Analysis of the impacts of generative AI-driven human-machine communication interactions on user subjectivity in social media
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.54691/q7mcgy45Keywords:
Generative artificial intelligence; human-machine communication; social media; user subjectivity; cognitive autonomy; expressive autonomy.Abstract
Generative artificial intelligence has arrived on social media with large language models like chatgpt making features for AI-assisted production and communication mainstream. People have transformed how they make stuff and work with machines. This research analyses the effect of these advancements on the subjectivity of users from the perspective of human-machine communication theory. The usage of AI-assisted production can minimise the difficulty of expression, but the anchoring effect may discreetly limit the autonomous judgement of users; Personalised recommendation reinforces the selective exposure to information, undermining the conditions that support critical reflection; The involvement of AI in self-presentation blurs the barrier between human and machine, and the identity identification needs to be repositioned. In an effort to seek a balance point between AI efficiency and human autonomy, the paper proposes many solutions in three fields to address these issues, including technical transparency, media literacy education and platform standards. The factual applications of AI given in this article are taken from public papers such as the Stanford "Artificial Intelligence Index Report". The major research approaches are literature analysis and deduction of theory.
Downloads
References
[1] Sundar, S. S. (2020). Rise of machine agency: A framework for studying the psychology of human–AI interaction (HAII). Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 25(1), 74–88.
[2] Hancock, J. T., Naaman, M., & Levy, K. (2020). AI-mediated communication: Definition, research agenda, and ethical considerations. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 25(1), 89–100.
[3] Go, E., & Sundar, S. S. (2019). Humanizing chatbots: The effects of visual, identity and conversational cues on humanness perceptions. Computers in Human Behavior, 97, 304–316.
[4] Logg, J. M., Minson, J. A., & Moore, D. A. (2019). Algorithm appreciation: People prefer algorithmic to human judgment. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 151, 90–103.
[5] Doshi, A. R., & Hauser, O. P. (2024). Generative AI enhances individual creativity but reduces the collective diversity of novel content. Science Advances, 10(28), eadn5290.
[6] Flaxman, S., Goel, S., & Rao, J. M. (2016). Filter bubbles, echo chambers, and online news consumption. Public Opinion Quarterly, 80(S1), 298–320.
[7] Couldry, N., & Hepp, A. (2017). The mediated construction of reality (Vol. 10). Polity Press.
[8] Belk, R. W. (2013). Extended self in a digital world. Journal of Consumer Research, 40(3), 477–500.
[9] Guzman, A. L. (2020). Ontological boundaries between humans and computers and the implications for human-machine communication. Human-Machine Communication, 1, 37–54.
[10] Yin, M., Wortman Vaughan, J., & Wallach, H. (2019, May). Understanding the effect of accuracy on trust in machine learning models. In Proceedings of the 2019 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 1–12).
[11] Diakopoulos, N. (2016). Accountability in algorithmic decision making. Communications of the ACM, 59(2), 56–62.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Frontiers in Humanities and Social Sciences

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.






