SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Connectist: Istanbul University Journal of Communication Sciences / 2026 / Sayı: 70

Artificial intimacy and synthetic dialogues: Generation Z’s brand interaction and parasocial relationships with ChatGPT-3.5 and ChatGPT-4o

Yapay yakınlık ve yapay diyaloglar: Z kuşağının ChatGPT-3.5 ve ChatGPT-4o ile marka etkileşimi ve parasosyal ilişkileri

Ceren Bilgici(ISTANBUL KULTUR UNIVERSITY)0000-0002-7510-8185
Özge Özkök Şişman(ISTANBUL KULTUR UNIVERSITY)0000-0001-7150-4909
Pages
22–42
Publication Date
2026-07-08
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

The findings indicate that ChatGPT-3.5 was regarded as functional in terms of providing easy access to information and understanding questions yet was perceived as emotionally weak and mechanical.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:ChatGPT, a generative artificial intelligence (AI) system developed by OpenAI, offers users an interactive dialogue experience through its human-like responses.
📊
Key Findings & Data:The first phase of the research was conducted in 2023 with ChatGPT-3.5 users, while the second phase was carried out in 2025 with ChatGPT-4o users.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The findings indicate that ChatGPT-3.5 was regarded as functional in terms of providing easy access to information and understanding questions yet was perceived as emotionally weak and mechanical.
🔬Design:Araştırma Makalesi
📍Scope:2023 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Yapay zekâ · ChatGPT · parasosyal ilişkiler

Abstract

ChatGPT, a generative artificial intelligence (AI) system developed by OpenAI, offers users an interactive dialogue experience through its human-like responses. The study examines Generation Z’s interactions with ChatGPT within the framework of parasocial relationship theory, aiming to reveal how these interactions are interpreted at the individual level. Seeking to explore how users make sense of these interactions, the study employs a qualitative research methodology and a repeated cross-sectional design that compares two independent participant groups with similar socio-economic, cultural, and professional characteristics at two different points in time. The study examines how users experienced two successive ChatGPT versions. The first phase of the research was conducted in 2023 with ChatGPT-3.5 users, while the second phase was carried out in 2025 with ChatGPT-4o users. The findings indicate that ChatGPT-3.5 was regarded as functional in terms of providing easy access to information and understanding questions yet was perceived as emotionally weak and mechanical. Interactions with ChatGPT-4o, by contrast, were experienced as warmer and more fluent.

Özet

OpenAI şirketinin geliştirdiği bir üretken yapay zekâ sistemi olan ChatGPT, insan benzeri yanıtlarıyla kullanıcılara etkileşimli bir diyalog deneyimi sunmaktadır. Buradan hareketle çalışma, Z kuşağının ChatGPT-3.5 ve ChatGPT-4o ile kurduğu etkileşimi parasosyal ilişki kuramı çerçevesinde inceleyerek, bu etkileşimin bireysel düzeyde nasıl anlamlandırıldığını ortaya koymayı amaçlamaktadır. Nitel bir araştırma metodolojisi üzerinden kullanıcıların bu etkileşimi nasıl yorumladığını incelemeyi amaçlayan araştırma, benzer sosyo-ekonomik, kültürel ve profesyonel özelliklere sahip iki bağımsız katılımcı grubunu iki farklı zaman noktasında karşılaştıran, tekrarlı kesitsel bir desen benimsemektedir. Bu araştırma, kullanıcıların birbirini izleyen iki farklı ChatGPT sürümünü nasıl deneyimlediğini incelemektedir. Araştırmanın birinci aşaması 2023 yılında ChatGPT-3.5 kullanıcılarıyla, ikinci aşaması ise 2025 yılında ChatGPT-4o kullanıcılarıyla gerçekleştirilmiştir. Bulgular, ChatGPT-3.5'in bilgiye kolay erişim sağlama ve soruları anlama becerisi bakımından işlevsel görüldüğünü, buna karşın duygusal açıdan zayıf ve mekanik olarak algılandığını ortaya koymaktadır. ChatGPT-4o ile kurulan etkileşim tam tersi şekilde daha sıcak ve akıcı bulunmuştur.

🔖

Cite This Article

Bilgici, C., Şişman, Ö. Ö. (2026). Artificial intimacy and synthetic dialogues: Generation Z’s brand interaction and parasocial relationships with ChatGPT-3.5 and ChatGPT-4o. Connectist: Istanbul University Journal of Communication Sciences, Sayı: 70, 22–42. https://doi.org/10.26650/CONNECTIST2026-1756435

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (67)

  1. Abdinagoro, S. B., & Bismo, A. (2024). The role of parasocial relationships and social media interaction in shaping relational quality: Exploring the mediating effect of brand connection and the moderating power of influencers. Multidisciplinary Science Journal, 7(6), 2025293. https://doi.org/10.31893/multiscience.2025293 google scholar Bozdağ, A. A. (2025). The AI-mediated intimacy economy: A paradigm shift in digital interactions. AI & Society, 40(4), 2285-2306. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00146-024-02132-6 google scholar
  2. Brakus, J. J., Schmitt, B. H., & Zarantonello, L. (2009). Brand experience: What is it? How is it measured? Does it affect loyalty? Journal of Marketing, 73(3), 52-68. https://doi.org/10.1509/jmkg.73.3.052 google scholar
  3. Çeber, B. (2025). Yapay zekâ "Sora" ile üretilen reklamların McLuhan'ın "araç mesajdır" perspektifinden incelenmesi: Toys "R" Us reklam örneği. Yeni Medya Elektronik Dergisi, 9(2), 171-200. 10.17932/IAU.EJNM.25480200.2025/ejnm_v9i2002 google scholar
  4. Cheng, Y., & Jiang, H. (2022). Customer–brand relationship in the era of artificial intelligence: Understanding the role of chatbot marketing efforts. Journal of Product & Brand Management, 31(2), 252–264. https://doi.org/10.1108/JPBM-05-2020-2907 google scholar
  5. Cheung, J. C.-S. (2013). Alone together: Why we expect more from technology and less from each other. Journal of Social Work Practice, 27(4), 471-474. https://doi.org/10.1080/02650533.2013.769209 google scholar
  6. Cumming, C. L. (2017). Cross-sectional design. In M. Allen (Ed.), The SAGE encyclopedia of communication research methods. SAGE Publications. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781483381411.n118 google scholar
  7. Delbaere, M., McQuarrie, E. F., & Phillips, B. J. (2011). Personification in advertising: Using a visual metaphor to trigger anthropomorphism. Journal of Advertising, 40(1), 121-130. https://doi.org/10.2753/JOA0091-3367400108 google scholar
  8. Delgado-Ballester, E., Munuera-Alemán, J. L., & Yagüe-Guillén, M. J. (2003). Development and validation of a brand trust scale. International Journal of Market Research, 45(3), 35-53. google scholar
  9. Dibble, J. L., Hartmann, T., & Rosaen, S. F. (2016). Parasocial interaction and parasocial relationship: Conceptual clarification and a critical assessment of measures. Human Communication Research, 42(1), 21-44. https://doi.org/10.1111/hcre.12063 google scholar
  10. Duong, C. D., Nguyen, T. H., Ngo, T. V. N., Pham, T. T. P., Vu, A. T., & Dang, N. S. (2025). Using generative artificial intelligence (ChatGPT) for travel purposes: Parasocial interaction and tourists’ continuance intention. Tourism Review, 80(4), 813-827. https://doi.org/10.1108/TR-01-2024-0027 google scholar
  11. Epley, N., Waytz, A., & Cacioppo, J. T. (2007). On seeing human: A three-factor theory of anthropomorphism. Psychological Review, 114(4), 864–886. 10.1037/0033-295X.114.4.864 google scholar
  12. Ersan, M. (2022). Reklam tasarımda bir görsel anlatım yöntemi olarak kişileştirme. Elektronik Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 21(84), 1739–1753. https://doi.org/10.17755/esosder.1003656 google scholar
  13. Fitria, T. N. (2023). Artificial intelligence (AI) technology in OpenAI ChatGPT application: A review of ChatGPT in writing English essay. Journal of English Language Teaching, 12(1). 10.15294/elt.v12i1.64069 google scholar
  14. Floridi, L. (2023). AI as agency without intelligence: On ChatGPT, large language models, and other generative models. Philosophy & Technology, 36(1), 15. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13347-023-00621-y google scholar
