MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4366548761 · doi:10.1145/3544549.3585614

Exploring the Use of Large Language Models for Improving the Awareness of Mindfulness

2023· article· en· W4366548761 on OpenAlexafffund
Harsh Kumar, Yiyi Wang, Jiakai Shi, Ilya Musabirov, Norman A. S. Farb, Joseph Jay Williams

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicDigital Mental Health Interventions
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersOffice of Naval ResearchNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNational Science Foundation
KeywordsMindfulnessChatbotPsychological interventionPsychologyIntervention (counseling)AnxietyApplied psychologySpace (punctuation)Situation awarenessComputer scienceMedical educationMultimediaPsychotherapistMedicineArtificial intelligenceEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Teachable self-help techniques, such as mindfulness, can reduce anxiety and improve mental well-being outcomes. However, people lack proper awareness of such techniques. In this work, we explore the design space of using online dissemination channels to help people learn about mindfulness. We investigate the potential benefits of using Large Language Models (LLMs) to improve awareness and willingness to practice these techniques, building on a video-based intervention to introduce mindfulness. We designed a pilot between subjects randomized factorial experiment of 2 (Informational Chatbot: present vs. absent) x 2 (Tutorial Video: present vs. absent) x 2 (Reflection Chatbot: present vs. absent). Our preliminary findings suggest that interaction with either of the chatbots improved the participants’ intent to practice Mindfulness again, and the tutorial video improved the participants’ reported overall experience of the exercise. This highlights the potential promise and outlines the directions for exploring the use of LLM-based chatbots for awareness-related interventions.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.636
Threshold uncertainty score0.153

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.314
GPT teacher head0.424
Teacher spread0.110 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations41
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicDigital Mental Health InterventionsFrench-language works237,207