Aligning Human-AI-Interaction Trust for Mental Health Support: Survey and Position for Multi-Stakeholders

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.20166v1
• Date: Wed, 22 Apr 2026 04:11:01 GMT
• Title: Aligning Human-AI-Interaction Trust for Mental Health Support: Survey and Position for Multi-Stakeholders
• Abstract summary: Building trustworthy AI systems for mental health support is a shared priority across stakeholders from multiple disciplines.<n>"Trustworthy" remains loosely defined and inconsistently operationalized.<n>We propose a three-layer trust framework, covering human-oriented, AI-oriented, and interaction-oriented trust.
• Score: 17.814096373665887
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
• Abstract: Building trustworthy AI systems for mental health support is a shared priority across stakeholders from multiple disciplines. However, "trustworthy" remains loosely defined and inconsistently operationalized. AI research often focuses on technical criteria (e.g., robustness, explainability, and safety), while therapeutic practitioners emphasize therapeutic fidelity (e.g., appropriateness, empathy, and long-term user outcomes). To bridge the fragmented landscape, we propose a three-layer trust framework, covering human-oriented, AI-oriented, and interaction-oriented trust, integrating the viewpoints of key stakeholders (e.g., practitioners, researchers, regulators). Using this framework, we systematically review existing AI-driven research in mental health domain and examine evaluation practices for ``trustworthy'' ranging from automatic metrics to clinically validated approaches. We highlight critical gaps between what NLP currently measures and what real-world mental health contexts require, and outline a research agenda for building socio-technically aligned and genuinely trustworthy AI for mental health support.

Related papers

• Responsible Evaluation of AI for Mental Health [72.85175110624736]
  Current approaches to evaluating AI tools in mental health care are fragmented and poorly aligned with clinical practice, social context, and first-hand user experience.<n>This paper argues for a rethinking of responsible evaluation by introducing an interdisciplinary framework that integrates clinical soundness, social context, and equity.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-20T12:55:10Z)
• AI Systems in Text-Based Online Counselling: Ethical Considerations Across Three Implementation Approaches [0.0]
  Text-based online counselling scales across geographical and stigma barriers, yet faces practitioner shortages, lacks non-verbal cues and suffers inconsistent quality assurance.<n>This paper analyses three AI implementation approaches - autonomous counsellor bots, AI training simulators and counsellor-facing augmentation tools.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-12T12:04:11Z)
• Understanding AI Trustworthiness: A Scoping Review of AIES & FAccT Articles [41.419459280691605]
  Trustworthy AI serves as a foundational pillar for two major AI ethics conferences: AIES and FAccT.<n>This scoping review aims to examine how the AIES and FAccT communities conceptualize, measure, and validate AI trustworthiness.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-10-24T09:40:38Z)
• Never Compromise to Vulnerabilities: A Comprehensive Survey on AI Governance [211.5823259429128]
  We propose a comprehensive framework integrating technical and societal dimensions, structured around three interconnected pillars: Intrinsic Security, Derivative Security, and Social Ethics.<n>We identify three core challenges: (1) the generalization gap, where defenses fail against evolving threats; (2) inadequate evaluation protocols that overlook real-world risks; and (3) fragmented regulations leading to inconsistent oversight.<n>Our framework offers actionable guidance for researchers, engineers, and policymakers to develop AI systems that are not only robust and secure but also ethically aligned and publicly trustworthy.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-08-12T09:42:56Z)
• Stakeholder Perspectives on Humanistic Implementation of Computer Perception in Healthcare: A Qualitative Study [1.2144656790395498]
  Digital phenotyping, affective computing and related passive sensing approaches offer unprecedented opportunities to personalize healthcare.<n>These tools provoke concerns about privacy, bias and the erosion of empathic, relationship-centered practice.<n>This study provides the first evidence-based account of key stakeholder perspectives on the integration of CP technologies into patient care.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-08-04T16:01:56Z)
• Towards Privacy-aware Mental Health AI Models: Advances, Challenges, and Opportunities [58.61680631581921]
  Mental health disorders create profound personal and societal burdens, yet conventional diagnostics are resource-intensive and limit accessibility.<n>This paper examines these challenges and proposes solutions, including anonymization, synthetic data, and privacy-preserving training.<n>It aims to advance reliable, privacy-aware AI tools that support clinical decision-making and improve mental health outcomes.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-01T15:10:02Z)
• Harnessing Large Language Models for Mental Health: Opportunities, Challenges, and Ethical Considerations [3.0655356440262334]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) are AI-driven tools that empower mental health professionals with real-time support, improved data integration, and the ability to encourage care-seeking behaviors.<n>However, their implementation comes with significant challenges and ethical concerns.<n>This paper examines the transformative potential of LLMs in mental health care, highlights the associated technical and ethical complexities, and advocates for a collaborative, multidisciplinary approach.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-12-13T13:18:51Z)
• FUTURE-AI: International consensus guideline for trustworthy and deployable artificial intelligence in healthcare [73.78776682247187]
  Concerns have been raised about the technical, clinical, ethical and legal risks associated with medical AI. This work describes the FUTURE-AI guideline as the first international consensus framework for guiding the development and deployment of trustworthy AI tools in healthcare.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-08-11T10:49:05Z)
• Organizational Governance of Emerging Technologies: AI Adoption in Healthcare [43.02293389682218]
  The Health AI Partnership aims to better define the requirements for adequate organizational governance of AI systems in healthcare settings. This is one of the most detailed qualitative analyses to date of the current governance structures and processes involved in AI adoption by health systems in the United States. We hope these findings can inform future efforts to build capabilities to promote the safe, effective, and responsible adoption of emerging technologies in healthcare.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-04-25T18:30:47Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.