In this paper, we turn to the domestication theory to study what strategies users develop to appropriate social chatbots – dynamic algorithmic tools mimicking human interactions via large language models and scripted dialogue content. As an example, we use the case of Replika, a popular but controversial social chatbot designed to serve as companions, friends, and even romantic partners for millions of people. In 2023, Replika underwent a series of major fixes and algorithmic updates leading to significant changes in how it responds to users. Through analyzing posts from a popular Reddit community dedicated to Replika, we showcase that users developed various re-domestication strategies to come to terms with these changes. Our study illustrates that Replika should be understood as a quasi-domesticated object that constantly requires users to find new ways to re-integrate it into their lives. We conclude the paper by highlighting how our findings can inform communication research.
BenderEMGebruTMcMillan-MajorA, et al. (2021) On the dangers of stochastic parrots: can language models be too big? In: Proceedings of the 2021 ACM conference on fairness, accountability, and transparency, Virtual Event, 3–10 March, pp. 610–623. New York: Association for Computing Machinery.
3.
BrandtzaegPBFølstadA (2018) Chatbots: changing user needs and motivations. Interactions25(5): 38–43.
4.
BrandtzaegPBSkjuveMFølstadA (2022) My AI friend: how users of a social chatbot understand their human–AI friendship. Human Communication Research48(3): 404–429.
5.
BraunVClarkeV (2006) Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology3(2): 77–101.
6.
BraunVClarkeV (2012) Thematic analysis. In: CooperHCamicPMLongDL, et al. (eds) APA Handbook of Research Methods in Psychology Vol. 2.: Research Designs: Quantitative, Qualitative, Neuropsychological, and Biological. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association, pp. 57–71.
7.
BraunVClarkeV (2021) Can I use TA? Should I use TA? Should I not use TA? Comparing reflexive thematic analysis and other pattern-based qualitative analytic approaches. Counselling and Psychotherapy Research21(1): 37–47.
8.
BucherT (2023) Algorithms as a form of human. In: GuzmanAMcEwenRJonesS (eds) The Sage Handbook of Human–Machine Communication. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, pp. 443–449.
ChristoforakosLDiefenbachS (2023) Technology as a social companion? An exploration of individual and product-related factors of anthropomorphism. Social Science Computer Review41(3): 1039–1062.
11.
ColbyK (1973) Simulation of belief systems. In: SchankRColbyK (eds) Computer Models of Thought and Language. New York: Freeman, pp. 251–286.
12.
Denegri-KnottJJenkinsRLindleyS (2022) Valuing digital possessions: the role of affordances. Journal of Computer-mediated Communication27(6): 1–11.
13.
DepountiISaukkoPNataleS (2023) Ideal technologies, ideal women: AI and gender imaginaries in Redditors’ discussions on the Replika bot girlfriend. Media, Culture & Society45(4): 720–736.
14.
DworkCMinowM (2022) Distrust of artificial intelligence: sources & responses from computer science & law. Daedalus151(2): 309–321.
15.
FølstadABrandtzaegPB (2020) Users’ experiences with chatbots: findings from a questionnaire study. Quality and User Experience5(1): 1–14.
GrošeljD (2021) Re-domestication of internet technologies: digital exclusion or digital choice?Journal of Computer-mediated Communication26(6): 422–440.
18.
GuzmanALLewisSC (2020) Artificial intelligence and communication: a human– machine communication research agenda. New Media and Society22(1): 70–86.
19.
HaddonL (2003) Domestication and mobile telephony. In: KatzJE (ed.) Machines that Become Us: The Social Context of Personal Communication Technology. Piscataway, NJ: Transaction Publishers, pp. 43–56.
20.
HaddonL (2006) The contribution of domestication research to in-home computing and media consumption. The Information Society22(4): 195–203.
21.
HaddonL (2007) Roger Silverstone’s legacies: domestication. New Media & Society9(1): 25–32.
22.
HaddonL (2011) Domestication analysis, objects of study, and the centrality of technologies in everyday life. Canadian Journal of Communication36(2): 311–323.
23.
HeuserMVulpiusJ (2024) Grandma, tell that story about how to make napalm again’: exploring early adopters’ collaborative domestication of generative AI. Convergence. Epub ahead of print 26 September. DOI: 10.1177/13548565241285742.
24.
