对比LLM与真人治疗师回应，发现前者更清晰支持但用户仍偏好人际陪伴。
Can LLMs Address Mental Health Questions? A Comparison with Human Therapists
- 用真实患者提问测试ChatGPT、Gemini等生成回复，对比人类治疗师文本特征。
- 用户调查显示，LLM回复更清晰、尊重且支持感更强，但偏好仍倾向真人治疗师。
- 适合关注AI心理助手设计、人机交互信任机制的研究者与开发者参考。
心理卫生服务可及性有限，促使使用由大语言模型（LLMs）驱动的数字工具和对话代理，但其质量与接受度尚不明确。本研究比较了真人治疗师与ChatGPT、Gemini、Llama针对真实患者问题生成的回应。文本分析显示，LLM生成的回答更长、更易读、词汇更丰富且语气更积极，而治疗师回应更常使用第一人称。在包含150名用户和23位持证治疗师的调查中，参与者认为LLM回答更清晰、更尊重、更具支持性，但两组均更倾向于选择人类治疗师的支持。研究揭示了LLM在心理健康领域的潜力与局限，强调需在沟通优势与信任、隐私、问责等关切之间寻求平衡。
原文摘要 · Abstract (English)
Limited access to mental health care has motivated the use of digital tools and conversational agents powered by large language models (LLMs), yet their quality and reception remain unclear. We present a study comparing therapist-written responses to those generated by ChatGPT, Gemini, and Llama for real patient questions. Text analysis showed that LLMs produced longer, more readable, and lexically richer responses with a more positive tone, while therapist responses were more often written in the first person. In a survey with 150 users and 23 licensed therapists, participants rated LLM responses as clearer, more respectful, and more supportive than therapist-written answers. Yet, both groups of participants expressed a stronger preference for human therapist support. These findings highlight the promise and limitations of LLMs in mental health, underscoring the need for designs that balance their communicative strengths with concerns of trust, privacy, and accountability.
Thank you to arXiv for use of its open access interoperability. PaperDance 不是 arXiv 官方产品；中文卡片由大模型生成，请以原文为准。