The exact text we saved

This is the version exactly as it was saved, character for character. The SHA-256 hash below is a 64-character code worked out from that text. Run the same text through SHA-256 and you get the same code; change a single letter and the code comes out completely different. Each version also stores the previous version’s hash, which chains them together so no version can be swapped out quietly.

TRUVACE RECORD VERSION
record: TRV-2026-2659
version: 1
kind: certified
reason: Certified into the record
timestamp: 2026-11-12T16:57:32.456479Z
status: published
lens: p_space
sector: lifestyle
headline: Activating Social Responses in Human–AI Interaction: The Effects of Reciprocal Self-Disclosure and Social Role Framing
dek: As chatbots become increasingly embedded in everyday communication, understanding when they elicit social responses is important. We conducted an experiment in which 169 participants interacted with LLM-based chatbots in a 2 (reciprocal self-disclosure: yes vs. no) × 3 (social role: mentor, companion, or assistant) between-subjects design. Self-esteem was measured before the interaction as an individual-difference factor. Factorial analyses showed that reciprocal self-disclosure increased users’ disclosure but d…
gain_title: (none)
problem_title: In an experiment with 169 participants, a chatbot that reciprocated self-disclosure did not significantly raise users' trust or perceived support, and users reported lower enjoyment than with a non-reciprocating chatbot.
trace_subject: (none)
gain_reading: (none)
gain_evidence: (none)
problem_reading: In an experiment with 169 participants, a chatbot that reciprocated self-disclosure did not significantly raise users' trust or perceived support, and users reported lower enjoyment than with a non-reciprocating chatbot.
problem_evidence: did not significantly increase trust or perceived support | enjoyment was lower in the reciprocal-disclosure condition
quick_read: An experiment with 169 participants tested how LLM-based chatbots draw social responses from people. Participants were split across a 2 × 3 design: the chatbot either reciprocated self-disclosure or did not, and it was framed as a mentor, a companion or an assistant.

Reciprocal self-disclosure led users to disclose more. It did not significantly increase trust or perceived support, and enjoyment was lower when the chatbot reciprocated.

Role framing worked differently depending on the person. Social role interacted with self-esteem in predicting the quality of self-disclosure, with favorable responses to the mentor role among participants with higher self-esteem.
limitation: 
tag: Evidence-backed problem
key_points: The experiment involved 169 participants who interacted with LLM-based chatbots. | It used a between-subjects design crossing reciprocal self-disclosure (yes or no) with three social roles: mentor, companion or assistant. | Reciprocal self-disclosure increased how much users disclosed. | Reciprocal self-disclosure did not significantly increase trust or perceived support. | Enjoyment was lower in the reciprocal-disclosure condition. | Participants with higher self-esteem responded favorably to the mentor role when it came to the quality of their self-disclosure.
rundown: Participants were randomly placed in one of six conditions combining reciprocal self-disclosure and a chatbot social role. Self-esteem was measured before the interaction as an individual-difference factor.

Factorial analyses showed that a chatbot sharing about itself changed what users did, since they disclosed more, but not how they judged the chatbot on trust or support. Enjoyment was lower in the reciprocal condition.

The authors conclude that chatbot social cues elicit different behavioral and evaluative responses, and that role framing should account for user characteristics. They describe the study as offering a conditional account of social responding in human–AI interaction, with implications for chatbot design in relational contexts.
sources:
- peer_reviewed | International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction | https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2026.2738478 | 2026-10-07
prev: 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000

SHA-256 hash

b6ec785553a4cf4cb679a3b3873ff720eefa5c08d41891b98b640aca1015d790

Previous version’s hash

0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000