Human Touch vs. Tech Talk: Mental Health Clinicians' Perspectives on Artificial Intelligence in Systemic Practice

As artificial intelligence (AI) based tools increasingly enter mental health care, clinicians face new possibilities alongside significant ethical, relational, and professional concerns. Yet limited empirical research has examined clinicians' perspectives on AI within systemic practice. This convergent mixed-methods study examined familiarity, use, perceived benefits and risks, ethical and relational concerns, and training needs among 89 practicing mental health professionals in the United States. Approximately half of respondents reported using AI professionally, with notetaking and transcription representing the most frequently reported applications. Findings reflect conditional acceptance of AI with greater perceived value for clinician support and greater concern when AI might compromise professional judgment, confidentiality, contextual understanding, or human connection. Findings also underscore the need for ethically grounded, relationally informed, and systematically responsive AI integration.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Marital and Family Therapy
Published
2026-09-11
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1111/jmft.70172
Primary Topic
Digital Mental Health Interventions
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Human Touch vs. Tech Talk: Mental Health Clinicians' Perspectives on Artificial Intelligence in Systemic Practice

Marcel Montañez, Merranda Marin, Kourtney Vaillancourt
Journal of Marital and Family Therapy
Digital Mental Health Interventions
article

Human Touch vs. Tech Talk: Mental Health Clinicians' Perspectives on Artificial Intelligence in Systemic Practice

Marcel Montañez, Merranda Marin, Kourtney Vaillancourt
article en

Abstract

As artificial intelligence (AI) based tools increasingly enter mental health care, clinicians face new possibilities alongside significant ethical, relational, and professional concerns. Yet limited empirical research has examined clinicians' perspectives on AI within systemic practice. This convergent mixed-methods study examined familiarity, use, perceived benefits and risks, ethical and relational concerns, and training needs among 89 practicing mental health professionals in the United States. Approximately half of respondents reported using AI professionally, with notetaking and transcription representing the most frequently reported applications. Findings reflect conditional acceptance of AI with greater perceived value for clinician support and greater concern when AI might compromise professional judgment, confidentiality, contextual understanding, or human connection. Findings also underscore the need for ethically grounded, relationally informed, and systematically responsive AI integration.

Journal of Marital and Family TherapyVol. 52(4)
New Mexico State University (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 9%
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.