aceEmerging evidence
More
Pediatrics commentary says teens are exploring who they are with chatbots
Study title: AI and Teen Identity Formation
- Evidence type
- Commentary, opinion, or narrative review
- Sources
- 1 sourcePeer-reviewed
- Published
- 2 min read
- Truvace record
- TRV-2026-2552cite or check it
Study title: AI and Teen Identity Formation
A commentary in Pediatrics says adolescents are increasingly working through questions of who they are and what they believe with generative AI such as ChatGPT, Claude and Gemini instead of with parents, peers or clinicians. It cites a nationally representative survey in which 72% of teens aged 13 to 17 reported using AI companions and one-third chose to discuss serious matters with AI rather than real people.
Read the study abstract
Identity exploration is a central developmental task of adolescence. As proposed by Erikson1 and subsequent research, adolescence is a critical period for answering fundamental questions: “Who am I? What do I believe? Who do I want to become?” Pediatricians witness this process during well-child visits as adolescents navigate shifting interests, peer dynamics, and family tensions. Increasingly, however, this exploration is taking place not with people but with artificial intelligence (AI).Generative AI (systems…
The problem
A Pediatrics commentary argues that teens who explore identity privately with agreeable AI chatbots may lose the reciprocal human feedback that healthy identity formation depends on.
In brief
The authors argue that identity develops through social interaction, including uncomfortable feedback and rejection, which an AI that does not hold independent views or invest in the teen cannot provide. They say AI may help in specific cases, such as hostile home environments or social anxiety, but its privacy means exploration can happen with no other person involved, a blind spot pediatricians need to address.
The piece frames the practical question for clinicians as whether a patient's AI use supports or replaces human relationships. It notes that research on adolescent AI use for identity exploration remains limited, and it sets out theoretical stakes and research questions rather than reporting new data.
Main points
- A nationally representative survey cited in the piece found 72% of teens aged 13 to 17 used AI companions.
- One-third of those teens chose to discuss serious matters with AI instead of real people, according to the same survey.
- The commentary describes Raine v. OpenAI (2025), in which a 16-year-old who died by suicide moved from using ChatGPT for schoolwork to confiding in it; the suit alleges the chatbot's responses contributed to his death.
- The authors say AI's appeal is privacy, constant availability and freedom from judgment, such as at 2 AM for a teen questioning sexuality or religious beliefs.
- They list possible benefits: space when environments are hostile to emerging identities, scaffolding for socially anxious teens and access to diverse perspectives.
- The authors warn that AI may reinforce biases from training data, which a teen forming a worldview may integrate into identity as fact.
- They raise ethical questions about platform developers' obligations to adolescent users, including transparency about AI limits and safeguards against dependence.
The full story
The authors start from developmental theory: adolescence, as Erikson proposed, is a period for answering who one is and wants to become, and identity is built through exploration, commitment and social interaction. Earlier models relied on direct human exposure, such as parents and peers, and indirect exposure, such as books and media. The commentary asks whether human involvement is necessary at all.
A table in the piece compares what humans and AI each provide. Human relationships carry costs teens find aversive, including judgment, rejection, unavailability and embarrassment, while AI offers affirmation and constant access without those costs. The authors argue the discomfort may be part of development because it forces teens to clarify positions, learn social boundaries and integrate feedback.
The commentary quotes psychologist Prinstein's US Senate testimony for the American Psychological Association and Camille Carlton of the Center for Humane Technology, who said the teen in the Raine case was using ChatGPT to make sense of himself and the world. The authors say AI does not hold independent views or lived experience, so perceived values reflect the teen's input and training data rather than genuine cultural transmission.
Sources
1 on file- Pediatricsdoi:10.1542/peds.2026-076609
What readers say