AI-Enhanced Virtual Reality Self-Talk for Psychological Counseling: Formative Qualitative Study
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: Access to mental health services continues to pose a global challenge, with current services often unable to meet the growing demand. This has sparked interest in conversational artificial intelligence (AI) agents as potential solutions. Despite this, the development of a reliable virtual therapist remains challenging, and the feasibility of AI fulfilling this sensitive role is still uncertain. One promising approach involves using AI agents for psychological self-talk, particularly within virtual reality (VR) environments. Self-talk in VR allows externalizing self-conversation by enabling individuals to embody avatars representing themselves as both patient and counselor, thus enhancing cognitive flexibility and problem-solving abilities. However, participants sometimes experience difficulties progressing in sessions, which is where AI could offer guidance and support. OBJECTIVE: This formative study aims to assess the challenges and advantages of integrating an AI agent into self-talk in VR for psychological counseling, focusing on user experience and the potential role of AI in supporting self-reflection, problem-solving, and positive behavioral change. METHODS: We carried out an iterative design and development of a system and protocol integrating large language models (LLMs) within VR self-talk during the first two and a half years. The design process addressed user interface, speech-to-text functionalities, fine-tuning the LLMs, and prompt engineering. Upon completion of the design process, we conducted a 3-month long exploratory qualitative study in which 11 healthy participants completed a session that included identifying a problem they wanted to address, attempting to address this problem using self-talk in VR, and then continuing self-talk in VR but this time with the assistance of an LLM-based virtual human. The sessions were carried out with a trained clinical psychologist and followed by semistructured interviews. We used applied thematic analysis after the interviews to code and develop key themes for the participants that addressed our research objective. RESULTS: In total, 4 themes were identified regarding the quality of advice, the potential advantages of human-AI collaboration in self-help, the believability of the virtual human, and user preferences for avatars in the scenario. The participants rated their desire to engage in additional such sessions at 8.3 out of 10, and more than half of the respondents indicated that they preferred using VR self-talk with AI rather than without it. On average, the usefulness of the session was rated 6.9 (SD 0.54), and the degree to which it helped solve their problem was rated 6.1 (SD 1.58). Participants specifically noted that human-AI collaboration led to improved outcomes and facilitated more positive thought processes, thereby enhancing self-reflection and problem-solving abilities. CONCLUSIONS: This exploratory study suggests that the VR self-talk paradigm can be enhanced by LLM-based agents and presents the ways to achieve this, potential pitfalls, and additional insights.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,034 | 0,038 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,008 | 0,008 |
| Communication savante | 0,004 | 0,004 |
| Science ouverte | 0,003 | 0,007 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,003 | 0,003 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,004 | 0,001 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».