  15. Floridi, L., & Chiriatti, M. (2020). GPT-3: Its nature, scope, limits, and consequences. Minds and Machines, 30(4), 681–694. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11023-020-09548-1 google scholar
  16. Fui-Hoon Nah, F., Zheng, R., Cai, J., Siau, K., & Chen, L. (2023). Generative AI and ChatGPT: Applications, challenges, and AI-human collaboration. Journal of Information Technology Case and Application Research, 25(3), 277-304. https://doi.org/10.1080/15228053.2023.2233814 google scholar
  17. George, A. S., Hovan George, A. S., Baskar, T., & Pandey, D. (2023). The allure of artificial intimacy: Examining the appeal and ethics of using generative AI for simulated relationships. Partners Universal International Innovation Journal (PUIIJ), 1(6). google scholar
  18. Giles, D. C. (2002). Parasocial interaction: A review of the literature and a model for future research. Media Psychology, 4(3), 279-305. https://doi.org/10.1207/S1532785XMEP0403_04 google scholar
  19. Haleem, A., Javaid, M., & Singh, R. P. (2022). An era of ChatGPT as a significant futuristic support tool: A study on features, abilities, and challenges. BenchCouncil Transactions on Benchmarks, Standards and Evaluations, 2(4), 100089. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tbench.2023.100089 google scholar
  20. Hartmann, J., Exner, Y., & Domdey, S. (2025). The power of generative marketing: Can generative AI create superhuman visual marketing content? International Journal of Research in Marketing, 42(1), 13-31. 10.1016/j.ijresmar.2024.09.002 google scholar
  21. Hendrikx, K. (2025). Student-AI relationships: The rise of artificial intimacy. Diggit Magazine. Retrieved May 20, 2025, from https://www.diggitmagazine.com/student-ai-relationships-rise-artificial-intimacy google scholar
  22. Ho, A., Hancock, J., & Miner, A. S. (2018). Psychological, relational, and emotional effects of self-disclosure after conversations with a chatbot. Journal of Communication, 68(4), 712-733. https://doi.org/10.1093/joc/jqy026 google scholar
  23. Horton, D., & Wohl, R. R. (1956). Mass communication and para-social interaction: Observations on intimacy at a distance. Psychiatry, 19(3), 215-229. https://doi.org/10.1080/00332747.1956.11023049 google scholar
  24. Koay, K. Y., Cheah, C. W., & Yap, J. Y. (2024). Self-influencer congruence, parasocial relationships, credibility, and purchase intentions: A sequential mediation model. Journal of Relationship Marketing, 23(1), 1-20. https://doi.org/10.1080/15332667.2023.2216373 google scholar
  25. Kvale, S., & Brinkmann, S. (2014). InterViews: Learning the craft of qualitative research interviewing (3rd ed.). SAGE Publications. google scholar
  26. Lestari, P. A., & Islami, N. A. (2024). The power of parasocial interaction: Relatability, trust, and ethical engagement in Gen Z influencer marketing. Communica: Journal of Communication, 2(4), 259-271. 10.61978/communica.v2i4.783 google scholar
  27. Levy, M. R. (1979). Watching TV news as para-social interaction. Journal of Broadcasting, 23(1), 69-80. https://doi.org/10.1080/08838157909363919 google scholar
  28. Lin, J. S. (2025). Examining the interplay of chatbot interactivity and anthropomorphic design for enhancing brand relationships in service businesses. International Journal of Advertising, 44(5), 829-860. https://doi.org/10.1080/02650487.2024.2410559 google scholar
  29. Liu, Y., Li, X., & Xiang, Z. (2022). The effect of chatbot-customer interaction on consumer brand advocacy: Exploring the role of chatbots. In ICEIEC 2022- Proceedings of 2022 IEEE 12th International Conference on Electronics Information and Emergency Communication (pp. 185-190). IEEE. 10.1109/ICEIEC54567.2022.9835050 google scholar
  30. Lobinger, K., & Brantner, C. (2015). In the eye of the beholder: Subjective views on the authenticity of selfies. International Journal of Communication, 9, 1848-1860. google scholar
  31. Marr, B., & Ward, M. (2019). Artificial intelligence in practice: How 50 successful companies used AI and machine learning to solve problems. John Wiley & Sons. google scholar
  32. McCarthy, J., Minsky, M. L., Rochester, N., & Shannon, C. E. (2006). A proposal for the Dartmouth Summer Research Project on artificial intelligence, August 31, 1955. AI Magazine, 27(4), 12–14. https://doi.org/10.1609/aimag.v27i4.1904 google scholar
