Keeping an AI on the mental health of vulnerable populations: reflections on the potential for participatory injustice

Considering the overall shortage of therapists to meet the psychological needs of vulnerable populations, AI-based technologies are often seen as a possible remedy. Particularly smartphone apps or chatbots are increasingly used to offer mental health support, mostly through cognitive behavioral therapy. The assumption underlying the deployment of these systems is their ability to make mental health support accessible to generally underserved populations. Hence, this seems to be aligned with the fundamental biomedical principle of justice understood in its <i>distributive</i> meaning. However, considerations of the principle of justice in its <i>epistemic</i> significance are still in their infancy in the debates revolving around the ethical issues connected to the use of mental health chatbots. This paper aims to fill this research gap, focusing on a less familiar kind of harm that these systems can cause, namely the harm to users in their capacities as knowing subjects. More specifically, we frame our discussion in terms of one form of epistemic injustice that such practices are especially prone to bring about, i.e., <i>participatory injustice</i>. To make our theoretical analysis more graspable and to show its urgency, we discuss the case of a mental health Chatbot, Karim, deployed to deliver mental health support to Syrian refugees. This case substantiates our theoretical considerations and the epistemo-ethical concerns arising from the use of mental health applications among vulnerable populations. Finally, we argue that conceptualizing epistemic participation as a capability within the framework of Capability Sensitive Design can be a first step toward ameliorating the participatory injustice discussed in this paper.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
AI and Ethics
Published
2024-08-20
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s43681-024-00523-5
Citations
4
Primary Topic
Neuroethics, Human Enhancement, Biomedical Innovations
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
1.37

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Keeping an AI on the mental health of vulnerable populations: reflections on the potential for participatory injustice

Giorgia Pozzi, Michiel De Proost
4 citations
AI and Ethics
Neuroethics, Human Enhancement, Biomedical Innovations
1.37
article

Keeping an AI on the mental health of vulnerable populations: reflections on the potential for participatory injustice

Giorgia Pozzi, Michiel De Proost
article en
4 citations

Abstract

Considering the overall shortage of therapists to meet the psychological needs of vulnerable populations, AI-based technologies are often seen as a possible remedy. Particularly smartphone apps or chatbots are increasingly used to offer mental health support, mostly through cognitive behavioral therapy. The assumption underlying the deployment of these systems is their ability to make mental health support accessible to generally underserved populations. Hence, this seems to be aligned with the fundamental biomedical principle of justice understood in its <i>distributive</i> meaning. However, considerations of the principle of justice in its <i>epistemic</i> significance are still in their infancy in the debates revolving around the ethical issues connected to the use of mental health chatbots. This paper aims to fill this research gap, focusing on a less familiar kind of harm that these systems can cause, namely the harm to users in their capacities as knowing subjects. More specifically, we frame our discussion in terms of one form of epistemic injustice that such practices are especially prone to bring about, i.e., <i>participatory injustice</i>. To make our theoretical analysis more graspable and to show its urgency, we discuss the case of a mental health Chatbot, Karim, deployed to deliver mental health support to Syrian refugees. This case substantiates our theoretical considerations and the epistemo-ethical concerns arising from the use of mental health applications among vulnerable populations. Finally, we argue that conceptualizing epistemic participation as a capability within the framework of Capability Sensitive Design can be a first step toward ameliorating the participatory injustice discussed in this paper.

AI and EthicsVol. 5(3)
Ghent University (BE), Delft University of Technology (NL)
Horizon 2020, H2020 European Research Council
Openalex Percentile: Top 20%
Neuroethics, Human Enhancement, Biomedical Innovations
1.37
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.