Swartz, H. A. (2023).
American Journal of Psychotherapy,
76(2), 55–56.
News stories about generative artificial intelligence (AI) abound, alternately predicting that AI will cause humanity’s demise and touting it as the solution to everything from climate change to health care scarcity. In 2022, OpenAI’s release of ChatGPT, an easy-to-use AI interface that produces fluent text in response to prompts, intensified highly ambivalent discussions about AI. Pundits and knowledgeable experts alike marveled at ChatGPT’s ability to produce text that resembles human writing while acknowledging that the speed of its evolution was outstripping our ability to understand its risks. This technology performed better on law school and medical school entrance exams than many human applicants, leading to predictions that AI will eventually render some professions obsolete. Psychotherapists, too, seem at risk for being replaced by AI. Are fears of AI supplanting psychotherapists reasonable?
To explore how AI might respond to a patient in distress, I typed this prompt into ChatGPT: “I feel sad. Can you help me?” It quickly generated the following text:
I am sorry to hear that you are feeling sad. I’ll do my best to help you. It’s important to remember that I’m an AI language model and may not fully understand or empathize with your emotions, but I can offer some general suggestions and support. . . . Remember, everyone experiences sadness from time to time, and it’s okay to seek help when you need it. You don’t have to face it alone.
Despite being impressed by the speed and conversational tone of ChatGPT’s text generation and the convenience of receiving an immediate response during hours when a human therapist would likely be unavailable, the formulaic exchange and canned feedback provided by ChatGPT left me with doubts about its ability to provide genuine soothing to humans experiencing depression.
Here are some thoughts:
This editorial examines the potential of artificial intelligence (AI) in psychotherapy. While AI chatbots offer increased accessibility and convenience, providing self-help tools and improving symptom management, studies reveal limitations, including a lack of genuine human connection and potential risks like increased self-harm. The author concludes that AI is a useful supplementary tool, particularly in low-resource settings, but cannot replace human therapists for complex emotional and interpersonal issues. Ultimately, a blended approach incorporating both AI and human interaction is suggested for optimal therapeutic outcomes.
