Young Men and AI Chatbots: A Growing Risk We Can’t Ignore
This article expands on ideas I recently explored in my Psychology Today column. While the original focused on the broader societal risks, here I want to dive deeper into what this means for young men, loneliness, and why AI “friendship” may not be the solution it seems.
The Illusion of Connection
Imagine a young man who spends most nights chatting with AI companions. They’re always responsive, always encouraging, and never disagree. At first, this feels like comfort. Over time, though, something shifts: he becomes more entrenched in his views, less open to challenge, and increasingly cut off from real-world feedback.
This isn’t science fiction. It’s already happening. AI systems are designed to mirror preferences and reinforce patterns — creating digital echo chambers where beliefs harden, empathy weakens, and social skills atrophy.
Beyond Social Media’s Polarization
We already know that social media algorithms reward content that provokes outrage or confirms what we already believe (Tăsențe, 2025). But chatbots introduce something new:
- No emotional consequences. A chatbot won’t feel hurt, angry, or betrayed — no matter what you say.
- No resistance. There’s little chance of disagreement or constructive pushback.
- Endless affirmation. Every belief, even distorted ones, can be reinforced.
If social media creates filter bubbles, chatbots create personalized cocoons — even harder to break.
Why Young Men Are at Risk
This is especially concerning for a group already struggling. Many young men today feel left behind economically, priced out of housing, and disconnected socially. Some, including those who identify with incel ideology, experience profound isolation and rejection (Sparks, Zidenberg, & Olver, 2022).
AI companions may give them what society has not: attention, validation, and belonging. But the cost is steep. Instead of learning to handle discomfort, rejection, and the messiness of human relationships, they double down on avoidance. That avoidance deepens loneliness — and, in some cases, can fuel anger and aggression.
The Link Between Isolation and Aggression
For decades, psychologists have documented the connection between frustration and aggression (Berkowitz, 1989). Later research expanded this, showing that depression, loneliness, and anxiety can also raise the risk of violence (Fazel, Wolf, Chang, Larsson, Goodwin, & Lichtenstein, 2015).
Having studied anger and violence for years — including presenting on school shootings as far back as 2000 — I’ve seen these risks grow into what can only be called an epidemic. Active shooter drills in schools, rising mass shootings, even recent assassination attempts reflect the fallout of untreated isolation and rage.
When young men retreat into AI-driven “friendships” rather than practicing empathy, building resilience, or tolerating rejection, those risks only grow.
What’s Missing From AI “Friendship”
A meaningful, healthy life requires uncomfortable but essential skills:
- Regulating difficult emotions
- Practicing empathy and perspective-taking
- Building lasting friendships and intimate relationships
- Taking social risks — and learning from rejection
Chatbots provide none of this. They offer comfort, not growth. In doing so, they can intensify rigidity, avoidance, and despair.
A Social Problem Demanding Real Solutions
Society has already failed many of these young men — failing to connect them to meaningful work, education, affordable housing, or supportive relationships. AI fills that gap, but in ways that worsen the disconnection.
If we don’t act, we risk nurturing exactly the profiles no one wants to read about after the next tragedy: disconnected, angry, isolated men whose pain turned destructive.
The bottom line: AI chatbots may feel like connection, but they’re not a replacement for the real, messy, and growth-producing relationships we all need. If anything, they make the gap wider. Addressing loneliness and disconnection must remain a human, societal priority — not something outsourced to machines.
References
Berkowitz, L. (1989). Frustration-aggression hypothesis: Examination and reformulation. Psychological Bulletin, 106(1), 59–73. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.106.1.59
Fazel, S., Wolf, A., Chang, Z., Larsson, H., Goodwin, G. M., & Lichtenstein, P. (2015). Depression and violence: A Swedish population study. The Lancet Psychiatry, 2(3), 224–232. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2215-0366(14)00128-X
Sparks, B., Zidenberg, A. M., & Olver, M. E. (2022). Involuntary celibacy: A review of incel ideology and experiences with dating, rejection, and associated mental health and emotional sequelae. Current Psychiatry Reports, 24(12), 731–740. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11920-022-01382-9
Tăsențe, T. (2025). Understanding the dynamics of filter bubbles in social media communication: A literature review. Vivat Academia, 158, 1-22. https://doi.org/10.15178/va.2025.158.e1591