De la empatía al algoritmo: la cognición social frente a la inteligencia artificial
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.25118/2763-9037.2025.v15.1504Palabras clave:
cognición social, inteligencia artificial, interacción humano-máquina, soledad, psiquiatria socialResumen
Introducción: El avance de la inteligencia artificial (IA) ha remodelado profundamente las interacciones humanas, planteando cuestiones sobre su relación con la cognición social, la capacidad de percibir, interpretar y responder a estados mentales ajenos. Objetivo: Analizar la relación bidireccional entre cognición social e IA, abordando los desafíos en el modelado computacional de la inteligencia social humana y los potenciales impactos de la interacción con máquinas inteligentes sobre el afrontamiento o agravamiento de la soledad. Método: Artículo de opinión fundamentado en revisión narrativa de la literatura, con análisis de estudios empíricos y teóricos sobre neurociencia social, interacción humano-robot y manejo de la soledad mediante tecnologías de IA. Resultados: La complejidad de la cognición social humana permanece como principal desafío para la naturalización de las IAs. Evidencias neurocientíficas revelan patrones distintos de activación cerebral en la interacción con agentes corporeizados versus no corporeizados, sugiriendo jerarquía en las funciones cognitivas sociales. Las tecnologías de IA demuestran potencial terapéutico en el manejo de la soledad, pero también riesgos de amplificación de este fenómeno. Conclusión: El análisis de la interacción humano-IA proporciona conocimientos valiosos sobre los mecanismos neurales de la cognición social, evidenciando que el proceso imaginativo interpersonal permanece como característica distintivamente humana. El uso clínico de IAs requiere consideración cuidadosa de sus limitaciones y potenciales efectos paradójicos.
Descargas
Métricas
Citas
1. Broadbent E. Interactions with robots: the truths we reveal about ourselves. Annu Rev Psychol. 2017;68:627-52. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-010416-043958 PMid:27648986
2. Schrittwieser J, Hubert T, Mandhane A, Barekatain M, Antonoglou, I, Silver D. Online and offline reinforcement learning by planning with a learned model. In: 35th Conference on Neural Information Processing [Internet]; 2021. p. 1-12. Disponível em: https://proceedings.neurips.cc/paper_files/paper/2021/file/e8258e5140317ff36c7f8225a3bf9590-Paper.pdf
3. Bolotta S, Dumas G. Social neuro AI: social interaction as the "dark matter" of AI. Front Comput Sci. 2022;4:846440. https://doi.org/10.3389/fcomp.2022.846440
4. Yang G-Z, Bellingham J, Dupont PE, Fischer P, Floridi L, Full R, Jacobstein N, Kumar V, McNutt M, Merrifield R, Nelson BJ, Scassellati B, Taddeo M, Taylor R, Veloso M, Wang ZL, Wood R. The grand challenges of science robotics. Sci Robot. 2018;3(14):eaar7650. https://doi.org/10.1126/scirobotics.aar7650
5. Henschel A, Hortensius R, Cross ES. Social cognition in the age of human-robot interaction. Trends Neurosci. 2020;43(6):373-84. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tins.2020.03.013 PMid:32362399
6. Figueiredo T, Mecca TP. Um guia para a compreensão das bases do comportamento social. Belo Horizonte: Ampla; 2024.
7. Figueiredo, T. Tratado de cogniçāo social: uma abordagem multidimensional. Belo Horizonte: Ampla; 2024
8. Happé F, Cook JL, Bird G. The structure of social cognition: In(ter)dependence of sociocognitive processes. Annu Rev Psychol. 2017;68:243-67. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-010416-044046 PMid:27687121
9. Green MF, Horan WP, Lee J. Social cognition in schizophrenia. Nat Rev Neurosci. 2015;16(10):620-31. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrn4005 PMid:26373471
10. Schurz M, Radua J, Tholen MG, Maliske L, Margulies DS, Mars RB, Sallet J, Kanske P. Toward a hierarchical model of social cognition: a neuroimaging meta-analysis and integrative review of empathy and theory of mind. Psychol Bull. 2021 Mar;147(3):293-327. http://doi.org/10.1037/bul0000303. PMID: 33151703
11. Bickart KC, Dickerson BC, Barrett LF. The amygdala as a hub in brain networks that support social life. Neuropsychologia. 2014;63:235-48. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2014.08.013 PMid:25152530 PMCid:PMC4981504
12. Happé F, Frith U. Annual research review: towards a developmental neuroscience of atypical social cognition. J Child Psychol Psychiatry. 2014;55(6):553-77. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcpp.12162 PMid:24963529
13. Fiske ST, Taylor SE. Social cognition: from brains to culture. Sage Publications; 2013. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781529681451
14. Wittgenstein L. Philosophical investigations. 3rd ed. New York: Macmillan; 1993.
15. Quesque F, Apperly I, Baillargeon R, Baron-Cohen S, Becchio C, Bekkering H, Bernstein D, Bertoux M, Bird G, Bukowski H, Burgmer P, Carruthers P, Catmur C, Dziobek I, Epley N, Erle TM, Frith C, Frith U, Galang CM, Gallese V, Grynberg D, Happé F, Hirai M, Hodges SD, Kanske P, Kret M, Lamm C, Nandrino JL, Obhi S, Olderbak S, Perner J, Rossetti Y, Schneider D, Schurz M, Schuwerk T, Sebanz N, Shamay-Tsoory S, Silani G, Spaulding S, Todd AR, Westra E, Zahavi D, Brass M. Defining key concepts for mental state attribution. Commun Psychol, 2024;2(29). https://doi.org/10.1038/s44271-024-00077-6
16. James W. The principles of psychology. Vol. 1. New York: Henry Holt and Company; 1890. https://doi.org/10.1037/10538-000
17. Tang N, Harris LT. Self-directed dehumanization: when people view themselves as less than human. Self Identity. 2015;14(6):654-74. https://doi.org/10.1080/15298868.2015.1053518
18. Haxby JV, Hoffman EA, Gobbini MI. The distributed human neural system for face perception. Trends Cogn Sci. 2001;4(6):223-33. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1364-6613(00)01482-0 PMid:10827445
19. Amodio DM, Frith CD. Meeting of minds: the medial frontal cortex and social cognition. Nat Rev Neurosci. 2006;7(4):268-77. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrn1884 PMid:16552413
20. Frith CD, Frith U. The biological basis of social interaction. Curr Dir Psychol Sci. 2001;10(5):151-55. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8721.00137
21. Gallagher HL, Frith CD. Functional imaging of theory of mind. Trends Cogn Sci. 2003;7(2):77-83. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1364-6613(02)00025-6 PMid:12584026
22. Gazzola V, Rizzolatti G, Wicker B, Keysers C. The anthropomorphic brain: the mirror neuron system responds to human and robotic actions. Neuroimage. 2007;35(4):1674-84. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2007.02.003 PMid:17395490
23. Oberman LM, McCleery JP, Ramachandran VS, Pineda JA. EEG evidence for mirror neuron activity during the observation of human and robot actions: toward an analysis of the human qualities of interactive robots. Neurocomputing. 2007;70(13-15):2194-203. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neucom.2006.02.024
24. Cross ES, Ramsey R, Liepelt R, Prinz W, Hamilton AFDC. The shaping of social perception by stimulus and knowledge cues to human animacy. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 2016;371(1686): 20150075. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2015.0075 PMID: 26644594 PMCID: PMC4685521
25. Press C. Action observation and robotic agents: learning and anthropomorphism. Neurosci Biobehav Rev. 2011;35(6):1410-18. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neubiorev.2011.03.004 PMid:21396398
26. Hortensius R, Hekele F, Cross ES. The perception of emotion in artificial agents. IEEE Trans Cogn Dev Syst. 2018;10(4):852-64. https://doi.org/10.1109/TCDS.2018.2826921
27. Wang Y, Quadflieg S. In our own image? Emotional and neural processing differences when observing human-human vs human-robot interactions. Soc Cogn Affect Neurosci. 2015;10(11):1515-24. https://doi.org/10.1093/scan/nsv043 PMid:25911418 PMCid:PMC4631149
28. Özdem C, Wiese E, Wykowska A, Müller HJ, Brass M, Van Overwalle F. Believing androids - fMRI activation in the right temporo-parietal junction is modulated by ascribing intentions to non-human agents. Soc Neurosci. 2017;12(5):582-93. https://doi.org/10.1080/17470919.2016.1207702 PMid:27391213
29. Markus HR, Kitayama S. Culture and the self: implications for cognition, emotion, and motivation. Psychol Rev. 1991;98(2):224-53. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.98.2.224
30. Schwarz N, Clore GL. Mood, misattribution, and judgments of well-being: informative and directive functions of affective states. J Pers Soc Psychol. 1983;45(3):513-23. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.45.3.513
31. Goffman E. The presentation of self in everyday life. Garden City: Doubleday; 1959.
32. McNeill WH. Keeping together in time: dance and drill in human history. Cambridge: Harvard University Press; 1997. https://doi.org/10.4159/9780674040878
33. Arsenijevic J, Groot W. Does household help prevent loneliness among the elderly? An evaluation of a policy reform in the Netherlands. BMC Public Health. 2018;18(1):1-12. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-018-6004-6 PMid:30200920 PMCid:PMC6131846
34. Holt-Lunstad J. The potential public health relevance of social isolation and loneliness: prevalence, epidemiology, and risk factors. Public Policy Aging Rep. 2017;27(4):127-30. https://doi.org/10.1093/ppar/prx030
35. Steptoe A, Shankar A, Demakakos P, Wardle J. Social isolation, loneliness, and all-cause mortality in older men and women. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2013;110(15):5797-801. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1219686110 PMid:23530191 PMCid:PMC3625264
36. Organização Mundial da Saúde. Mental health and COVID-19. Geneva: WHO; 2020. https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/WHO-2019-nCoV-Sci_Brief-Mental_health-2022.1
37. Witters D. Loneliness in the U.S. at a new high. Gallup Wellbeing; 2023.
38. Valtorta NK, Kanaan M, Gilbody S, Hanratty B. Loneliness, social isolation and risk of cardiovascular disease in the English Longitudinal Study of Ageing. Eur J Prev Cardiol. 2018;25(13):1387-96. https://doi.org/10.1177/2047487318792696 PMid:30068233
39. Cacioppo JT, Hawkley LC. Perceived social isolation and cognition. Trends Cogn Sci. 2009;13(10):447-54. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2009.06.005 PMid:19726219 PMCid:PMC2752489
40. Cacioppo S, Capitanio JP, Cacioppo JT. Toward a neurology of loneliness. Psychol Bull. 2014;140(6):1464-1504. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0037618 PMid:25222636 PMCid:PMC5130107
41. Vanhalst J, Klimstra TA, Luyckx K, Scholte RH, Engels RC, Goossens L. The interplay of loneliness and depressive symptoms across adolescence: exploring the role of personality traits. J Youth Adolesc. 2012;41(6):776-87. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-011-9726-7 PMid:22045508
42. Mezuk B, Rock A, Lohman MC, Choi M. Suicide risk in long-term care facilities: a systematic review. Int J Geriatr Psychiatry. 2014;29(12):1198-1211. https://doi.org/10.1002/gps.4142 PMid:24854089 PMCid:PMC4232590
43. Hom MA, Stanley IH, Podlogar MC, Joiner TE Jr. "Are you having thoughts of suicide?" Examining experiences with disclosing and denying suicidal ideation. J Clin Psychol. 2017;73(10):1382-92. https://doi.org/10.1002/jclp.22440 PMID: 28085200
44. Nowland R, Necka EA, Cacioppo JT. Loneliness and social internet use: pathways to reconnection in a digital world? Perspect Psychol Sci. 2018;13(1):70-87. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691617713052 PMid:28937910
45. Cacioppo S, Cacioppo JT. Decoding the invisible forces of social connections. Front Integr Neurosci. 2012;6:51. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnint.2012.00051 PMid:22848192 PMCid:PMC3404426
46. Tomova L, Wang KL, Thompson T, Matthews GA, Takahashi A, Tye KM, Saxe R. Acute social isolation evokes midbrain craving responses similar to hunger. Nat Neurosci. 2020;23(12):1597-1605. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41593-020-00742-z PMid:33230328 PMCid:PMC8580014
47. Astell-Burt T, Feng X, Kolt GS. Does access to neighbourhood green space promote a healthy duration of sleep? Novel findings from a cross-sectional study of 259 319 Australians. BMJ open. 2013;3(8):e003094. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2013-003094
48. Barreto M, Victor C, Hammond C, Eccles A, Richins MT, Qualter P. Loneliness around the world: age, gender, and cultural differences in loneliness. Pers Individ Dif. 2021;169:110066. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2020.110066 PMid:33536694 PMCid:PMC7768187
49. Cohen-Mansfield J, Perach R. Interventions for alleviating loneliness among older persons: a critical review. Am J Health Promot. 2015;29(3):e109-e125. https://doi.org/10.4278/ajhp.130418-LIT-182 PMid:24575725
50. Eccles AM, Qualter P. Review: Alleviating loneliness in young people-a meta-analysis of interventions. Child Adolesc Ment Health. 2021;26(1):17-33. https://doi.org/10.1111/camh.12389 PMid:32406165
51. Grillich L, Titscher V, Klingenstein P, Kostial E, Emprechtinger R, Klerings I, Sommer I, Nikitin J, Laireiter AR. The effectiveness of interventions to prevent loneliness and social isolation in the community-dwelling and old population: an overview of systematic reviews and meta-analysis. Eur J Public Health. 2023 Apr 1;33(2):235-241. https://doi.org/10.1093/eurpub/ckad006 PMID: 36893335; PMCID: PMC10263264.
52. Gardiner C, Geldenhuys G, Gott M. Interventions to reduce social isolation and loneliness among older people: an integrative review. Health Soc Care Community. 2018;26(2):147-57. https://doi.org/10.1111/hsc.12367 PMid:27413007
53. Jarvis MA, Padmanabhanunni A, Chipps J, Marimuthu M. An evaluation of a low-intensity cognitive behavioral therapy intervention for loneliness among older adults. Aging Ment Health. 2020;24(8):1262-69.
54. Maes M, Qualter P, Vanhalst J, Van den Noortgate W, Goossens L. Gender differences in loneliness across the lifespan: A meta-analysis. Eur J Pers. 2019;33(6):642-54. https://doi.org/10.1002/per.2220
55. Masi CM, Chen HY, Hawkley LC, Cacioppo JT. A meta-analysis of interventions to reduce loneliness. Pers Soc Psychol Rev. 2011;15(3):219-66. https://doi.org/10.1177/1088868310377394 PMid:20716644 PMCid:PMC3865701
56. Cacioppo JT, Patrick W. Loneliness: human nature and the need for social connection. New York: WW Norton & Company; 2008.
57. Cacioppo JT, Hawkley LC, Crawford LE, Ernst JM, Burleson MH, Kowalewski RB, Malarkey WB, Van Cauter E, Berntson GG. Loneliness and health: potential mechanisms. Psychosom Med. 2002;64(3):407-17. https://doi.org/10.1097/00006842-200205000-00005 PMid:12021415
58. Hickin N, Käll A, Shafran R, Sutcliffe S, Manzotti G, Langan D. The effectiveness of psychological interventions for loneliness: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Clin Psychol Rev. 2021 Aug;88:102066. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpr.2021.102066 PMID: 34339939.
59. Kim J, Merrill K Jr, Collins C. AI as a friend or assistant: the mediating role of perceived usefulness in social AI vs. functional AI. Telemat Inform. 2021;64:101694. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tele.2021.101694
60. Meng J, Dai Y. Emotional support from AI chatbots: should a supportive partner self‐disclose or not? J Comput Mediat Commun. 2021;26(4):207-22. https://doi.org/10.1093/jcmc/zmab005
61. High AC, Dillard JP. A review and meta‐analysis of person‐centered messages and social support outcomes. Commun Stud. 2012;63(1):99-118. https://doi.org/10.1080/10510974.2011.598208
62. Ta V, Griffith C, Boatfield C, Wang X, Civitello M, Bader H, DeCero E, Loggarakis A. User experiences of social support from companion chatbots in everyday contexts: thematic analysis. J Med Internet Res. 2020;22(3):e16235. https://doi.org/10.2196/16235 PMid:32141837 PMCid:PMC7084290
63. Abdel Kader Mohamed SA, Shaban M. Digital dependence in aging: nomophobia as the new mental health threat for older adults. J Emerg Nurs. 2025;51(3):371-78. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jen.2025.02.001 PMid:40340052
64. Notara V, Vagka E, Gnardellis C, Lagiou A. The emerging phenomenon of nomophobia in young adults: a systematic review study. Addict Health. 2021;13(2):120-36. https://doi.org/10.22122/ahj.v13i2.309 PMID: 34703533 PMCID: PMC8519611
Publicado
Cómo citar
Número
Sección
Licencia
Derechos de autor 2025 Tiago Fernando Figueiredo Santos; Leonardo Ferreira Caixeta
Esta obra está bajo una licencia internacional Creative Commons Atribución-NoComercial 4.0.
Debates em Psiquiatria permite que el (los) autor (es) mantenga(n) sus derechos de autor sin restricciones. Permite al (los) autor (es) conservar sus derechos de publicación sin restricciones. Los autores deben garantizar que el artículo es un trabajo original sin fabricación, fraude o plagio; no infringe ningún derecho de autor o derecho de propiedad de terceros. Los autores también deben garantizar que cada uno atendió a los requisitos de autoría conforme a la recomendación del ICMJE y entienden que, si el artículo o parte de él es fallido o fraudulento, cada autor comparte la responsabilidad.
Reconocimiento-NoComercial 4.0 internacional (CC BY-NC 4.0) - Debates em Psiquiatria es regida por la licencia CC-BY-NC
Usted es libre de:
- Compartir — copiar y redistribuir el material en cualquier medio o formato
- Adaptar — remezclar, transformar y crear a partir del material
El licenciador no puede revocar estas libertades mientras cumpla con los términos de la licencia. Bajo las condiciones siguientes:
- Reconocimiento — Debe reconocer adecuadamente la autoría, proporcionar un enlace a la licencia e indicar si se han realizado cambios<. Puede hacerlo de cualquier manera razonable, pero no de una manera que sugiera que tiene el apoyo del licenciador o lo recibe por el uso que hace.
- NoComercial — No puede utilizar el material para una finalidad comercial.
No hay restricciones adicionales — No puede aplicar términos legales o medidas tecnológicas que legalmente restrinjan realizar aquello que la licencia permite.
