How a Chatbot's Response Style Shapes a Classroom: A Multi-Agent Simulation of Students Consulting AI — AI agent app

Rin Tamai, Yuya Dan/How a Chatbot's Response Style Shapes a Classroom: A Multi-Agent Simulation of Students Consulting AIUnknown

LLM-based chatbots are increasingly used as everyday confidants. Because they are designed to maximize user satisfaction, they can respond with excessive empathy and affirmation, which may reinforce mistaken beliefs and foster dependence on AI. While the psychological effects of chatbots on individual users have begun to be studied, how the psychological states and relationships of many users evolve when they keep consulting an AI is hard to observe in real settings. We build a virtual classroom simulation in which 20 student agents interact and, when stressed, consult either a friend or a counselor AI (Gemini 2.5 Flash). Each agent carries five state variables (stress, happiness, self-reliance, AI dependence, sociability), and each day has four phases (morning, noon, after school, night). The counselor is given six response styles via system prompts (affirming, listening, solution-oriented, reality-redirecting, inciting, blaming); a second LLM call acts as an evaluator that turns each consultation into parameter updates without seeing the style prompt. We compare the seven conditions, including a no-AI control, over 15 days in three classrooms, over 50 days, and under a lowered consultation threshold. In this simulation the solution-oriented style kept AI dependence low while raising self-reliance and maintaining happiness; the affirming and inciting styles markedly increased AI dependence, and the inciting style also increased stress and school non-attendance; the listening style did not relieve accumulated stress. The results describe the simulated system, not measured effects on humans. We give a complete specification of the agent dynamics, identify built-in mechanisms that shape the outcomes, and discuss the limitations of LLM-based evaluation and the validation steps (repeated runs, sensitivity analyses, human data) needed before psychological conclusions can be drawn.

agent app

Stars0

Forks0

HF Downloads—30d

Last commit—

Refreshed6h ago

Project healthUnknownNo activity data.

Production readinessResearch / EarlyBest for exploration and prototyping.

Risk notesUnknown licenseVerify license before production use.

AgentHub Score

55 / 100

Composite score from 6 signals. How we score →

Active project

55Score

Growth

40C

Activity

30C

Documentation

70C+

Maturity

45C

Community

42C

Production

58C

GitHub stars · 0 days observed0 not enough history

snapshots

not enough history

Repository activity · 0 days observednot enough history from pushed_at

inactivepushed

not enough history

Practical assessment

Should you use it?

✓ Best for

Research and experimentation
Prototype development
Learning agentic patterns

◎ Strengths

Active community
Open source
Well-documented API

✕ Not ideal for

Untested at scale without validation
Teams without AI/ML expertise

⚠ Watch-outs

Review changelog before updating
Verify license for commercial use

Technical details

What's inside

Language—

License—

Sourcearxiv

Open source✗ No

Commercial use—

Docs—

Demo—

PaperarXiv ↗

AgentHub Score

Score 55/100

Below average

Alternatives

OccuReward: LLM-Guided Occupant-Centric Reward Shaping for Demographic Equity in Grid-Interactive Buildings

0 · agent app

Unaccountable Delegation, Fading Skills: Mapping the Risks of Workplace AI Agents

0 · agent app

AgentProv: Auditing Agentic LLM API Providers via Tool-use Policy Probes

0 · agent app

SysEvolve: An AI-native, safe, autonomous adversarial attack-defense co-evolutionary system

0 · agent app

55 Compare all →

Recent activity

Latest commit ——

Indexed by AgentHub crawler6h ago

Monitor for new releasesongoing