Abstract
Abstract
While Artificial intelligence (AI) is increasingly being integrated into psychotherapy, little is known about how prospective patients evaluate different levels of AI involvement. Participants (n = 1,003) with depression evaluated vignettes describing psychotherapy options, from treatment delivered without AI integration (Human therapist) to treatments involving different degrees of AI integration (Assistive, Collaborative, Fully Autonomous AI). Participants consistently evaluated Human therapists more favorably, reporting a greater likelihood of seeking treatment, less hesitancy, and greater treatment acceptability. Economically, compared with a Human therapist, participants were willing to pay 31.6% less for therapists using Assistive or Collaborative AI and 57.2% less for Fully Autonomous AI. 18-19% of participants indicated that they would refuse treatment involving Assistive or Collaborative AI, compared with 31% for Fully Autonomous AI. Preference for Human over AI therapists was particularly pronounced at higher levels of therapist experience (doctoral/masters vs. peer/trainee). Overall, participants valued psychotherapy delivered by Human therapists more highly than AI integrated psychotherapy. These findings suggest that, despite increasing AI integration in mental health care, prospective patients continue to view psychotherapy as a distinctly human endeavor.