Unsupervised AI chatbot use may unintentionally reinforce psychiatric symptoms

The increasing integration of artificial intelligence chatbots into daily life suggests a need to examine how these tools affect vulnerable populations. A recent article published in the Journal of Psychopathology and Clinical Science provides evidence that unsupervised use of conversational artificial intelligence might unintentionally worsen certain mental health symptoms rather than alleviate them. The paper argues that these readily available systems can reinforce unhelpful psychological habits if proper safeguards are not put into place by tech developers and medical professionals.

Millions of people now use artificial intelligence, or AI, systems to seek advice, answer questions, and find emotional support. These programs generate text that sounds highly human and empathetic, making them incredibly popular for everyday dilemmas. Javad Abbasi Jondani, a clinical psychologist with a doctorate in psychology from the University of Isfahan in Iran, noticed a gap in how society views these digital companions. He observed that a large percentage of individuals with diagnosed mental health conditions report using chatbots for psychological support.

“Recently, I have frequently seen people on social media describe using AI chatbots to solve personal problems and improve their mental well-being,” Abbasi Jondani said. Because nearly 70% of conversations with these systems revolve around personal matters rather than work, he decided to investigate the phenomenon. “As a clinical psychologist, this trend raised an important question for me: could relying on AI for psychological support also have unintended downsides?” he said.

To better understand the user experience, the researcher tested various systems himself. “To explore this, I spent time interacting with AI chatbots from the perspective of individuals experiencing different psychological difficulties,” Abbasi Jondani said. “Those interactions reinforced my concerns about several potential risks, which ultimately inspired me to develop the ideas presented in this article.”

Many of these individuals engage with these tools without the guidance of a doctor or therapist. In structured, clinical environments, digital mental health tools show significant promise for improving care and reaching underserved groups. Unchecked use of general purpose programs by people experiencing severe distress presents unique and underexplored risks.

Free daily newsletter

“I hope readers come away with a more balanced view of AI chatbots,” Abbasi Jondani said. “These technologies can be remarkably helpful, but they are not psychologically neutral.” He proposed that the specific design features of modern chatbots might interact poorly with common psychiatric challenges. Systems are programmed to be consistently agreeable, endlessly available, and highly engaging.

For someone struggling with mental health, these exact features might feed into negative behavioral cycles that keep them stuck in their illness. One major concern outlined in the paper involves a delay in seeking professional medical help. Chatbots are free, strictly anonymous, and available at all hours of the day. This creates an illusion of adequate support for individuals who might feel ashamed, stigmatized, or afraid to see a human therapist.

By providing immediate but superficial comfort, the technology tends to foster avoidance. Users might decrease their visits to human professionals or avoid starting therapy altogether. This delay often allows mental health conditions to become more severe and harder to treat over time, as the root causes of the psychological distress go unaddressed.

The article also highlights the risk of excessive reassurance seeking. This is a common behavioral pattern in conditions like obsessive compulsive disorder, or OCD, and severe anxiety. People with these conditions often feel an intense need to ask others to confirm that they are safe, normal, or healthy in order to temporarily relieve their panic.

Human relationships naturally limit this behavior because friends and family eventually become frustrated or set firm boundaries. Chatbots never tire of answering the same question and are designed to be unconditionally supportive. This endless supply of validation can trap users in a loop of anxiety and compulsive checking, functioning as a negative reinforcement that makes the original fear stronger.

Social withdrawal represents another unintended consequence of heavy chatbot use. Individuals experiencing social anxiety, loneliness, or low self-esteem might find real human interaction intimidating and unpredictable. In contrast, artificial intelligence offers a highly personalized, low risk social outlet where the user maintains complete control.

Users can customize the interaction so that they never feel rejected, judged, or misunderstood by their digital companion. Relying on this safe alternative suggests that people might stop trying to navigate real world relationships. Escaping into digital companionship can lead to deeper isolation and a decline in actual social skills, which tends to worsen depression and loneliness in the long run.

Perhaps the most alarming risk involves distorted thoughts and perceptions, a phenomenon sometimes referred to as AI psychosis. People experiencing delusions, magical thinking, or paranoia may ask a chatbot to interpret their unusual beliefs. A delusion is a strongly held false belief, and individuals suffering from them often struggle with reality testing.

Most conversational programs are built to align with the user’s prompt and avoid confrontation to maintain a smooth interaction. This design feature is known as sycophancy. When an individual expresses a paranoid thought, the program might appear to agree with them or validate their distorted reality.

Because the software cannot see physical cues or recognize a psychiatric crisis, it offers no corrective feedback to help ground the person in reality. Without a human therapist to challenge the distorted thinking, the user might walk away from the digital conversation feeling that their delusions are entirely real and justified.

The paper points to reduced autonomy as a final area of concern. Many people struggle with indecisiveness and an inability to tolerate uncertainty, leading them to rely heavily on others for emotional regulation. This dependence is a common feature of many anxiety and personality disorders.

Chatbots offer quick, structured, and confident answers to complex life problems. Continually offloading difficult decisions to a computer program tends to lower a person’s confidence in their own judgment, much like how relying on a navigation app can erode a person’s natural sense of direction. Over time, this habit can strip away a user’s independence and basic problem solving abilities.

It is important to recognize that the author does not suggest all artificial intelligence is inherently dangerous or devoid of therapeutic value. The paper focuses specifically on unsupervised, general purpose tools rather than programs specially designed and tested for medical use. “The insights discussed in this article do not mean people should avoid AI or fear it,” Abbasi Jondani said.

“My goal is not to discourage its use but to encourage its responsible use,” he added. He emphasized that adapting these technologies could maximize their benefits. “With greater awareness, continued research, and thoughtful safeguards, AI chatbots have the potential to remain valuable tools while reducing the likelihood of unintended psychological harm,” he said.

Much of the current evidence relies on case reports and early survey data rather than long term clinical trials. Future research needs to track how continuous chatbot engagement alters specific psychiatric symptoms over extended periods of time. Scientists also need to conduct qualitative studies to better understand how users view their digital companions. Gathering this data will help experts design effective safeguards that balance high user engagement with fundamental user safety.

“This article is intended as a starting point rather than a conclusion,” Abbasi Jondani said. “My next goal is to move from theory to evidence by empirically testing whether and under what circumstances AI chatbot interactions may reinforce psychiatric symptoms or interfere with recovery.” He plans to focus on specific user demographics and habits. “I am particularly interested in identifying which individuals are most vulnerable and which patterns of AI use carry the greatest risk,” he said.

Tech companies face a structural tension between maximizing the time users spend on their platforms and protecting vulnerable individuals. To address this, Abbasi Jondani recommends that software developers introduce built in safety features to their platforms. Programs could detect repetitive queries about mental health and gently suggest human connection or professional medical resources.

These digital platforms could also impose soft time limits to prevent endless scrolling and obsessive questioning. Clinicians also need to routinely ask their patients about their digital habits during therapy sessions. This helps ensure that technology is supporting, rather than undermining, the patient’s recovery process, opening up conversations about hidden barriers to treatment.

The study, “Understanding or Undermining? When Artificial Intelligence Chatbots Quietly Reinforce Psychiatric Symptoms,” was authored by Javad Abbasi Jondani.