A Suite of Mobile Conversational Agents for Daily Stress Management (Popbots): Mixed Methods Exploratory Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Approximately 60%-80% of the primary care visits have a psychological stress component, but only 3% of patients receive stress management advice during these visits. Given recent advances in natural language processing, there is renewed interest in mental health chatbots. Conversational agents that can understand a user's problems and deliver advice that mitigates the effects of daily stress could be an effective public health tool. However, such systems are complex to build and costly to develop. OBJECTIVE: To address these challenges, our aim is to develop and evaluate a fully automated mobile suite of shallow chatbots-we call them Popbots-that may serve as a new species of chatbots and further complement human assistance in an ecosystem of stress management support. METHODS: After conducting an exploratory Wizard of Oz study (N=14) to evaluate the feasibility of a suite of multiple chatbots, we conducted a web-based study (N=47) to evaluate the implementation of our prototype. Each participant was randomly assigned to a different chatbot designed on the basis of a proven cognitive or behavioral intervention method. To measure the effectiveness of the chatbots, the participants' stress levels were determined using self-reported psychometric evaluations (eg, web-based daily surveys and Patient Health Questionnaire-4). The participants in these studies were recruited through email and enrolled on the web, and some of them participated in follow-up interviews that were conducted in person or on the web (as necessary). RESULTS: Of the 47 participants, 31 (66%) completed the main study. The findings suggest that the users viewed the conversations with our chatbots as helpful or at least neutral and came away with increasingly positive sentiment toward the use of chatbots for proactive stress management. Moreover, those users who used the system more often (ie, they had more than or equal to the median number of conversations) noted a decrease in depression symptoms compared with those who used the system less often based on a Wilcoxon signed-rank test (W=91.50; Z=-2.54; P=.01; r=0.47). The follow-up interviews with a subset of the participants indicated that half of the common daily stressors could be discussed with chatbots, potentially reducing the burden on human coping resources. CONCLUSIONS: Our work suggests that suites of shallow chatbots may offer benefits for both users and designers. As a result, this study's contributions include the design and evaluation of a novel suite of shallow chatbots for daily stress management, a summary of benefits and challenges associated with random delivery of multiple conversational interventions, and design guidelines and directions for future research into similar systems, including authoring chatbot systems and artificial intelligence-enabled recommendation algorithms.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.012 | 0.017 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".