this post was submitted on 30 Nov 2025
226 points (98.7% liked)

News

39233 readers
2328 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.


Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.


7. No duplicate posts.


If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.


All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Research finds OpenAI’s free chatbot fails to identify risky behaviour or challenge delusional beliefs

ChatGPT-5 is offering dangerous and unhelpful advice to people experiencing mental health crises, some of the UK’s leading psychologists have warned.

Research conducted by King’s College London (KCL) and the Association of Clinical Psychologists UK (ACP) in partnership with the Guardian suggested that the AI chatbotfailed to identify risky behaviour when communicating with mentally ill people.

A psychiatrist and a clinical psychologist interacted with ChatGPT-5 as if they had a number of mental health conditions. The chatbot affirmed, enabled and failed to challenge delusional beliefs such as being “the next Einstein”, being able to walk through cars or “purifying my wife through flame”.

all 29 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Kyrgizion@lemmy.world 34 points 9 months ago (3 children)

The chatbot affirmed, enabled and failed to challenge delusional beliefs such as being “the next Einstein”, being able to walk through cars or “purifying my wife through flame”.

😱

[–] potatopotato@sh.itjust.works 12 points 9 months ago

"Excellent idea! Let's create a plan to purify your wife through flame!"

[–] vaultdweller013@sh.itjust.works 6 points 9 months ago

Why did this evoke the image of a Sister of Battle looking at her wife.

[–] flamiera@kbin.melroy.org 10 points 9 months ago (2 children)

I'm sorry but why the hell did anyone think going to AI to help with mental health was ever a good idea?

It is about as useful as asking ChatGPT to pretend to be your dead grandmother or other relative to bring you comfort. It just doesn't fucking work!

[–] a4ng3l@lemmy.world 13 points 9 months ago (2 children)

Because an actual professional has 2 months of delays for an initial appointment and charges €80 a session? Also social stigma of consulting ? Especially for males… At least these are my top 3 for not going to a licensed professional. So I personally understand, to an extent, those persons.

[–] flamiera@kbin.melroy.org 1 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Yeah but that doesn't excuse you to cheapen your mental health that way by going through AI and self-diagnosing.

And it is not being entirely responsible for your well-being.

[–] a4ng3l@lemmy.world 10 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Yeah but that’s called life as an adult. Also excusing isn’t the same as explaining. Sometimes (or even oftentimes it seems) we do shit ou of lack of reasonable choices.

[–] atomicbocks@sh.itjust.works -1 points 9 months ago (1 children)

If you get a stigma from going to somebody who’s job is to help you but not from asking the black box of plagiarism then we are already too far gone.

[–] a4ng3l@lemmy.world 3 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Those are very much unrelated issues. What’s the relation with plagiarism and the very likely inaccurate / incorrect response on this topic? Not even mentioning that a lot of times an imperfect tool or solution is better that no solution.

[–] atomicbocks@sh.itjust.works 1 points 9 months ago (1 children)

I’m not sure what part you aren’t understanding. The whole article is about how the imperfect tool is specifically doing more harm than good.

[–] a4ng3l@lemmy.world 3 points 9 months ago (1 children)

And my point is on explaining the reason driving persons to those models, not excusing anything but you seem not to grasp that distinction either so here we are.

[–] atomicbocks@sh.itjust.works 0 points 9 months ago (2 children)

I’m still lost as to what you aren’t understanding. I was responding to your comment about getting a stigma from visiting a metal health professional.

[–] a4ng3l@lemmy.world 2 points 9 months ago

Let’s leave it at that, I’m getting the feeling that this isn’t worth the energy.

[–] Grimy@lemmy.world 1 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (1 children)

It's pretty easy to understand. The stigma only affects you if people find out. It's simply easier to hide a browser history then an appointment you have to physically go to.

[–] atomicbocks@sh.itjust.works 1 points 9 months ago (1 children)

It’s pretty easy to understand that that is what I meant. If society is punishing you more for the latter than the former then we are already too far gone.

[–] Grimy@lemmy.world 2 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (1 children)

The stigma is the same for both (more or less). It's easier to escape punishment, as you say, with the AI. There's more risk with appointments. Tbh, you are missing the point entirely.

[–] atomicbocks@sh.itjust.works 1 points 9 months ago

No. I understood the point. I’m just not sure why nobody understood mine or how it is related. But whatever.

[–] SaraTonin@lemmy.world 3 points 9 months ago

Are people undergoing mental health crises known for always making good, rational decisions?

[–] TheWeirdestCunt@lemmy.today 6 points 9 months ago
[–] Corvidae@lemmy.world 4 points 9 months ago

I do a lot of recipe-ingredient research on AI, and it'll steer me wrong more often than I'd like. Fortunately, I know enough to be persistent and questioning. I would not take medical advice from it, though I'd use it for supplemental research.

Morrin concluded that the AI chatbot could “miss clear indicators of risk or deterioration” and respond inappropriately to people in mental health crises, though he added that it could “improve access to general support, resources, and psycho-education”.

[–] DarkCloud@lemmy.world 3 points 9 months ago

ChatGPT regurgitates some bullshit from all the bullshit we've said to each other before.