‘I think I misspoke earlier. My bad!’: Exploring how generative artificial intelligence tools exploit society’s <i>feeling rules</i>

Generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) tools that appear to perform with care and empathy can quickly gain users’ trust. For this reason, GenAI tools that attempt to replicate human responses have heightened potential to misinform and deceive people. This article examines how three GenAI tools, within divergent contexts, mimic credible emotional responsiveness: OpenAI’s ChatGPT, the National Eating Disorder Association’s Tessa and Luka’s Replika. The analysis uses Hochschild’s concept of feeling rules to explore how these tools exploit, reinforce or violate people’s internalised social guidelines around appropriate and credible emotional expression. We also examine how GenAI developers’ own beliefs and intentions can create potential social harms and conflict with users. Results show that while GenAI tools enact compliance with basic feeling rules – for example, apologising when an error is noticed – this ability alone may not sustain user interest, particularly once the tools’ inability to generate meaningful, accurate information becomes intolerable.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
New Media & Society
Published
2025-10-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1177/14614448251338276
Primary Topic
Emotional Labor in Professions
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

‘I think I misspoke earlier. My bad!’: Exploring how generative artificial intelligence tools exploit society’s feeling rules

Alexandra Ridgway, Sarah Polkinghorne, Lisa M. Given
New Media & Society
Emotional Labor in Professions
article

‘I think I misspoke earlier. My bad!’: Exploring how generative artificial intelligence tools exploit society’s feeling rules

Alexandra Ridgway, Sarah Polkinghorne, Lisa M. Given
article en

Abstract

Generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) tools that appear to perform with care and empathy can quickly gain users’ trust. For this reason, GenAI tools that attempt to replicate human responses have heightened potential to misinform and deceive people. This article examines how three GenAI tools, within divergent contexts, mimic credible emotional responsiveness: OpenAI’s ChatGPT, the National Eating Disorder Association’s Tessa and Luka’s Replika. The analysis uses Hochschild’s concept of feeling rules to explore how these tools exploit, reinforce or violate people’s internalised social guidelines around appropriate and credible emotional expression. We also examine how GenAI developers’ own beliefs and intentions can create potential social harms and conflict with users. Results show that while GenAI tools enact compliance with basic feeling rules – for example, apologising when an error is noticed – this ability alone may not sustain user interest, particularly once the tools’ inability to generate meaningful, accurate information becomes intolerable.

New Media & SocietyVol. 27(10)
RMIT University (AU)
Openalex Percentile: Top 64%
Emotional Labor in Professions
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.