ArticleFrontiers in psychology2026
Privacy assurances and professional-boundary warnings in generative AI mental health chatbots: a randomized vignette experiment on calibrated trust, overreliance risk, and professional help-seeking intentions.
Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Generative artificial intelligence (AI) chatbots are increasingly used by students to look up mental health information, seek reassurance, explore coping strategies, and identify possible sources of support. In such sensitive contexts, however, their use raises concerns about privacy, professional boundaries, and the risk of relying on AI beyond its proper role. This study examined whether two brief interface messages-privacy assurance and professional-boundary warning-affect students' safety-related evaluations of generative AI mental health chatbots. Methods: We conducted a 2 × 2 randomized vignette experiment with 768 college students. Participants were assigned to one of four chatbot scenarios that either included or omitted privacy assurance and professional-boundary warning. Measures covered perceived privacy protection, boundary awareness, calibrated trust, safe-use intention, overreliance risk, and professional help-seeking intention. Results: Privacy assurance increased perceived privacy protection, Discussion: These findings suggest that visible privacy and boundary messages can influence how students judge AI chatbots in mental health-related situations. Such messages should not be understood as prompts for greater use. Rather, they may help users treat chatbots as limited tools for information and support navigation and recognize when professional help is needed.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.