The most vulnerable are prone to use AI therapists: The role of attachment, epistemic trust, and mental health symptoms in acceptance of digital mental health interventions.

IF 3.8 1区 心理学 Q2 PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL
Psychotherapy Research Pub Date : 2026-09-01 Epub Date: 2026-01-19 DOI:10.1080/10503307.2026.2615388
Vera Békés, Katie Aafjes-van Doorn
{"title":"The most vulnerable are prone to use AI therapists: The role of attachment, epistemic trust, and mental health symptoms in acceptance of digital mental health interventions.","authors":"Vera Békés, Katie Aafjes-van Doorn","doi":"10.1080/10503307.2026.2615388","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Digital mental health interventions (DMHIs) offer scalable solutions to traditional barriers in mental healthcare. Acceptability of DMHIs might differ among patients with differing level of symptoms and relational difficulties. This study investigated how a person's psychological profile, including their level of mental health symptoms, epistemic trust, and attachment security, predicts their acceptance of AI-based interventions (avatars, chatbots) versus human-delivered teletherapy.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>Using cluster analysis on survey data from 1,612 (potential) patients and clinicians recruited via Prolifc, we identified three distinct psychological profiles: \"Avoidant-not trusting,\" \"Secure-trusting-healthy,\" and \"Young-anxious-ambivalent-symptomatic.\"</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Results showed a paradoxical pattern: Individuals in the two most vulnerable clusters (\"Avoidant-not trusting\" and \"Young-anxious-ambivalent-symptomatic\") demonstrated significantly higher acceptance of AI-based DMHIs. In contrast, the psychologically healthier \"Secure-trusting-healthy\" cluster showed the lowest AI-based DMHI acceptance and the highest acceptance of teletherapy. Also, having therapy experience as provider or patient was associated with lower AI acceptance in general.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>These findings suggest that AI-based interventions may be uniquely suited to reach individuals who struggle with human-to-human therapeutic relationships, thereby serving as a critical entry point to care for those who need it most. However, those vulnerable people might also miss out on the relational learning that takes place in human-based therapies.</p>","PeriodicalId":48159,"journal":{"name":"Psychotherapy Research","volume":" ","pages":"1318-1332"},"PeriodicalIF":3.8000,"publicationDate":"2026-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Psychotherapy Research","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10503307.2026.2615388","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/1/19 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: Digital mental health interventions (DMHIs) offer scalable solutions to traditional barriers in mental healthcare. Acceptability of DMHIs might differ among patients with differing level of symptoms and relational difficulties. This study investigated how a person's psychological profile, including their level of mental health symptoms, epistemic trust, and attachment security, predicts their acceptance of AI-based interventions (avatars, chatbots) versus human-delivered teletherapy.

Method: Using cluster analysis on survey data from 1,612 (potential) patients and clinicians recruited via Prolifc, we identified three distinct psychological profiles: "Avoidant-not trusting," "Secure-trusting-healthy," and "Young-anxious-ambivalent-symptomatic."

Results: Results showed a paradoxical pattern: Individuals in the two most vulnerable clusters ("Avoidant-not trusting" and "Young-anxious-ambivalent-symptomatic") demonstrated significantly higher acceptance of AI-based DMHIs. In contrast, the psychologically healthier "Secure-trusting-healthy" cluster showed the lowest AI-based DMHI acceptance and the highest acceptance of teletherapy. Also, having therapy experience as provider or patient was associated with lower AI acceptance in general.

Conclusion: These findings suggest that AI-based interventions may be uniquely suited to reach individuals who struggle with human-to-human therapeutic relationships, thereby serving as a critical entry point to care for those who need it most. However, those vulnerable people might also miss out on the relational learning that takes place in human-based therapies.

最脆弱的群体倾向于使用人工智能治疗师:依恋、认知信任和心理健康症状在接受数字心理健康干预措施中的作用。
目的:数字精神卫生干预(DMHIs)为精神卫生保健中的传统障碍提供了可扩展的解决方案。具有不同程度症状和关系困难的患者对DMHIs的可接受性可能不同。这项研究调查了一个人的心理状况,包括他们的心理健康症状水平、认知信任和依恋安全,如何预测他们对基于人工智能的干预(化身、聊天机器人)和人类提供的远程治疗的接受程度。方法:通过聚类分析来自1,612名(潜在)患者和临床医生的调查数据,我们确定了三种不同的心理特征:“回避-不信任”,“安全-信任-健康”和“年轻-焦虑-矛盾-症状”。结果:结果显示了一个矛盾的模式:两个最脆弱的群体(“回避-不信任”和“年轻-焦虑-矛盾症状”)的个体对基于人工智能的DMHIs的接受程度明显更高。相比之下,心理健康的“安全-信任-健康”群体对基于人工智能的DMHI接受度最低,对远程治疗的接受度最高。此外,作为提供者或患者的治疗经历通常与较低的人工智能接受度相关。结论:这些发现表明,基于人工智能的干预措施可能特别适合于接触那些在人际治疗关系中挣扎的个体,因此可以作为最需要它的人的关键切入点。然而,那些脆弱的人也可能错过在以人为基础的治疗中发生的关系学习。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Psychotherapy Research
Psychotherapy Research PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL-
CiteScore
7.80
自引率
10.30%
发文量
68
期刊介绍: Psychotherapy Research seeks to enhance the development, scientific quality, and social relevance of psychotherapy research and to foster the use of research findings in practice, education, and policy formulation. The Journal publishes reports of original research on all aspects of psychotherapy, including its outcomes, its processes, education of practitioners, and delivery of services. It also publishes methodological, theoretical, and review articles of direct relevance to psychotherapy research. The Journal is addressed to an international, interdisciplinary audience and welcomes submissions dealing with diverse theoretical orientations, treatment modalities.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书