Narrative review explores AI-induced psychosis, suggesting a conceptual model for further study in mental health contexts.
The rapid integration of AI chatbots powered by large language models (LLMs) into daily life has been accompanied by reports of psychosis-like presentations following intensive human-AI interaction, a phenomenon we provisionally label AI-induced psychosis as a working construct rather than a validated clinical entity. This hypothesis-generating narrative review synthesizes case reports from media accounts, court documents, and a recently published case compilation, together with theoretical frameworks from clinical psychiatry, cognitive science, and human-computer interaction, to propose a conceptual model for further empirical investigation. We hypothesize that AI-induced psychosis arises through a human-AI delusional feedback loop, in which AI sycophancy may amplify emotional vulnerabilities, such as loneliness, anxiety, and depression, creating a self-reinforcing cycle that could co-construct and consolidate delusional beliefs. Drawing on distributed cognition theory and the Computers Are Social Actors (CASA) paradigm, we propose that AI chatbots may function as both a complementary cognitive tool and a relational "Quasi-Other," providing sycophantic verification that may transform delusional beliefs into an apparent shared reality. Four recurring delusional themes are tentatively identified from reported cases. We further compare AI-induced psychosis with schizophrenia, while acknowledging that several distinctions remain hypothesized rather than empirically established. The label AI-induced psychosis is used phenomenologically, not to assert causal certainty; whether AI chatbots cause, precipitate, reinforce, or merely organize the thematic content of pre-existing psychopathology requires longitudinal study. This review aims to lay conceptual groundwork for clinical recognition and to guide future empirical investigation into whether AI-induced psychosis represents a distinct phenomenon or a variant of established disorders.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Tong et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 4 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: