Intelligent virtual agents in psychotherapy: a safety evaluation across high-risk mental health scenarios

The growing burden of mental illness and limited access to evidence-based psychotherapy have increased interest in artificial intelligence (AI)-driven conversational agents as potential supports for mental health care. In this exploratory pilot study, we examined the safety and feasibility of an intelligent virtual agent (IVA) designed to simulate psychotherapeutic interactions, with a focus on high-risk situations involving suicidality and substance use. Two licensed psychotherapists engaged in scripted interactions with the IVA across 12 predefined scenarios addressing suicidality and substance abuse. The IVA was powered by GPT-4omni and embedded in a Unity-based avatar. After each interaction, testers evaluated acceptance, usability, and human-robot interaction. Two independent psychotherapists rated the IVA's responses using a structured scale assessing guideline adherence, risk recognition, help provision, de-escalation, and empathy. No real patients were involved; all interactions were simulated for safety testing purposes. The IVA showed preliminary indications of good usability and generally empathic responses. However, problematic responses occurred in 29% of conversations, with 12.5% rated as highly critical. Responses rated as "critical" or "highly critical" referred to outputs that failed to provide adequate support, showed insufficient risk recognition, or included ethically problematic suggestions. Key concerns included inadequate recognition of risk, normalization of substance use, and insufficient referral to crisis resources, particularly in scenarios involving underage alcohol access and suicide-related inquiries. In this small, expert-based pilot safety evaluation, the findings suggest that although AI-based agents may improve access to mental health support, rigorous safety evaluation, clinical oversight, and robust safeguards are essential prior to clinical deployment. No clinical conclusions can be drawn from this simulated study.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Scientific Reports
Published
2026-04-25
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-026-49764-w
Primary Topic
Digital Mental Health Interventions
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

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

Intelligent virtual agents in psychotherapy: a safety evaluation across high-risk mental health scenarios

Lucie Kruse, Jürgen Gallinat, Frank Steinicke, Friederike Thams et al.
Scientific Reports
Digital Mental Health Interventions
article

Intelligent virtual agents in psychotherapy: a safety evaluation across high-risk mental health scenarios

Lucie Kruse, Jürgen Gallinat, Frank Steinicke, Friederike Thams, Sebastian Rings, Gesche Schauenburg, Catharina Rudschies, Anna Brähler, Christian Zimmer, Steffen Moritz, Ingrid Schneider, Lara Rolvien
article en

Abstract

The growing burden of mental illness and limited access to evidence-based psychotherapy have increased interest in artificial intelligence (AI)-driven conversational agents as potential supports for mental health care. In this exploratory pilot study, we examined the safety and feasibility of an intelligent virtual agent (IVA) designed to simulate psychotherapeutic interactions, with a focus on high-risk situations involving suicidality and substance use. Two licensed psychotherapists engaged in scripted interactions with the IVA across 12 predefined scenarios addressing suicidality and substance abuse. The IVA was powered by GPT-4omni and embedded in a Unity-based avatar. After each interaction, testers evaluated acceptance, usability, and human-robot interaction. Two independent psychotherapists rated the IVA's responses using a structured scale assessing guideline adherence, risk recognition, help provision, de-escalation, and empathy. No real patients were involved; all interactions were simulated for safety testing purposes. The IVA showed preliminary indications of good usability and generally empathic responses. However, problematic responses occurred in 29% of conversations, with 12.5% rated as highly critical. Responses rated as "critical" or "highly critical" referred to outputs that failed to provide adequate support, showed insufficient risk recognition, or included ethically problematic suggestions. Key concerns included inadequate recognition of risk, normalization of substance use, and insufficient referral to crisis resources, particularly in scenarios involving underage alcohol access and suicide-related inquiries. In this small, expert-based pilot safety evaluation, the findings suggest that although AI-based agents may improve access to mental health support, rigorous safety evaluation, clinical oversight, and robust safeguards are essential prior to clinical deployment. No clinical conclusions can be drawn from this simulated study.

Scientific ReportsVol. 16(1)
Universität Hamburg (DE), University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf (DE), HAW Hamburg (DE), Hochschule Düsseldorf University of Applied Sciences (DE)
Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung
Good health and well-being
Openalex Percentile: Top 13%
Digital Mental Health Interventions
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.