  33. Minsky, M. (1961). Steps toward artificial intelligence. Proceedings of the IRE, 49(1), 8-30. google scholar
  34. OpenAI. (2022, November 30). Introducing ChatGPT. Retrieved June 02, 2025, from https://openai.com/index/ChatGPT/ google scholar
  35. OpenAI. (2024, May 13). Hello GPT-4o. Retrieved June 02, 2025, from https://openai.com/index/hello-gpt-4o/ google scholar
  36. OpenAI. (2025). About. Retrieved June 05, 2025, from https://openai.com/about/ google scholar
  37. OpenAI. (2026a, March 5). Introducing GPT-5.4. https://openai.com/index/introducing-gpt-5-4/ google scholar
  38. OpenAI. (2026b, March 5). Introducing GPT-5.4. https://openai.com/index/introducing-gpt-5-4/ google scholar
  39. OpenAI. (2026, April 23). Introducing GPT-5.5. https://openai.com/index/introducing-gpt-5-5/ google scholar
  40. Pavlik, J. V. (2023). Collaborating with ChatGPT: Considering the implications of generative artificial intelligence for journalism and media education. Journalism & Mass Communication Educator, 78(1), 84-93. https://doi.org/10.1177/10776958221149577 google scholar
  41. Ricoeur, P. (1977). Toward a hermeneutic of the idea of revelation. The Harvard Theological Review, 70(1), 1-37. https://www.jstor.org/stable/1508979 google scholar
  42. Rohmah, S. N., & Haqqu, R. (2024). The role of artificial intelligence (ChatGPT) in the development of technology and communication. Jurnal Teknologi Informasi dan Komunikasi, 8(4). 10.35870/jtik.v8i4.2087 google scholar
  43. Rubin, R. B., & McHugh, M. P. (1987). Development of parasocial interaction relationships. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 31(3), 279-292. https://doi.org/10.1080/08838158709386664 google scholar
  44. Saini, S., & Bansal, R. (2025). Parasocial relationships and self-disclosure: Strengthening brand image through brand attitude in premium cosmetics. Journal of Promotion Management, 31(2), 337-366. https://doi.org/10.1080/10496491.2025.2466585 google scholar
  45. Sandelowski, M. (2000). Focus on research methods: Whatever happened to qualitative description? Research in Nursing & Health, 23(4), 334-340. 10.1002/1098-240X(200008)23:43.0.CO;2-G google scholar
  46. Shahriar, S., & Hayawi, K. (2024). Let’s have a chat! A conversation with ChatGPT: Technology, applications, and limitations. Artificial Intelligence and Applications, 2(1), 11-20. https://doi.org/10.47852/bonviewAIA3202939 google scholar
  47. Sharkasi, N., Rezakhah, S., & Agag, G. (2025). A comparative paradigm of sequential mediation models of influencers’ credibility using PLS-SEM with machine learning. Journal of Marketing Analytics, 13(3), 744-779. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41270-025-00382-x google scholar
  48. Shazhaev, I., Shafeeg, A., Mikhaylov, D., Tularov, A & Shazhaev, I., (2023). Voice assistant integrated with ChatGPT. Indonesian Journal of Computer Science, 12(1), 22-31. https://doi.org/10.33022/ijcs.v12i1.3146 google scholar
  49. Sheng, M. L., Natalia, N., & Rusfian, E. Z. (2025). AI chatbot, human, and in-between: Examining the broader spectrum of technology- human interactions in driving customer-brand relationships across experience and credence services. Psychology & Marketing, 42(4), 1051-1071. https://doi.org/10.1002/mar.22165 google scholar
  50. Skjuve, M., Følstad, A., Fostervold, K. I., & Brandtzaeg, P. B. (2021). My chatbot companion: A study of human-chatbot relationships. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 149, 102601. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhcs.2021.102601 google scholar
  51. Smit, E., Bronner, F., & Tolboom, M. (2007). Brand relationship quality and its value for personal contact. Journal of Business Research, 60(6), 627-633. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2006.06.012 google scholar
  52. Spillane, J. P., & Hunt, B. R. (2010). Days of their lives: A mixed-methods, descriptive analysis of the men and women at work in the principal’s office. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 42(3), 293-331. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220270903527623 google scholar
