Artificial Intelligence-Mediated Communication and Human Relationships: Examining Trust, Social Presence, and Interpersonal Connectedness among University Students
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.65310/8v0m4m50Keywords:
AI-mediated communication, interpersonal connectedness, social presence, trust, university studentsAbstract
Artificial intelligence-mediated communication introduces new forms of technological participation in interpersonal interaction, raising questions about trust, social presence, and relational connectedness in higher education. This study examined how existing scholarship characterizes these relationships and identified the conditions associated with variation in relational outcomes. A scoping review and framework-based relational mechanism synthesis were conducted using 34 scholarly sources published between 1976 and 2026, identified through bibliographic and publisher-based searches. The evidence base included experimental, cross-sectional, longitudinal, mixed-method, design-oriented, and conceptual investigations. Sources were examined according to communication configuration, degree of AI assistance, disclosure conditions, relational outcomes, and contextual moderators. The synthesis identified three interconnected domains: trust calibration and authenticity, social presence and conversational agency, and interpersonal connectedness in educational communication. Across the reviewed literature, AI assistance was associated with communicative efficiency and responsiveness, while relational evaluations varied according to perceived authenticity, transparency, technological reliability, and human control. Conversational and anthropomorphic cues contributed to perceived social presence without consistently establishing durable interpersonal trust. Evidence involving university students particularly emphasized AI literacy, perceived accuracy, risk perception, and technology adoption, whereas broader relational interpretations drew partly on other populations. The study proposes calibrated trust as an interpretive principle emphasizing proportionate reliance, verification, and human accountability. These findings support differentiated assessments of AI-mediated communication that distinguish technological performance, perceived social presence, and sustained interpersonal relationships.
Downloads
References
Adam, M., Wessel, M., & Benlian, A. (2021). AI-based chatbots in customer service and their effects on user compliance. Electronic Markets, 31(2), 427–445. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12525-020-00414-7
Araujo, T. (2018). Living up to the chatbot hype: The influence of anthropomorphic design cues and communicative agency framing on conversational agent and company perceptions. Computers in Human Behavior, 85, 183–189. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2018.03.051
Biocca, F., Harms, C., & Burgoon, J. K. (2003). Toward a more robust theory and measure of social presence: Review and suggested criteria. Presence: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments, 12(5), 456–480. https://doi.org/10.1162/105474603322761270
Choung, H., David, P., & Ross, A. (2023). Trust in AI and its role in the acceptance of AI technologies. International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction, 39(9), 1727–1739. https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2022.2050543
Clark, L., Pantidi, N., Cooney, O., Doyle, P., Garaialde, D., Edwards, J., Spillane, B., Gilmartin, E., Murad, C., Munteanu, C., Wade, V., & Cowan, B. R. (2019). What makes a good conversation? Challenges in designing truly conversational agents. In Proceedings of the 2019 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 1–12). Association for Computing Machinery. https://doi.org/10.1145/3290605.3300705
Croes, E. A. J., & Antheunis, M. L. (2021). Can we be friends with Mitsuku? A longitudinal study on the process of relationship formation between humans and a social chatbot. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 38(1), 279–300. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265407520959463
de Visser, E. J., Monfort, S. S., McKendrick, R., Smith, M. A. B., McKnight, P. E., Krueger, F., & Parasuraman, R. (2016). Almost human: Anthropomorphism increases trust resilience in cognitive agents. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 22(3), 331–349. https://doi.org/10.1037/xap0000092
Đerić, E., Frank, D., & Milković, M. (2025). Trust in generative AI tools: A comparative study of higher education students, teachers, and researchers. Information, 16(7), Article 622. https://doi.org/10.3390/info16070622
Feine, J., Gnewuch, U., Morana, S., & Maedche, A. (2019). A taxonomy of social cues for conversational agents. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 132, 138–161. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhcs.2019.07.009
Glikson, E., & Woolley, A. W. (2020). Human trust in artificial intelligence: Review of empirical research. Academy of Management Annals, 14(2), 627–660. https://doi.org/10.5465/annals.2018.0057
Go, E., & Sundar, S. S. (2019). Humanizing chatbots: The effects of visual, identity and conversational cues on humanness perceptions. Computers in Human Behavior, 97, 304–316. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2019.01.020
Guzman, A. L., & Lewis, S. C. (2020). Artificial intelligence and communication: A human–machine communication research agenda. New Media & Society, 22(1), 70–86. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444819858691
