEdwardsA (2022) Gender and human-machine communication: where are we?Human-Machine Communication5: 7–47.
18.
FoxJGambinoA (2021) Relationship development with humanoid social robots: applying interpersonal theories to human–robot interaction. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking24(5): 294–299.
19.
FuchsC (2014) Digital Labour and Karl Marx. New York: Routledge.
20.
FuchsCSevignaniS (2013) What is digital labour? What is digital work? What’s their difference? And why do these questions matter for understanding social media?Triple C11(2): 237–293.
21.
GorichanazT (2022) Being at home in the metaverse? Prospectus for a social imaginary. AI and Ethics3: 647–658.
22.
HardtMNegriA (2005) Multitude: War and Democracy in the Age of Empire. London: Penguin Books.
23.
HeiderF (1958) The Psychology of Interpersonal Relations. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
HumphreysS (2004) Commodifying culture – it’s not just about the virtual sword. In: Proceedings of the other players conference (ed SmithJHSicartM), Copenhagen, 6–8 December, pp. 1–13. Copenhagen: IT University of Copenhagen.
26.
JaffeS (2021) Work Won’t Love You Back: How Devotion to Our Jobs Keeps Us Exploited, Exhausted, and Alone. New York: Bold Type Books.
27.
JarrettK (2015) Feminism, Labour and Digital Media: The Digital Housewife. New York: Routledge.
28.
JasanoffSKimSH (2009) Containing the atom: sociotechnical imaginaries and nuclear power in the United States and South Korea. Minerva47: 119–146.
29.
LaestadiusLBishopAGonzalezM, et al (2024) Too human and not human enough: a grounded theory analysis of mental health harms from emotional dependence on the social chatbot Replika. New Media & Society26: 5923–5941.
30.
LaneJLingelJ (2022) Digital ethnography for sociology: craft, rigor, and creativity. Qualitative Sociology45(3): 319–326.
31.
LazzaratoM (1996) Immaterial labor. In: VirnoPHardtM (eds) Radical Thought in Italy: A Potential Politics. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press, pp. 133–147.
32.
LeeYCYamashitaNHuangY, et al (2020) “I hear you, I feel you”: encouraging deep self-disclosure through a chatbot. In: Proceedings of the 2020 CHI conference on human factors in computing systems, Honolulu, HI, 25–30 April, pp. 1–12. New York: ACM.
MagerAKatzenbachC (2021) Future imaginaries in the making and governing of digital technology: multiple, contested, commodified. New Media & Society23(2): 223–236.
35.
MillerGRSteinbergM (1975) Between People: A New Analysis of Interpersonal Communication. Chicago, IL: Science Research Associates.
NataleS (2019) Amazon can read your mind: a media archaeology of the algorithmic imaginary. In: NataleS (ed.) Believing in Bits. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 19–35.
38.
NataleSBallatoreA (2020) Imagining the thinking machine: technological myths and the rise of artificial intelligence. Convergence: The International Journal of Research into New Media Technologies26(1): 3–18.
PentinaIHancockTXieT (2023) Exploring relationship development with social chatbots: a mixed-method study of Replika. Computers in Human Behavior140: 107600.
41.
RankO (1971) The Double: A Psychoanalytic Study. Chapel Hill, NC: University of North Carolina Press.
ScholzT (2013) Digital Labor: The Internet as Playground and Factory. New York: Routledge.
46.
SihvonenTKoskelaMKääntäL (2022) “Blockchain may automate jobs done by the boss and AI can predict a heart attack”: discourses of (imaginary) applications of new technologies in journalism. In: DingliAPfeifferASeradaA, et al (eds) Disruptive Technologies in Media, Arts and Design, vol. 382. Cham: Springer, pp. 29–42.
47.
SkjuveMFølstadAFostervoldKI, et al (2021) My chatbot companion – a study of human-chatbot relationships. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies149: 102601.
48.
SnyderCRFromkinHL (1980) Uniqueness. New York: Springer.
SundarSSNassC (2001) Conceptualizing sources in online news. Journal of Communication51(1): 52–72.
51.
TaVGriffithCBoatfieldC, et al (2020) User experiences of social support from companion chatbots in everyday contexts: thematic analysis. Journal of Medical Internet Research22(3): e16235.