  53. Stein, J. P., Breves, P. L., & Anders, N. (2024). Parasocial interactions with real and virtual influencers: The role of perceived similarity and human-likeness. New Media & Society, 26(6), 3433-3453. https://doi.org/10.1177/14614448221102900 google scholar
  54. Stratton, S. J. (2024). Purposeful sampling: Advantages and pitfalls. Prehospital and Disaster Medicine, 39(2), 121-122. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1049023X24000281 google scholar
  55. Sundar, S. S., & Liao, M. (2023). Calling BS on ChatGPT: Reflections on AI as a communication source. Journalism & Communication Monographs, 25(2), 165-180. https://doi.org/10.1177/15226379231167135 google scholar
  56. Taube, J., & Warnaby, G. (2017). How brand interaction in pop-up shops influences consumers’ perceptions of luxury fashion retailers. Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management, 21(3), 385-399. https://doi.org/10.1108/JFMM-08-2016-0074 google scholar
  57. Tian, Q., & Hoffner, C. A. (2010). Parasocial interaction with liked, neutral, and disliked characters on a popular TV series. Mass Communication and Society, 13(3), 250-269. https://doi.org/10.1080/15205430903296051 google scholar
  58. Tsai, W.-H. S., Liu, Y., & Chuan, C.-H. (2021). How chatbots’ social presence communication enhances consumer engagement: The mediating role of parasocial interaction and dialogue. Journal of Research in Interactive Marketing, 15(3), 460-482. https://doi.org/10.1108/JRIM-12-2019-0200 google scholar
  59. Tukachinsky, R. (2010). Para-romantic love and para-friendships: Development and assessment of a Multiple Parasocial Relationships scale. American Journal of Media Psychology, 3(1), 73-94. google scholar
  60. Um, N. (2022). Impact of parasocial interaction, perceived ad message authenticity, and match-up between brand and celebrity in evaluation of Instagram celebrity-based brand endorsement. Sustainability, 14(5), 2928. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14052928 google scholar
  61. Vivek, S. D., Beatty, S. E., & Morgan, R. M. (2012). Customer engagement: Exploring customer relationships beyond purchase. Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice, 20(2), 127-145. https://doi.org/10.2753/MTP1069-6679200201 google scholar
  62. Vo, T. H., Tan, G. W.-H., Pham, N. T., Truong, T. H. D., & Ooi, K.-B. (2025). Promoting customer engagement and brand loyalty on social media: The role of virtual influencers. International Journal of Consumer Studies, 49(2). https://doi.org/10.1111/ijcs.70028 google scholar
  63. Wang, R., Siau, K. L., & Zhang, Z. (2023). Using AI and ChatGPT in brand storytelling. In Twenty-ninth Americas Conference on Information Systems (AMCIS 2023). Association for Information Systems. Retrieved June 02, 2025, https://aisel.aisnet.org/amcis2023/sig_aiaa/sig_aiaa/14 google scholar
  64. Wienrich, C., Carolus, A., Markus, A., Augustin, Y., Pfister, J., & Hotho, A. (2023). Long-term effects of perceived friendship with intelligent voice assistants on usage behavior, user experience, and social perceptions. Computers, 12(4), 77. 10.3390/computers12040077 google scholar
  65. Xiao, Y., & Yu, S. (2025). Can ChatGPT replace humans in crisis communication? The effects of AI-mediated crisis communication on stakeholder satisfaction and responsibility attribution. International Journal of Information Management, 80, 10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2024.102835 google scholar
  66. Xu, Y. W., Chi, C. G., Gursoy, D., & Cai, R. (2026). Rethinking AI anthropomorphism: A holistic conceptualization and scale across AI systems and service contexts. Technology in Society, 85, 103189. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techsoc.2025.103189 google scholar
  67. Youn, S., & Jin, S. V. (2021). “In A.I. we trust?” The effects of parasocial interaction and technopian versus luddite ideological views on chatbot-based customer relationship management in the emerging “feeling economy.” Computers in Human Behavior, 119, 106721. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2021.106721 google scholar