analiza aiqbench
This survey identifies a critical calibration gap in mental health AI, where NLP metrics like safety often conflict with therapeutic needs for empathy and lived experience. The authors propose a three-layer framework to align human-oriented trust with demonstrated interaction and AI-level trustworthiness, shifting the goal from maximizing perceived trust to ensuring genuine reliability. This work is essential for researchers and clinicians developing responsible language models for sensitive support applications.
Trust Stack for Mental Health AI: A Survey of Calibration across Human, Interaction, and AI Layers
arXiv:2604.20166v3 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Language-based AI is increasingly deployed for mental health support, yet trust is evaluated in interdisciplinary but operationally misaligned ways: NLP and AI work measures robustness, safety, privacy, and explanations, while psychotherapy, HCI, and regulatory work emphasize therapeutic fidelity, lived experience, empathy, and reliance. Empathetic chatbots can elicit strong user trust without commensurate safety, while safer systems are under-trusted when their boundaries are opaque, a calibration gap no single community owns. Through a structured scoping synthesis of 61 papers, we survey this landscape into a three-layer framework separating (L1) human-oriented trust, (L2) interaction-oriented trustworthiness, and (L3) AI-oriented trustworthiness, and map five stakeholder perspectives onto these layers. We outline a research agenda for building socio-technically aligned trustworthy AI for mental health support, highlighting that the central objective should shift from maximizing perceived trust to calibrating human trust to demonstrated interaction- and AI-level trustworthiness.
Authors:Xin Sun, Yue Su, Yifan Mo, Qingyu Meng, Yuxuan Li, Min Chen, Mengyuan Zhang, Saku Sugawara, Charlotte Gerritsen, Sander L. Koole, Koen Hindriks, Jiahuan Pei
Abstract:Language-based AI is increasingly deployed for mental health support, yet trust is evaluated in interdisciplinary but operationally misaligned ways: NLP and AI work measures robustness, safety, privacy, and explanations, while psychotherapy, HCI, and regulatory work emphasize therapeutic fidelity, lived experience, empathy, and reliance. Empathetic chatbots can elicit strong user trust without commensurate safety, while safer systems are under-trusted when their boundaries are opaque, a calibration gap no single community owns. Through a structured scoping synthesis of 61 papers, we survey this landscape into a three-layer framework separating (L1) human-oriented trust, (L2) interaction-oriented trustworthiness, and (L3) AI-oriented trustworthiness, and map five stakeholder perspectives onto these layers. We outline a research agenda for building socio-technically aligned trustworthy AI for mental health support, highlighting that the central objective should shift from maximizing perceived trust to calibrating human trust to demonstrated interaction- and AI-level trustworthiness.
Computation and Language (cs.CL); Human-Computer Interaction (cs.HC)
arXiv:2604.20166 [cs.CL]
(or arXiv:2604.20166v3 [cs.CL] for this version)
Text integral sub licența deschisă a publicației · 181 cuvinte
Subiecte conexe
The J-Space Debate, Agent Swarms, and Pacing Frontier AI - Digital Minds Newsletter #4
LessWrong · 18 sept. 2026

Dharma vs Adharma - The Perplexity of Being Alive
hillpost.in · 25 aug. 2026

Digital States 2026: AI Moves From Experiment to Infrastructure
govtech.com · 24 sept. 2026

Survey: People don’t trust AI, but they tell it everything
Proton Blog · 24 sept. 2026