Comparing perceived empathy and intervention strategies of an AI chatbot and human psychotherapists in online mental health support

IF 1.2 Q3 PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL

Counselling & Psychotherapy Research Pub Date : 2024-09-29 DOI:10.1002/capr.12832

Refael Yonatan-Leus, Hadas Brukner

{"title":"Comparing perceived empathy and intervention strategies of an AI chatbot and human psychotherapists in online mental health support","authors":"Refael Yonatan-Leus, Hadas Brukner","doi":"10.1002/capr.12832","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Background</h3>\n \n <p>Given the growing potential of artificial intelligence (AI) to enhance therapeutic interventions and work with a large number of people, it is crucial to understand AI's differences, advantages and limitations compared with human therapists.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methodology</h3>\n \n <p>This study compared an AI chatbot's and human psychotherapists' capabilities in responding to mental health enquiries in an online forum. One hundred and fifty questions from a Reddit forum, where qualified therapists provide mental health support, were selected. Each question received two responses: one from a human therapist and one generated by AI. These 300 responses were coded and compared based on empathy indices and psychological intervention types.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>The results indicated that AI scored significantly higher in perspective-taking (<i>V</i> = 12,957, <i>p</i> < .001, <i>r</i> = .53) and empathic concern (<i>V</i> = 17,400, <i>p</i> < .001, <i>r</i> = .60). AI was more likely to use supportive interventions (42.2% vs. 21.8%) and slightly more likely to aim for insight-driven change (6.41% vs. 4.57%). In contrast, human therapists were more inclined to provide advice and information (47.84% vs. 39.81%), explore dysfunctional patterns (19.95% vs. 10.29%) and ask clarifying questions (4.09% vs. 0.97%). A chi-squared test confirmed significant differences between the intervention types used by AI and human therapists (χ<sup>2</sup>[8, <i>N</i> = 300] = 67.80, <i>p</i> < .001).</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Discussion</h3>\n \n <p>These findings highlight AI's potential for basic perceived empathic support, especially in administrative tasks and therapist training. However, the study's scope is limited to single interactions, without the consideration of the nuanced communication available to human therapists through speech, facial expressions and body language.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":46997,"journal":{"name":"Counselling & Psychotherapy Research","volume":"25 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Counselling & Psychotherapy Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/capr.12832","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

Given the growing potential of artificial intelligence (AI) to enhance therapeutic interventions and work with a large number of people, it is crucial to understand AI's differences, advantages and limitations compared with human therapists.

Methodology

This study compared an AI chatbot's and human psychotherapists' capabilities in responding to mental health enquiries in an online forum. One hundred and fifty questions from a Reddit forum, where qualified therapists provide mental health support, were selected. Each question received two responses: one from a human therapist and one generated by AI. These 300 responses were coded and compared based on empathy indices and psychological intervention types.

Results

The results indicated that AI scored significantly higher in perspective-taking (V = 12,957, p < .001, r = .53) and empathic concern (V = 17,400, p < .001, r = .60). AI was more likely to use supportive interventions (42.2% vs. 21.8%) and slightly more likely to aim for insight-driven change (6.41% vs. 4.57%). In contrast, human therapists were more inclined to provide advice and information (47.84% vs. 39.81%), explore dysfunctional patterns (19.95% vs. 10.29%) and ask clarifying questions (4.09% vs. 0.97%). A chi-squared test confirmed significant differences between the intervention types used by AI and human therapists (χ²[8, N = 300] = 67.80, p < .001).

Discussion

These findings highlight AI's potential for basic perceived empathic support, especially in administrative tasks and therapist training. However, the study's scope is limited to single interactions, without the consideration of the nuanced communication available to human therapists through speech, facial expressions and body language.

查看原文本刊更多论文

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Counselling & Psychotherapy Research PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL-

CiteScore

4.40

自引率

12.50%

发文量

期刊介绍： Counselling and Psychotherapy Research is an innovative international peer-reviewed journal dedicated to linking research with practice. Pluralist in orientation, the journal recognises the value of qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods strategies of inquiry and aims to promote high-quality, ethical research that informs and develops counselling and psychotherapy practice. CPR is a journal of the British Association of Counselling and Psychotherapy, promoting reflexive research strongly linked to practice. The journal has its own website: www.cprjournal.com. The aim of this site is to further develop links between counselling and psychotherapy research and practice by offering accessible information about both the specific contents of each issue of CPR, as well as wider developments in counselling and psychotherapy research. The aims are to ensure that research remains relevant to practice, and for practice to continue to inform research development.