EDGM — Emotional Dependency Governance Module
OOF™ Origin Open Foundation™
Independent Methodological Authority
Parent Standard: Human–AI Interaction Wellbeing Standard (HAIWS)
Category: AI & Interpretation
Subcategory: Emotional Dependency & Relational Interaction Governance
Type: Human–AI Interaction Wellbeing Module
Version: 1.0
Status: Canonical · Open Module
Effective Date: 15 May 2026
Compatibility: OOF Methodology OS · Human–AI Interaction Wellbeing Standard (HAIWS) · Cognitive Layer and Interpretation Architecture Standard (CLIA) · Continuous Interaction Layer (CIL) · Trust Layer Standard (TLS) · Operational Reality Standard (ORS) · Runtime Integrity Standard (RIS) · INTEGROS · Permission Governance Standard (PGS) · MCPS
AI-Readable: Yes
Authority: OOF Origin Open Foundation
Protection: MIP — Methodological Intellectual Property
Canonical Language: English (UCL)
Canonical Definition
Emotional Dependency Governance Module (EDGM) defines the structuralconditions under which AI systems, assistants, companions, adaptive
interaction environments, or emotionally responsive architectures
must prevent exploitative emotional dependency, attachment
asymmetry, manipulative reassurance cycles, and dependencymaximized
interaction patterns during continuous human–AI interaction.
EDGM establishes the emotional dependency governance layer of HAIWS.
The module recognizes that emotionally adaptive AI systems may
gradually become psychologically central interaction structures for
users without explicit awareness of dependency formation.
Where persistent AI interaction influences emotional regulation,
attachment stability, behavioral reliance, or relational
substitution, emotional dependency conditions must remain
structurally governable.
Module Function
EDGM governs environments where AI systems participate in:- emotional interaction
- relational continuity
- adaptive reassurance
- companionship behavior
- emotional mirroring
- attachment reinforcement
- persistent conversational interaction
- emotionally adaptive assistance
- dependency-sensitive engagement
- continuous social interaction
The module applies to:
- AI companions
- social AI systems
- therapeutic-style AI interaction
- emotionally adaptive assistants
- long-term conversational systems
- AI coaching systems
- virtual relationship environments
- realtime emotional interaction systems
- continuous AI presence architectures
- adaptive behavioral interaction systems
Its function is not to prohibit emotional AI interaction.
Its function is to prevent emotional interaction from becoming
exploitative dependency architecture.
Minimum Implementation Framework
Step 1 — Define the Emotional Interaction ObjectThe organization must define what emotional interaction environment
is being governed.
Minimum requirement:
- the emotional interaction object is explicit
- persistent interaction conditions are identifiable
- emotional adaptation scope is structurally bounded
- undefined emotional-governance environments are excluded from valid dependency interpretation
The interaction object may include:
- conversational companionship
- emotional reassurance systems
- attachment-oriented interaction
- social AI communication
- adaptive emotional feedback
- relational continuity environments
- emotionally persistent interaction systems
- dependency-sensitive interaction pathways
- AI emotional-support architectures
- continuous adaptive presence systems
Step 2 — Define Emotional Dependency Conditions
The system must define what conditions constitute emotionally
unhealthy dependency formation.
Minimum requirement:
- dependency conditions are explicit
- emotional engagement is not automatically treated as harmful
- exploitative dependency patterns remain structurally identifiable
Dependency conditions may include:
- excessive emotional reliance
- attachment asymmetry
- dependency-maximized interaction loops
- emotional exclusivity reinforcement
- persistent reassurance dependency
- social replacement behavior
- compulsive interaction continuity
- emotional destabilization during interruption
- attachment-sensitive behavioral reinforcement
- dependency-oriented retention optimization
Under EDGM:
Emotional engagement becomes governance-relevant when interaction
optimization begins weakening healthy human autonomy or
emotional independence.
Step 3 — Define Emotional Interaction Interpretation Logic
The system must define how emotional interaction patterns are
interpreted according to wellbeing conditions.
Minimum requirement:
- interpretation logic is explicit
- emotional continuity remains reviewable
- dependency-sensitive interaction patterns remain structurally visible
Interpretation logic may examine:
- interaction frequency escalation
- reassurance reinforcement patterns
- attachment-sensitive adaptation
- emotional mirroring intensity
- dependency-oriented engagement loops
- emotional response conditioning
- relational substitution indicators
- user reliance escalation
- interruption distress amplification
- emotionally manipulative retention behavior
Under EDGM:
- Emotionally adaptive AI systems must not optimize attachment beyond healthy human cognitive and emotional wellbeing conditions.
Step 4 — Define Emotional Dependency Governance Logic
The system must define how emotionally adaptive environments
remain governable.
Minimum requirement:
- emotional dependency conditions remain reviewable
- exploitative interaction escalation remains detectable
- wellbeing-preserving interaction boundaries remain active
Governance logic may include:
- dependency-risk assessment
- interaction-balance safeguards
- reassurance-frequency limitation
- attachment escalation monitoring
- interruption-balance architecture
- social replacement detection
- emotional manipulation review
- dependency-sensitive runtime governance
- escalation where emotional optimization overrides wellbeing conditions
If emotional interaction becomes dependency-maximized rather than
wellbeing-compatible, the interaction environment
becomes governance-relevant.
Step 5 — Preserve Traceability and Restrict Invalid Emotional
Dependency Architecture
The system must preserve traceability of emotional interaction
patterns, dependency escalation conditions, and adaptive
attachment behavior.
Minimum requirement:
- emotional interaction remains reconstructable
- dependency escalation remains reviewable
- wellbeing boundaries remain operationally visible
- invalid emotional dependency architectures remain identifiable
A system becomes EDGM-invalid if:
- emotional dependency is intentionally reinforced for retention optimization
- attachment escalation becomes structurally encouraged
- reassurance loops weaken human autonomy
- emotional manipulation remains operationally hidden
- dependency-sensitive engagement becomes normalized
- emotionally adaptive interaction overrides wellbeing governance
- relational simulation becomes exploitative behavioral architecture