The problem
What needs solving
Find out, over months rather than weeks, whether confiding in chatbots leaves teenagers, and lonely people of any age, less lonely and distressed or more. Then find which design choices make the difference.
Why it matters
About one in five US 12- to 21-year-olds have used chatbots for mental health advice, and most of those users had told no one (JAMA Pediatrics, 2026). Short trials give mixed results; a year-long study of adults linked seeking company from chatbots with later loneliness, though people who felt less connected also used them more. In October 2026 the attorneys general of eight US states sued OpenAI, alleging harm to children. California has signed rules for companion chatbots used by minors, from 2027, and we found no trial of the design limits they set.
What counts as progress
(a) An independent team, its plan published first, follows 2,000 or more people, at least 500 of them aged 13 to 17, for six months, linking usage records to standard measures of loneliness, distress and dependence. (b) A randomised trial of at least 12 weeks and 1,000 people shows that one design choice, such as a time limit, less flattery or a less human voice, changes loneliness or distress. The size that counts is set in advance. (c) Solved when the effects for teenagers and lonely adults match in direction and size on two assistants from different makers, each tested independently, and the design choices that matter are named.
Stater & version history
Stated by UNSOLVED editors
18 Oct 2026 — Stated by the UNSOLVED editors for the founding registry, from the research of October 2026.