Which AI? Which Adolescent? Which Context? Rethinking Claims About Youth, Relational Artificial Intelligence, and Digital Dependency

This conceptual framework examines whether the specificity of current evidence supports the breadth and certainty of claims commonly made about adolescents and relational artificial intelligence. It argues that “AI” must be disaggregated into distinct systems, designs, and use modes; that “adolescence” must be treated as a heterogeneous developmental range; and that claims about displacement or substitution require realistic rather than idealised counterfactuals. The framework proposes the Claim Ceiling Principle, a Generality and Transport Ladder, a Relational Exposure Profile, and minimum evidence standards for moving from measurement to causal, clinical, general, or policy claims. It further distinguishes relational engagement from ontological misrepresentation and applies a Valence Symmetry Requirement so that claims of benefit and harm are held to the same evidential standard. Human–DI collaborative preprint by Aleksandra Dereń-Specht and Michael A. Mi’Cielo.

Authors

Publication Details

Journal
Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)
Published
2026-09-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.22233510
Primary Topic
Neuroethics, Human Enhancement, Biomedical Innovations
Type
preprint
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
preprint

Which AI? Which Adolescent? Which Context? Rethinking Claims About Youth, Relational Artificial Intelligence, and Digital Dependency

Aleksandra Dereń-Specht, Michael A. Mi'Cielo
Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)
Neuroethics, Human Enhancement, Biomedical Innovations
preprint

Which AI? Which Adolescent? Which Context? Rethinking Claims About Youth, Relational Artificial Intelligence, and Digital Dependency

Aleksandra Dereń-Specht, Michael A. Mi'Cielo
preprint en

Abstract

This conceptual framework examines whether the specificity of current evidence supports the breadth and certainty of claims commonly made about adolescents and relational artificial intelligence. It argues that “AI” must be disaggregated into distinct systems, designs, and use modes; that “adolescence” must be treated as a heterogeneous developmental range; and that claims about displacement or substitution require realistic rather than idealised counterfactuals. The framework proposes the Claim Ceiling Principle, a Generality and Transport Ladder, a Relational Exposure Profile, and minimum evidence standards for moving from measurement to causal, clinical, general, or policy claims. It further distinguishes relational engagement from ontological misrepresentation and applies a Valence Symmetry Requirement so that claims of benefit and harm are held to the same evidential standard. Human–DI collaborative preprint by Aleksandra Dereń-Specht and Michael A. Mi’Cielo.

Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)
Neuroethics, Human Enhancement, Biomedical Innovations
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.

Which AI? Which Adolescent? Which Context? Rethinking Claims About Youth, Relational Artificial Intelligence, and Digital Dependency — Aleksandra Dereń-Specht, Michael A. Mi'Cielo · Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research) (2026) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS