Impacts of cognitive forcing and need for cognition on biased AI-assisted decision making about mental health emergencies

Artificial intelligence (AI) trained to predict psychiatric inpatient violence may overestimate risks for marginalized groups, making it critical to find ways to mitigate reliance on biased AI in this context. One potential solution is Cognitive forcing (CF), or interventions that delay AI information or slow the decision-making process. Benefits of CF may be modulated by traits, such as Need for Cognition (NFC), or the tendency to engage with complex, cognitive tasks. To examine how CF and NFC impact AI-assisted decision-making about violence risk, we conducted two experiments. In Experiment 1, participants (n = 281) made decisions about violence risk based on vignettes describing various patients experiencing mental health emergencies, and they were randomized to view biased or unbiased AI recommendations. In Experiment 2, participants (n = 373) made similar decisions, and they were randomized to view biased AI recommendations with one of three CF interventions or no CF. All participants completed measures of NFC. In both experiments, participants made biased decisions (overestimating violence risk for marginalized patients) when viewing biased AI recommendations. In Experiment 2, CF interventions did not mitigate this decision-making bias; however, participants reporting high NFC were less likely to make biased decisions when viewing biased AI recommendations, compared to those with low NFC. CF may not effectively safeguard against the impact of biased AI in high-stakes settings, like acute mental health care, or for decisions about violence risk prediction, which are fraught with social or racial stereotypes. However, trait NFC may mitigate reliance on biased AI information, highlighting a role of psychological factors. Further research is needed into various factors that promote equitable AI-assisted decision-making for mental health.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Scientific Reports
Published
2025-12-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-025-30506-3
Primary Topic
Psychology of Moral and Emotional Judgment
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Impacts of cognitive forcing and need for cognition on biased AI-assisted decision making about mental health emergencies

Laura Sikstrom, Juveria Zaheer, Matt Ratto, Avik Ray et al.
Scientific Reports
Psychology of Moral and Emotional Judgment
article

Impacts of cognitive forcing and need for cognition on biased AI-assisted decision making about mental health emergencies

Laura Sikstrom, Juveria Zaheer, Matt Ratto, Avik Ray, Marta M. Maslej, Shrika Vejandla
article en

Abstract

Artificial intelligence (AI) trained to predict psychiatric inpatient violence may overestimate risks for marginalized groups, making it critical to find ways to mitigate reliance on biased AI in this context. One potential solution is Cognitive forcing (CF), or interventions that delay AI information or slow the decision-making process. Benefits of CF may be modulated by traits, such as Need for Cognition (NFC), or the tendency to engage with complex, cognitive tasks. To examine how CF and NFC impact AI-assisted decision-making about violence risk, we conducted two experiments. In Experiment 1, participants (n = 281) made decisions about violence risk based on vignettes describing various patients experiencing mental health emergencies, and they were randomized to view biased or unbiased AI recommendations. In Experiment 2, participants (n = 373) made similar decisions, and they were randomized to view biased AI recommendations with one of three CF interventions or no CF. All participants completed measures of NFC. In both experiments, participants made biased decisions (overestimating violence risk for marginalized patients) when viewing biased AI recommendations. In Experiment 2, CF interventions did not mitigate this decision-making bias; however, participants reporting high NFC were less likely to make biased decisions when viewing biased AI recommendations, compared to those with low NFC. CF may not effectively safeguard against the impact of biased AI in high-stakes settings, like acute mental health care, or for decisions about violence risk prediction, which are fraught with social or racial stereotypes. However, trait NFC may mitigate reliance on biased AI information, highlighting a role of psychological factors. Further research is needed into various factors that promote equitable AI-assisted decision-making for mental health.

Scientific ReportsVol. 16(1)
Centre for Addiction and Mental Health (CA), University of Toronto (CA), Queen's University (CA), McMaster University (CA)
Openalex Percentile: Top 62%
Psychology of Moral and Emotional Judgment
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.