Hancock, J. T., Naaman, M., & Levy, K. (2020). AI-mediated communication: Definition, research agenda, and ethical considerations. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 25(1), 89–100. https://doi.org/10.1093/jcmc/zmz022
Hohenstein, J., & Jung, M. (2020). AI as a moral crumple zone: The effects of AI-mediated communication on attribution and trust. Computers in Human Behavior, 106, Article 106190. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2019.106190
Jacovi, A., Marasović, A., Miller, T., & Goldberg, Y. (2021). Formalizing trust in artificial intelligence: Prerequisites, causes and goals of human trust in AI. In Proceedings of the 2021 ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency (pp. 624–635). Association for Computing Machinery. https://doi.org/10.1145/3442188.3445923
Lee, M. K. (2018). Understanding perception of algorithmic decisions: Fairness, trust, and emotion in response to algorithmic management. Big Data & Society, 5(1), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1177/2053951718756684
Luger, E., & Sellen, A. (2016). “Like having a really bad PA”: The gulf between user expectation and experience of conversational agents. In Proceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 5286–5297). Association for Computing Machinery. https://doi.org/10.1145/2858036.2858288
McKnight, D. H., Carter, M., Thatcher, J. B., & Clay, P. F. (2011). Trust in a specific technology: An investigation of its components and measures. ACM Transactions on Management Information Systems, 2(2), Article 12, 1–25. https://doi.org/10.1145/1985347.1985353
Nass, C., & Moon, Y. (2000). Machines and mindlessness: Social responses to computers. Journal of Social Issues, 56(1), 81–103. https://doi.org/10.1111/0022-4537.00153
Nowak, K. L., & Biocca, F. (2003). The effect of the agency and anthropomorphism on users’ sense of telepresence, copresence, and social presence in virtual environments. Presence: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments, 12(5), 481–494. https://doi.org/10.1162/105474603322761289
Obadă, D.-R., Gradinaru, C., & Gradinaru, I.-A. (2026). From understanding to influence: The interplay of AI literacy, self-efficacy, and trust in predicting communication students’ AI adoption and word-of-mouth. Frontiers in Communication, 10, Article 1722464. https://doi.org/10.3389/fcomm.2025.1722464
Parasuraman, R., & Riley, V. (1997). Humans and automation: Use, misuse, disuse, abuse. Human Factors, 39(2), 230–253. https://doi.org/10.1518/001872097778543886
Park, K., & Yoon, H. Y. (2024). Beyond the code: The impact of AI algorithm transparency signaling on user trust and relational satisfaction. Public Relations Review, 50(5), Article 102507. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2024.102507
Petricini, T., Zipf, S., & Wu, C. (2025). RESEARCH-AI: Communicating academic honesty: Teacher messages and student perceptions about generative AI. Frontiers in Communication, 10, Article 1544430. https://doi.org/10.3389/fcomm.2025.1544430
Purcell, Z. A., Jakesch, M., Dong, M., Nussberger, A.-M., & Köbis, N. (2025). Writing with AI boosts trust-building efficiency. iScience, 28(12), Article 114092. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.isci.2025.114092
Reeves, B., & Nass, C. I. (1996). The media equation: How people treat computers, televisions, and new media like real people and places. CSLI Publications; Cambridge University Press.
Sahebi, S., & Formosa, P. (2025). The AI-mediated communication dilemma: Epistemic trust, social media, and the challenge of generative artificial intelligence. Synthese, 205, Article 128. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-025-04963-2
Sahebi, S., Formosa, P., & Bankins, S. (2026). The AI penalty and disclosure paradox: Trust, authenticity and knowledge uptake in AI-mediated communication. Computers in Human Behavior: Artificial Humans, 8, Article 100304. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chbah.2026.100304
Shin, D. (2021). The effects of explainability and causability on perception, trust, and acceptance: Implications for explainable AI. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 146, Article 102551. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhcs.2020.102551
Short, J., Williams, E., & Christie, B. (1976). The social psychology of telecommunications. Wiley.
Sundar, S. S. (2008). The MAIN model: A heuristic approach to understanding technology effects on credibility. In M. J. Metzger & A. J. Flanagin (Eds.), Digital media, youth, and credibility (pp. 73–100). MIT Press. https://doi.org/10.1162/dmal.9780262562324.073
Walther, J. B. (1992). Interpersonal effects in computer-mediated interaction: A relational perspective. Communication Research, 19(1), 52–90. https://doi.org/10.1177/009365092019001003
Wang, F., Li, N., Cheung, A. C. K., & Wong, G. K. W. (2025). In GenAI we trust: An investigation of university students’ reliance on and resistance to generative AI in language learning. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 22(1), Article 59. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-025-00547-9
Zhang, G., & Yu, T. (2025). Association between generative AI self-efficacy and generative AI acceptance: The mediating role of generative AI trust and the moderating role of generative AI risk perception. Acta Psychologica, 261, Article 105791. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2025.105791
