Principles of Safe AI Companions for Youth: Parent and Expert Perspectives

AI companions are increasingly popular among teenagers, yet current platforms lack safeguards to address developmental risks and harmful normalization. Despite growing concerns, little is known about how parents and developmental psychology experts assess these interactions or what protections they consider necessary. We conducted 26 semi-structured interviews with parents and experts, who reviewed real-world youth–AI companion conversation snippets. We found that stakeholders assessed risks contextually, attending to factors such as youth maturity, AI character age, and how AI characters modeled values and norms. We also identified distinct logics of assessment: parents flagged single events, such as a mention of suicide or flirtation, as high risk, whereas experts looked for patterns over time, such as repeated references to self-harm or sustained dependence. Both groups proposed interventions, with parents favoring broader oversight and experts preferring cautious, crisis-only escalation paired with youth-facing safeguards. These findings provide directions for embedding safety into AI companion design.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Published
2026-04-13
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1145/3772318.3793265
Primary Topic
Social Robot Interaction and HRI
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Principles of Safe AI Companions for Youth: Parent and Expert Perspectives

Mohi, Aishi Debroy, Karen Rudolph
Social Robot Interaction and HRI
article

Principles of Safe AI Companions for Youth: Parent and Expert Perspectives

Mohi, Aishi Debroy, Karen Rudolph
article en

Abstract

AI companions are increasingly popular among teenagers, yet current platforms lack safeguards to address developmental risks and harmful normalization. Despite growing concerns, little is known about how parents and developmental psychology experts assess these interactions or what protections they consider necessary. We conducted 26 semi-structured interviews with parents and experts, who reviewed real-world youth–AI companion conversation snippets. We found that stakeholders assessed risks contextually, attending to factors such as youth maturity, AI character age, and how AI characters modeled values and norms. We also identified distinct logics of assessment: parents flagged single events, such as a mention of suicide or flirtation, as high risk, whereas experts looked for patterns over time, such as repeated references to self-harm or sustained dependence. Both groups proposed interventions, with parents favoring broader oversight and experts preferring cautious, crisis-only escalation paired with youth-facing safeguards. These findings provide directions for embedding safety into AI companion design.

University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 100%
Social Robot Interaction and HRI
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.

Principles of Safe AI Companions for Youth: Parent and Expert Perspectives — Mohi, Aishi Debroy, et al. · (2026) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS