AI is no longer something for the future; it is an integral and an integral part of life now. Unconsciously at times, consciously at others, individuals interact with AI technologies every day from voice-based assistants like Siri and Alexa to algorithmic news feed, from shopping suggestions tailored to one's interests to virtual counsellors [1]. With intelligent systems getting increasingly robust and pervasive, they not only change businesses and economies but also redefine the very fabric of human existence [2]. This article delves into how AI affects human psychology and social behaviors and raises questions like: How do intelligent systems change cognition and feelings? How do intelligent systems affect people-to-people relationships and social acts? What are the social and moral implications that arise out of these changes? With the integration of psychological, sociological, media, and computer science knowledge, this paper seeks to present an overall description of the far-reaching influence of AI on human existence.

Human-AI Interaction and Anthropomorphism

Human-AI interaction studies have found that humans anthropomorphize AI systems by ascribing human-like qualities to the non-human system, such as emotion, intentionality, and personality [3] was at the forefront of work with their Media Equation Theory, showing how humans interact with media and computers as social actors [4] showed how users build parasocial relationships one-way emotional connections with virtual assistants and chatbots. Such interactions can potentially create trust and interest but also boundarilessness between humans and computers, affecting social interaction and expectations. Anthropomorphism determines people's acceptance of AI suggestions or dependency upon AI as a source of companionship, sometimes emotionally dependent as well [5]. The phenomenon is also followed by fears of over-trust in AI systems that are bounded in themselves or biased. Also, human-like AI may impact social norms such as politeness and reciprocity, as individuals modify communication patterns in light of it. Psychological effects include shifting empathy and social cognition, as computer interaction mimics human relation but without true emotional reciprocity [6]. The topic is relevant to understanding how incorporation of AI has an effect on interpersonal relationships and unity. Nonetheless, most research emphasizes brief interactions while neglecting long-term psychological ramifications.

Social Media Algorithms and Echo Chambers

Social media websites employ AI-based algorithms to personalize the stream of content, influencing the pattern of information consumption of users and social interaction. [7] proved that these algorithms cause echo chambers by presenting the user with content in line with the existing belief of the user selectively. This tends to reinforce cognitive biases and restrict exposure to contrasting perspectives, and thereby encourage social polarization. [8] also demonstrated that algorithmic curation facilitates social comparison with negative psychological effects such as lower self-esteem and anxiety. These effects lead to fragmented social realities where people live in isolated ideological ghettos [9]. The algorithms pay off engagement metrics, frequently exaggerating sensational or emotive material, which distorts public debate and escalates conflict Filter bubbles created violate democratic deliberation by reducing cross-cutting communication. Scholars warn that algorithmic mediation silently shapes identity construction, as online experiences are increasingly attentively curated [9]. Despite growing awareness, transparency, and user control over algorithmic filtering are still minimal. This literature emphasizes the necessity for critical reflection on the role of AI in building digital social space and their broader social implications.

Cognitive Impacts of AI Technologies

The cognitive impact of AI includes changes in attention, memory, and decision-making. The recorded that habitual engagement with AI-enabled devices results in divided attention and fewer profound levels of focus since the users constantly switch between different digital cues. [10] explored to what degree AI facilitates cognitive offloading, for example, the reliance on digital assistants to remember information, which alters memory retention and recall procedures. Decision-making is also impacted, with customized advice making decisions, at times contributing to biased or suboptimal ones because of algorithmic prejudice [11]. Cognitive load theory believes that AI systems have the capability to lower as well as enhance cognitive effort based on design and environment. Moreover, excessive exposure to AI can disempower critical thinking as hand-vetted material can promote confirmation bias. The role of AI in structuring learning context and learning tools enhances the sophistication of the impact of cognitive development [12]. With AI offering cognitive capabilities, there are ethical issues of dependency and loss of mental acumen being raised. The literature advocates for longitudinal research to attain long-term cognitive impacts of integrating AI into everyday life.

Emotional Regulation and AI Support Systems

AI technologies increasingly offer mechanisms for emotional regulation, such as virtual counselors, mood monitoring, and tailored wellness applications. [13] examined how AI chatbots offer emotional support, with some of the findings being increased accessibility and diminished stigma in seeking help. Artificial comprehension and empathy in AI systems lack authenticity and emotional fulfillment, however. Emotional reliance on AI technology can exist, to the detriment of human relationships and support groups. [14] pointed out that AI assistance in mood management can be double-edged, being easy but with the risk of shallow coping with emotional problems. There are also concerns about data privacy and ethical use of sensitive emotional data [15]. Emotional contagion on social media is also influenced by AI systems by amplifying some of the emotions of the content, influencing shared mood and conduct. The literature points out that although AI can potentially support emotional well-being, it lacks human empathy richness and depth [16]. This lack requires integrated solutions combining AI and human care. There needs to be ethical design frameworks balancing benefits with psychological hurt in AI-facilitated emotional care.

Trust, Authenticity, and Identity in AI Contexts

Trust is a latent feature of social interaction and is deeply undermined by AI-mediated communication. Findings by [16] indicate that users become trusting of AI systems when they possess social cues, yet such trust could be illusory as a result of the limitations and bias in AI. The emergence of generative AI, like deepfakes and synthetic media, increasingly makes it difficult to be aware of authenticity, undermining trust in digital media and institutions [17]. Identity formation is compromised as individuals construct their digital identities within AI-curated space, and the result of performative or disjointed identities. [18] explained the "filter bubble" scenario where algorithmic curation limits exposure, and the impact upon self-concept and membership of social groups. [19] maintained that these advancements threaten the existence of segregated social groups with increased prejudices, with less empathy and social cohesion. The literature requires transparency of AI systems to enable informed trust and user agency [20]. The literature also investigates the psychological conflict between human authenticity and AI-mediated representation. Broadly, the impact of AI on trust and identity points to the necessity of interdisciplinary research bridging technology design with social psychology and ethics.

Collective Behavior and AI-Mediated Social Dynamics

AI molds collective action by means of social bots, recommendation algorithms, and content filters. [21] chronicled how social bots mold political discussions, disseminating disinformation and propagating radical ideologies. Algorithmic amplification distorts public opinion by means of prioritizing engagement over accuracy. AI platforms do facilitate worldwide cooperation, driving social movements and crisis interventions by means of real-time information sharing [22]. Empirical research indicates that AI-supported interactions can potentially facilitate community building between geographically dispersed groups, forming new types of collective identity. However, manipulation, echo chambers, and the degradation of democratic deliberation are problems of concern. Research demands fair governance of AI to realize collective positive potential and reduce harm [23]. The literature also analyzes the effects of AI on norms, social capital, and collective efficacy. Understanding AI’s dual role in social cohesion and fragmentation is critical for managing its societal impacts. More empirical research is needed on AI’s role in fostering resilient and inclusive social networks.

Ethical Challenges in AI and Social Psychology

Ethical issues in AI include responsibility, transparency, discrimination, and algorithmic bias. [24] demonstrated how discriminatory outcomes in employment, lending, and law enforcement are produced by biased training data.  [25] cautioned against "weapons of math destruction," where sneaky algorithms produce social destruction. The literature indicates that lack of diversity among the development teams for AI aggravates bias. Ethical solutions call for explainable AI, diversity in design workflows, and fairness audits. Emotional manipulation via sponsored content and political propaganda are other ethical issues [26]. Participatory styles with stakeholders are encouraged by scholars to ensure socially responsible AI. Ethical responsibility has to be balanced with innovation, which is an ongoing issue. Policy formulation is concerned with regulation, standards, and governance models that safeguard vulnerable populations [27]. Interdisciplinary collaboration across technologists, social scientists, and ethicists is highlighted in the literature to address these issues in an integrated form.

AI in Human Relationships and Social Resilience

AI technologies influence social relations and resilience by helping to provide companionship, support, and interactivity. [28] discovered that virtual agents were able to combat loneliness and support mental health care. Social connectivity based on AI might also change the character of established social relationships, and social skills might thus be deteriorated [29]. Research further investigates how AI-mediated communication influences empathy, intimacy, and conflict management. Virtual agents' human insensitiveness to emotions in simulation constrains their application in conflict relational situations [30]. AI also holds promise to assist caregivers and at-risk populations with greater social inclusion. The literature highlights the significance of ethical attention to emotional truth and relational boundaries. Social resilience models include AI as a technology but warn against replacing artificial human relations [31]. Longitudinal studies will be needed to assess the impact of AI on social networks and community health. In general, AI offers promising avenues for social support but requires modest integration into human relational ecologies.

Bibliometric Trends in AI and Social Psychology Research

Bibliometric mapping demonstrates the meteoric rise in interdisciplinary studies between social psychology and AI. Central author networks coalesce around cognitive impact, emotional AI, ethical governance, and social media algorithms [32]. Thematic keyword mapping extracts emerging topics like "algorithmic trust," "emotional regulation," and "digital identity." Geographic visualization displays research hotspots in North America, Europe, and growing in Asia, demonstrating global interest and investment [33]. Cooperative trends envision multidisciplinary teams with computer science, psychology, and ethics. Pioneering work based on citation analysis is [34] Integrative theories with psychological, social, and ethical aspects are gaps opening with more literature. Bibliometric methods offer snapshots of the changing research agenda and channels to knowledge. This meta-analytic approach informs future directions and identifies untapped territories. More generally, bibliometric data verify the paper's salience for complete models of the social psychological impact of AI.

Policy and Ethical Governance Frameworks

Strong AI governance of its psychological and social effects necessitates multi-level policy systems that blend ethical considerations and societal interests. Existing frameworks support transparency, responsibility, fairness, and inclusivity in the development and use of AI [35]. Policymakers are challenged to strike a balance between innovation and safeguarding individual rights and social cohesion. Education and public literacy are prioritized to enable users to better manage AI-mediated environments [36]. Researchers suggest participatory governance involving the stakeholders in different sectors, including marginalized populations. Regulations involve algorithmic audits, impact assessments, and explainability obligations [37]. Global action is essential considering global deployment of AI. Ethical frameworks need to deal with emotional wellbeing, privacy, and bias in the algorithms. Adaptive policies that respond to dynamic AI technology are emphasized in the literature [38]. Trust through governance structures provides the ethical integration of AI into society, striking a balance between technological innovation and human values.

Figure 1: AI role from Individual to Societal Transformation

While previous research has explored particular aspects of human-AI interaction, comparatively few empirical studies have included cross-domain models incorporating affective, cognitive, relational, and societal impacts in one theoretical framework. The present paper redresses this balance by reporting an integrative model for the impact of AI on human social psychology.

Theoretical Framework

This study employs an interdisciplinary approach integrating Social Cognitive Theory (Bandura, 1986), Media Equation Theory (Reeves & Nass, 1996), and the Theory of Technological Mediation (Verbeek, 2005).

Conceptual Model

The impact of AI has a causal sequence: AI Systems → Cognitive Changes → Emotional Impacts → Social Interactions → Collective Behaviors → Societal Outcome. AI systems change human cognition, resulting in cognitive and emotional effects that modify social interactions and eventually influence collective behaviors and societal values. The model illustrates how micro-level AI interactions are scaled up to macro-level societal impacts with emphasis on the need for ethical, human-focused AI design.

Figure 2: AI Societal Influence Pyramid

This flow represents how AI develops from individual-level impacts (emotion and cognition) to relational (interpersonal) and group levels and eventually reconfigures social structures.

This article reports a qualitative meta-synthesis grounded in systematic review of 2010-2025 empirical and theory work. It searched databases like Scopus, Web of Science, PsycINFO, and Google Scholar using keywords like combinations of "Artificial Intelligence," "human psychology," "social interaction," "algorithmic influence," and "emotional impact." Inclusion criteria were those studies that included the psychological or social effects of AI interaction. The ultimate synthesis relies on about 70 peer-reviewed papers, books, and conference articles.

AI's Impact on Cognitive Processes

Artificial Intelligence essentially revolutionizes the way human beings perceive, process, and remember information. Social media and streaming recommendation algorithms disperse attention through presenting continuous flows of personalized and frequently distracting information [39]. Predictive text and autocomplete features subtly influence thinking, shaping and altering ideas in their formation. This excessive dependence on search engines and AI assistants results in cognitive offloading, wherein individuals utilize AI to memorize information and retrieve it later at the expense of their memory capacity [40]. This change also affects critical thinking since filtered content feeds minimize exposure to convergent opinions and reinforce confirmation bias. All these cognition changes are a concern regarding reduced deep learning, analytical thinking, and autonomous judgment in AI-rich environments.

Emotional Regulation and AI

Artificial intelligence-based software like emotion-reading chatbots and mood booster apps have become popular as emotional wellbeing management tools. Technology can be utilized to provide immediate relief and customized assistance, allowing users to concentrate on stress and anxiety management in everyday life. The lack of genuine human empathy in AI-based communication may be seen to retard its capabilities in addressing emotional needs on a more holistic level [41]. There is a growing risk of emotional dependency on virtual agents, which may replace human social support rather than complement it. Furthermore, the ethical use of sensitive emotional data raises privacy concerns, especially when AI systems analyze mood patterns to target advertising or influence behavior [42]. Overall, AI’s role in emotional regulation offers promise but must be balanced with awareness of its psychological limitations and risks.

Trust, Authenticity, and Identity

The advent of generative AI technologies such as deep fakes undermines the authenticity of digital content and media, leading to general loss of trust. As the ability to be able to tell real from fake content is undermined, media institutions lose trust, undermining social confidence. Offering content that is tailored around people's interests maintains echo chambers, controlling exposure to opposing views and undermining people's identity formation in homogeneous communities [43]. This algorithm-curated identity structures people's self-conception and social world, frequently reinforcing prejudice and polarization. [44] underscores the danger that presents to democratic deliberation and social harmony. Therefore, AI impact on trust and identity needs close scrutiny of transparency and user empowerment. to reestablish credible digital spaces.

Collective Behavior and Social Dynamics

Social AI-based robots and algorithmic amplification have tremendous power on public opinion and political discourse through the dissemination of disinformation and narrative-building [45]. Such technologies amplify social polarization and cause online communities to break apart. Nevertheless, AI-mediated platforms can also facilitate novel forms of worldwide cooperation by connecting fragmented groups and facilitating instant information exchange [46]. For example, AI enables social movements, crisis management, and innovation by scaling and sharing knowledge. The two-edged role of AI in fragmenting and uniting society complicates but necessitates its regulation. The comprehension of the above dynamics is needed to lift AI applications to be socially resilient and democratic.

Ethical Challenges and Psychological Implications

AI technologies tend to amplify existing bias towards discrimination in key fields like employment, lending, and law enforcement policies [47]. Algorithmic bias perpetuates systemic privilege and undermines fairness, causing actual psychological harm to individuals and groups who are the target of it. Worse, outrage-maximization algorithms offer a premium on sensational content, spreading fear, fury, and social disintegration. These practices exacerbate mental illness problems and destroy public trust, undermining democratic process and social solidarity. Meeting these moral challenges involves open algorithmic development, equity audits, and participatory AI governance [48]. The psycho-social implications highlight the necessity of multi-disciplinary approaches to guarantee AI technologies augment, not degrade, human well-being. AI reconstructs the way people think, process, and retain information. Recommendation systems manage attention spans, predictive text functionality influences subtly the way people think, and reliance on search engines reduces deep learning.

Table 1: Ethical Challenges

Stakeholder Map for Ethical AI Development

Policymaker’s ↔ Developers ↔ Educators ↔ End-users

Stakeholder Map for Ethical AI Development

The moral evolution of AI relies on a responsive network of four stakeholder’s policymakers, developers, educators, and users whose interdependent roles ensure that AI development serves the public good and causes minimal harm. Policymakers establish policy and law to facilitate equity and responsibility, developers embed ethics into AI development, educators foster public consciousness and critical thought, and users offer critical feedback and advocacy. They examine collectively the intricate impact of AI on human psychology, as depicted in the Emotional-Cognitive-Relational AI Impact Model, after the manner in which input from AI loops back to influence cognitive bias, emotional response, social response, and finally construction of identity. This multi-disciplinary method highlights the collective responsibility within legal, technical, educational, and social realms to engineer AI systems such that human dignity, psychological health, and social harmony are guaranteed.

Implications for Stakeholders

The policymakers have a key role in setting regulatory environments to tackle the social and psychological risks of AI, for instance, explain ability requirements and ethical design requirements; the tone on how AI gets integrated into society is set by them. Meanwhile, AI designers and developers have to embrace user values, perform thorough ethical impact analyses, and establish proper transparency mechanisms, so that what they build aligns with human values. Teachers and researchers are essential bridges, giving the public AI literacy, getting ready to think critically regarding AI systems, and carrying out interdisciplinary studies on the psychological and social implications of AI. All these participants are connected in an environment where ethical development of AI can thrive, weighing innovation against responsibility and guaranteeing end-users are protected, educated, and empowered.

Future work must investigate longitudinal psychological effects through life stages and cultures, experimental methods for intervening into causal processes, ethical frameworks for AI that foster resilience and social solidarity, and governance models that consolidate psychology, ethics, and sociology. These are needed since AI is not just a technical phenomenon; it is a deep psychological and social driver. Embedding AI in everyday life promises well-being and innovation but also entails risks for autonomy, authenticity, and solidarity. Charting these dynamics in a structured manner enables stakeholders to guide AI development in human-oriented, ethical, and sustainable directions that lead to the well-being of everyone.

1. Bandura, A. (1986). Social Foundations of Thought and Action: A Social Cognitive Theory. Prentice-Hall.
2. Nasr, R. S., & El-Deeb, S. (2025). Generative AI and its potential impact on humanity. International Journal of Consumer Studies, 49(1), Article e70024. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijcs.70024
3. Rajagopal, N. K., Anitha, L., Nagpal, P., & Jitendra, G. (2024). Green HR techniques: A sustainable strategy to boost employee engagement. In D. A. Karras et al. (Eds.), Advancements in business for integrating diversity, and sustainability: How to create a more equitable and resilient business world in the developing world (pp. 104–107). Taylor & Francis. ISBN 978-1-032-70828-7
4. Nagpal, P., Aggarwal, S., Sharma, A., Datta, A., Kuzieva, N., & Gurusamy, M. (2025). Revolutionizing human resources for safer automotive work environments. In AI's role in enhanced automotive safety (pp. 501–514). IGI Global Scientific Publishing. https://doi.org/10.4018/979-8-3373-0442-7.ch032
5. Jaques, N., Lazaridou, A., Hughes, E., Gulcehre, C., Ortega, P. A., Strouse, D. J., et al. (2019). Social influence as intrinsic motivation for multi-agent deep reinforcement learning. arXiv preprint arXiv:1810.08647.
6. Pooja Nagpal & Senthil Kumar. (2017). A study on drivers and outcomes of employee engagement – A review of literature approach. Asia Pacific Journal of Research.4 (1) 56- 62. ISSN -2320-5504. Online E ISSN – 2347-4793
7. Hernandez-Leal, P., Kartal, B., & Taylor, M. E. (2019). A survey and critique of multiagent deep reinforcement learning. Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems, 33(6), 750–797. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10458-019-09421-1
8. Nagpal, P. (2023). The transformative influence of artificial intelligence (AI) on financial organizations worldwide. In 2023 IEEE International Conference on ICT in Business Industry & Government (ICTBIG) (pp. 1–4). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICTBIG59752.2023.10455998
9. Reeves, B., & Nass, C. (1996). The Media Equation: How People Treat Computers, Television, and New Media Like Real People and Places. Cambridge University Press.
10. Holzinger, D., Dall, M., Sanduvete-Chaves, S., Saldaña, D., Chacón-Moscoso, S., & Fellinger, J. (2020). The impact of family environment on language development of children with cochlear implants: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Ear and Hearing, 41(5), 1077–1091. https://doi.org/10.1097/AUD.0000000000000852
11. Nagpal, P., Pawar, A., & Sanjay, H. M. (2025). Analysis of entrepreneurial motivation on entrepreneurial success in SMEs. In Sustainable smart technology businesses in global economies (pp. 149–162). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003616306
12. Jarrahi, M. H., Lutz, C., & Newlands, G. (2022). Artificial intelligence, human intelligence and hybrid intelligence based on mutual augmentation. Big Data & Society, 9(2). https://doi.org/10.1177/20539517221142824
13. Pooja Nagpal., & Kiran Kumar., A.C. (2019). The Effect of Perceived High Performance Work Practices on Employee Engagement -An Empirical Study on IT Firms in India. Think India Journal, 22 (43), 272-278. ISSN: 0971-1260.
14. Bakshy, E., Messing, S., & Adamic, L. A. (2015). Exposure to ideologically diverse news and opinion on Facebook. Science, 348(6239), 1130–1132.
15. Twenge, J. M., Martin, G. N., & Spitzberg, B. H. (2019). Trends in psychological well-being among US adolescents: 1991–2017. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 116(1), 120–130.
16. Nagpal, P., Pawar, A., & H. M., S. (2024). Predicting employee attrition through HR analytics: A machine learning approach. In 2024 4th International Conference on Innovative Practices in Technology and Management (ICIPTM) (pp. 1–4). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICIPTM59628.2024.10563285
17. Ishfaq, R., Darby, J., & Gibson, B. (2023). Adapting the retail business model to omnichannel strategy: A supply chain management perspective. Journal of Business Logistics, 45(1), Article e12352. https://doi.org/10.1111/jbl.12352
18. Pooja Nagpal., (2022). Organizational Commitment as an Outcome of Employee Engagement: A Social Exchange Perceptive using a SEM Model. International Journal of Biology Pharmacy and Allied Science,11(1): 72-86
19. Ferrara, E., et al. (2016). The rise of social bots. Communications of the ACM, 59(7), 96–104.
20. Guzman, A. L., & Lewis, S. C. (2020). Artificial intelligence and communication: A human–machine communication research agenda. New Media & Society, 22(1), 70–86.
21. Nass, C., & Moon, Y. (2000). Machines and mindlessness: Social responses to computers. Journal of Social Issues, 56(1), 81–103.
22. Pooja Nagpal (2022). Online Business Issues and Strategies to overcome it- Indian Perspective. SJCC Management Research Review. 12 (1): 1-10. Print ISSN 2249-4359. DOI: 10.35737/sjccmrr/v12/il/2022/151
23. Nagpal, P., Pawar, A., & Sanjay, H. M. (2024). Sustainable entrepreneurship: Balancing push and pull factors for customer loyalty in organic product marketing. African Journal of Biological Sciences, 6(9), 1134–1144. https://doi.org/10.33472/AFJBS.6.9.2024.1134-1144
24. Bargavi, N., Irfana, S., Ramana, A. V., Shankar, G., Nagpal, P., & Dhote, S. (2023). Circular economy towards sustainable businesses: Exploring factors shaping adoption and implementation barriers. Educational Administration: Theory and Practice, 30(3), 813-819.
25. F Khanum and P Nagpal. (2019). A Study on Corporate Entrepreneurship Drivers and its Outcome. Journal of Emerging Technologies and Innovative Research, 7, (15), 152- 158. ISSN: 2349-5162.
26. Akilandeeswari, S. V., Nagpal, P., Vinotha, C., Jain, K., Chatterjee, R., & Gundavarapu, M. R. (2024). Transforming e-commerce: Unleashing the potential of dynamic pricing optimization through artificial intelligence for strategic management. Migration Letters, 21(S3), 1250–1260.
27. Lakshmi, J. D., Devi, R., & Nagpal, P. (2021). Stress and behavioral analysis of employees using statistical and correlation methods. International Journal of Aquatic Science, 12(1), 275–281.
28. Pariser, E. (2011). The Filter Bubble: What the Internet Is Hiding from You. Penguin Press.
29. Fitzpatrick, K. K., Darcy, A., & Vierhile, M. (2017). Delivering mental health treatment via mobile phone: A review of the literature. Behavioral Research and Therapy, 105, 1-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brat.2017.05.002
30. Venkatesh, V., & Davis, F. D. (2000). A Theoretical Extension of the Technology Acceptance Model: Four Longitudinal Field Studies. Management Science, 46(2), 186-204. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.46.2.186.11926
31. Huang, C., & Su, T. (2020). The Impact of Social Media on Young Adults' Mental Health: A Meta-Analysis. Journal of Affective Disorders, 276, 146-154. https://doi.org/10.1016/jad.2020.06
32. Nagpal, P. (2024). Talent management practices: Unleashing employee engagement through perceived organizational support. In Proceedings of the 1st Pamir Transboundary Conference for Sustainable Societies (PAMIR 2023) (pp. 499-505). https://doi.org/10.5220/0012492300003792
33. Waber, B., Williams, M., Carroll, J. S., & others. (2015). A voice is worth a thousand words: The implications of the micro-coding of social signals in speech for trust research. In F. Lyon, G. Möllering, & M. N. K. Saunders (Eds.), Handbook of research methods on trust (pp. 302–312). Edward Elgar Publishing.
34. Anurag Shrivastavaa , S. J. Suji Prasadb ,et al (2023). IoT Based RFID Attendance Monitoring System of Students using Arduino ESP8266 & Adafruit.io on Defined Area. Cybernetics and Systems: An International Journal. https://doi.org/10.1080/01969722.2023.2166243.
35. BK Kumari, VM Sundari, C Praseeda, P Nagpal, J EP, S Awasthi (2023), Analytics-Based Performance Influential Factors Prediction for Sustainable Growth of Organization, Employee Psychological Engagement, Work Satisfaction, Training and Development. Journal for ReAttach Therapy and Developmental Diversities 6 (8s), 76-82.
36. Namita Rajput, Gourab Das, et al (2023) . An inclusive systematic investigation of human resource management practice in harnessing human capital, Materials Today: Proceedings, 80 (3), 3686- 3690, ISSN               2214-7853, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2021.07.362
37. Gokulkumari, M. Ravichand, P. Nagpal and R. Vij. (2023). "Analyze the political preference of a common man by using data mining and machine learning," 2023 International Conference on Computer Communication and Informatics (ICCCI), Coimbatore, India. doi: 10.1109/ICCCI56745.2023.10128472.
38. A. Syed, N. Bargavi, A. et al. (2022). "Recent Management Trends Involved with the Internet of Things in Indian Automotive Components Manufacturing Industries," 2022 5th International Conference on Contemporary Computing and Informatics (IC3I), Uttar Pradesh, India. pp. 1035-1041, doi: 10.1109/IC3I56241.2022.10072565.
39. William, A. Shrivastava, et al (2022). "Framework for Intelligent Smart City Deployment via Artificial Intelligence Software Networking," 2022 3rd International Conference on Intelligent Engineering and Management (ICIEM), pp. 455-460, doi: 10.1109/ICIEM54221.2022.9853119.
40. H. Abbas, S. Sanyal, P. Nagpal, J. Panduro-Ramirez, R. Singh and S. Pundir. (2023). "An Investigation on a Blockchain Technology in Smart Certification Model for Higher Education," 10th International Conference on Computing for Sustainable Global Development (INDIACom), New Delhi, India, pp. 1277-1281.
41. Mou, Y., & Xu, K. (2017). The media inequality: Comparing the initial human-human and human-AI social interactions. Computers in Human Behavior, 72, 432-440.
42. Jacob, M., Zook, A., & Magerko, B. (2013). Viewpoints AI: Procedurally Representing and Reasoning about Gestures. In DiGRA conference
43. Dembińska, A., Kłosowska, J., & Ochnik, D. (2022). Ability to initiate relationships and sense of loneliness mediate the relationship between low self-esteem and excessive internet use. Current Psychology, 41(9), 6577–6583. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-020-01049-1