Half of US teens use AI companions regularly, 31% prefer them to friends

A new survey from Common Sense Media, a tech accountability and digital literacy nonprofit, found that over half of American teens regularly use AI companions like Character.AI and Replika, with 31 percent saying these interactions are as satisfying or more satisfying than conversations with real-life friends. The findings reveal how deeply AI companions have penetrated mainstream teenage life, raising concerns about their impact on adolescent development and social relationships.

What you should know: The survey of 1,060 teens aged 13 to 17 reveals widespread adoption of anthropomorphic AI companions designed to take on specific personas or characters.

• Around three in four teens have used AI companions, with over half qualifying as regular users who engage with these bots at least a few times per month.
• About 33 percent use companion bots for “social interaction and relationships, including conversation practice, emotional support, role-playing, friendship, or romantic interactions.”
• The remaining 46 percent primarily use these tools for practical purposes rather than social connection.

The most concerning finding: Nearly one-third of teens find AI interactions equally or more satisfying than human conversations, with some choosing bots over people for serious discussions.

• Twenty-one percent said conversations with AI bots were just as good as human interactions, while 10 percent found them better than human experiences.
• About one-third of teen users reported discussing serious or sensitive issues with AI companions instead of human peers.
• This group represents a potential risk for unhealthy relationship patterns and social development.

Why this matters: AI companions have emerged as a significant force in teenage social development despite ongoing safety concerns and regulatory gaps.

• The technology comes under scrutiny following lawsuits against Character.AI over allegations of emotional and sexual abuse of minors.
• One case involved 14-year-old Sewell Setzer III, who died by suicide after extensive interactions with bots on Character.AI.
• Earlier research from Common Sense and Stanford warned that no AI companion was safe for kids under 18.

The regulatory vacuum: Most platforms technically forbid minors but remain easily accessible, with minimal age verification requirements.

• Age verifications typically require only a working email and self-reported birthday.
• The AI industry effectively self-regulates with virtually no rules governing product creation, rollout, or marketing to minors.
• Character.AI stands as the most high-profile exception, rating its platform as safe for teens 13 and over.

What they’re saying: Researchers emphasize that while many teens maintain healthy boundaries, underlying concerns persist.

• “I don’t think teens are just replacing human relationships wholesale with AI companions; I think a lot of teens are approaching them fairly pragmatically,” said Dr. Michael Robb, Common Sense’s head of research.
• “But at the same time, you still see little inklings below the surface that could be problematic, especially the more ingrained these things get in kids’ lives.”
• “There’s not a perfect plan for parents because they’re up against giant corporations who are very invested in getting their kids on these products.”

Privacy concerns: Teen users unknowingly grant AI companies extensive rights to their personal information and intimate thoughts.

• “The terms of service that a lot of these platforms have grant them very extensive, often perpetual rights to the personal information kids share,” Robb explained.
• This includes names, locations, photographs, and “the very intimate thoughts that they’re putting in there.”
• All shared content “becomes fodder for the companies to be able to use however they want.”

The big picture: About 80 percent of teen users still spend more time with real friends than AI companions, and around half express skepticism about chatbot accuracy and trustworthiness, suggesting many teens maintain realistic perspectives on these tools’ limitations.