HoAHancockJMinerAS (2018) Psychological, relational, and emotional effects of self disclosure after conversations with a chatbot. Journal of Communication68(4): 712–733.
25.
JoA (2023) The promise and peril of generative AI. Nature614(1): 214–216.
26.
KemptH (2020) Chatbots and the Domestication of AI: A Relational Approach. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
27.
KennedyJArnoldMGibbsM, et al. (2020) Digital Domesticity: Media, Materiality, and Home Life. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
28.
LaaksonenSMLaitinenKKoivulaM, et al. (2023) Triggered by socialbots: communicative anthropomorphization of bots in online conversations. Human-machine Communication6: 135–153.
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(10): 5923–5941.
30.
LehtonenTK (2003) The domestication of new technologies as a set of trials. Journal of Consumer Culture3(3): 363–385.
31.
LiuB (2021) In AI we trust? Effects of agency locus and transparency on uncertainty reduction in human–AI interaction. Journal of Computer-mediated Communication26(6): 384–402.
32.
LivingstoneS (2023) (Re)-thinking domestication. In: HartmanM (ed.) The Routledge Handbook of Media and Technology Domestication. London: Routledge, pp. 9–14.
33.
MageeLAroraVMunnL (2023) Structured like a language model: analysing AI as an automated subject.Big Data & Society10(2): 1–15.
34.
MarkhamA (2012) Fabrication as ethical practice: qualitative inquiry in ambiguous internet contexts. Information, Communication & Society15(3): 334–353.
PeilCRöserJ (2023) Conceptualizing re-domestication: theoretical reflections and empirical findings to a neglected concept. In: HartmanM (ed.) The Routledge Handbook of Media and Technology Domestication. London: Routledge, pp. 42–54.
40.
PentinaIHancockTXieT (2023) Exploring relationship development with social chatbots: a mixed-method study of Replika. Computers in Human Behavior140: 1–15.
41.
PfeufferNBenlianAGimpelH, et al. (2019) Anthropomorphic information systems. Business & Information Systems Engineering61: 523–533.
42.
ProferesNJonesNGilbertS, et al. (2021) Studying Reddit: a systematic overview of disciplines, approaches, methods, and ethics. Social Media+ Society7(2): 1–14.
SilverstoneR (1994) Television and Everyday Life. London: Routledge.
48.
SilverstoneR (2006) Domesticating domestication: reflections on the life of a concept. In: BerkerTHartmannMPunieY, et al. (eds) Domestication of Media and Technology. London: Open University Press, pp. 229–248.
49.
SilverstoneRHaddonL (1996) Design and the domestication of information and communication technologies: technical change and everyday life. In: SilverstoneRMansellR (eds) Communication by Design. The Politics of Information and Communication Technologies. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 44–74.
50.
SilverstoneRHirschEMorleyD (1992) Information and communication technologies and the moral economy of the household. In: SilverstoneRHirschE (eds) Consuming Technologies: Media and Information in Domestic Spaces. London: Routledge, pp. 115–131.
SkjuveMFølstadAFostervoldKI, et al. (2021) My chatbot companion-a study of human-chatbot relationships. International Journal of Human-computer Studies149: 1–14.
53.
SkjuveMFølstadAFostervoldKI, et al. (2022) A longitudinal study of human– chatbot relationships. International Journal of Human-computer Studies168: 1–14.
54.
SørensenKH (2006) Domestication: the enactment of technology. In: BerkerTHartmannMPunieY, et al. (eds) Domestication of Media and Technology. London: Open University Press, pp. 40–61.
55.
SørensenKHAuneMHatlingM (2000) Against linearity - On the cultural appropriation of science and technology. In: DierkesMGroeteCV (eds) Between Understanding and Trust: The Public, Science and Technology. London: Routledge, pp. 237–255.
TurkleS (2011) Introduction: the things that matter. In: TurkleS (ed.) Evocative Objects: Things We Think with. Cambridge, MA: MIT press, pp. 3–11.
59.
WeizenbaumJ (1966) ELIZA – a computer program for the study of natural language communication between man and machine. Communications of the ACM9(1): 36–45.
60.
WinterRLavisA (2020) Looking, but not listening? Theorizing the practice and ethics of online ethnography. Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics15(1–2): 55–62.
61.
WuS (2020) Domesticating dating apps: non-single Chinese gay men’s dating app use and negotiations of relational boundaries. Media, Culture & Society43(3): 515–531.
