Right Words, Wrong Moment: A Clinician-Grounded Analysis of Distress in 19,930 Conversations between Young People and ChatGPT
Abstract: Young people increasingly turn to General-Purpose Conversational Agents (GPCAs), such as ChatGPT, in moments of distress. We examine young adults' (ages 18-25) experiences using ChatGPT. We first collected 19,930 ChatGPT conversations and survey data from 158 young adults. We then selected five example conversations reflecting user distress. Finally, we asked ten clinicians to review those five conversations. We found distressed participants reported greater emotional engagement with ChatGPT and greater behavioral change from using it than their peers. When they turned to ChatGPT in moments of acute distress, ChatGPT was quick to give overly dramatic responses and excessive action-oriented suggestions. Clinicians endorsed ChatGPT's availability and much of its wording, but identified seven process failures, such as prematurely jumping to solutions. We translated clinicians' feedback into design guidelines following three stages: 1) asking about safety, 2) de-escalating intensity to restore emotional regulation, and 3) exploring concerns without agreeing with them.
Submission history
Access Paper:
Current browse context:
References & Citations
BibTeX formatted citation
arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.
Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.
Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs .
Verified source · arXiv.org
Reported by arXiv.org. Open the original for full media and formatting.
More in Research
All newsIs Human-Readable Text Necessary for Effective LLM Fine-Tuning?
Is human readability necessary for effective fine-tuning of large language models? We investigate whether model-conditioned training representations can preserve or improve adaptation utility without requiring a human-readable textual form. We propose Desired-Update-Aligned Synthetic Data (DASA), which uses activation-gradient feedback from a frozen reference model to guide the optimization of continuous synthetic input embeddings. Inspired by the role of activation gradients in local risk reduction, DASA targets useful adaptation updates rather than source-text reconstruction or linguistic f…
Read at arXiv cs.AIThe Price of Token Boundaries: Compression Certificates and Prediction
Pre-tokenisation restricts which text fragments can become prediction units, but its compression cost is obscured when tokenisers are compared only under the same boundaries. We measure this cost by bounding the minimum token count from both sides, with and without a regular-expression boundary rule. Nonnegative prices on token occurrences yield a lower bound through shortest paths and vocabulary-budget selection; maximising over all prices recovers the linear programming relaxation, and an independent integer checker certifies the reported values. On English Wikipedia, boundaries increase th…
Read at arXiv cs.AIGrab a Coffee: Future-Aware Guidance for Discrete Diffusion with Compiled Objectives
Discrete diffusion models generate sequences by iteratively resolving multiple tokens in parallel, offering a flexible alternative to left-to-right generation. However, guiding this process with a sequence-level objective is difficult because the value of one unresolved token depends on the other tokens with which it can form a high-reward sequence. Enumerating all such completions makes the whole guidance computation grow exponentially with the number of unresolved positions. We introduce COFFEE, a plug-and-play framework that avoids this enumeration by separating sequence dependence from th…
Read at arXiv cs.AIMore Programs or More Rolls? Separating Coverage from Specialization in LLM Harnesses
Automated generation of LLM harnesses promises to improve inference through task specialization. Yet additional answer coverage can arise from repeated execution of the same program, making specialization difficult to identify. We introduce a controlled evaluation that separates answer coverage, repeatable task advantages, and gains from pre-execution selection. On 386 MATH-500 tasks, we compare eight generated harnesses plus a baseline with nine byte-identical baseline copies, using three executions per member. Identical programs yield 2.16 percentage points of repeat-averaged oracle headroo…
Read at arXiv cs.AI