正确的措辞，错误的时机：一项基于临床医生对19,930段年轻人与ChatGPT对话中困扰的分析
Right Words, Wrong Moment: A Clinician-Grounded Analysis of Distress in 19,930 Conversations between Young People and ChatGPT
浏览论文内容
中文总结 AI 辅助
本研究基于19,930段对话和临床医生评审，分析年轻人困扰时使用ChatGPT的体验，发现其回应过度戏剧化且存在流程缺陷，并提出三阶段设计指南以改善支持。
中文摘要 AI 辅助
年轻人越来越多地在困扰时刻转向通用型对话代理（GPCAs），如ChatGPT。我们考察了年轻成年人（18-25岁）使用ChatGPT的体验。我们首先收集了19,930段ChatGPT对话以及来自158名年轻成年人的调查数据。随后，我们选取了五段反映用户困扰的示例对话。最后，我们邀请了十位临床医生审阅这五段对话。我们发现，与同龄人相比，处于困扰中的参与者报告了更高的情感投入以及因使用ChatGPT而产生的更大行为改变。当他们在急性困扰时刻转向ChatGPT时，ChatGPT会迅速给出过度戏剧化的回应和过多的行动导向建议。临床医生认可了ChatGPT的可及性及其大部分措辞，但指出了七项流程失败，例如过早跳入解决方案。我们将临床医生的反馈转化为遵循三个步骤的设计指南：1）询问安全性；2）降低强度以恢复情绪调节；3）在不认同的情况下探索担忧。
英文摘要
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.
发表机构
- University of Washington（华盛顿大学）
- University of Oxford（牛津大学）
- Stanford University（斯坦福大学）
- Georgetown University（乔治城大学）
- The University of Texas at Austin（德克萨斯大学奥斯汀分校）
机构由 AI 辅助整理，请以论文原文为准。
