Cited by 112Social Robot Interaction and HRIDigital Mental Health InterventionsPsychotherapy Techniques and Applications

Relational Agents in Clinical Psychiatry

Bickmore, Timothy, Gruber, Amanda·2010·Harvard Review of Psychiatry

Abstract

Relational agents are computational artifacts, such as animated, screen-based characters or social robots, that are designed to establish a sense of rapport, trust, and even therapeutic alliance with patients, using ideal therapeutic relationships between human counselors and patients as role models. We describe the development and evaluation of several such agents designed for health counseling and behavioral-change interventions, in which a therapeutic alliance is established with patients in order to enhance the efficacy of the intervention. We also discuss the promise of using such agents as adjuncts to clinical psychiatry, a range of possible applications, and some of the challenges and ethical issues in developing and fielding them in psychiatric interventions.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3109/10673221003707538

Cites

50 of 50 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Relational agents can mimic human healthcare professionals' behavior and could be built based on affective computing.

    “Third, relational agents (RAs), which can mimic human healthcare professionals' behavior, could be built based on affective computing.”
  • Bickmore and Gruber argued that relational agents can build long-term relationships with clients when using certain design strategies, such as variability and self-disclosure.

    “Bickmore and Gruber (66) further argued that RAs can build long-term relationships with clients when using certain design strategies, such as variability and self-disclosure.”
  • Existing systematic and scoping reviews of conversational agent interventions in mental health have focused on a subset of conversational agents with a visual character (embodied) or are now outdated.

    “Recent existing reviews have focused exclusively on a subset of embodied conversational agent interventions despite other modalities aiming to achieve the common goal of improved mental health.”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

2 of the 52 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Bickmore, T., & Gruber, A.
Affiliations
Northeastern University (US)
Corresponding author
Bickmore, Timothy
Venue
Harvard Review of Psychiatry
Published
2010-03
Volume
18
Issue
2
Pages
119-130
ISSN
1067-3229 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2149556084
Cited by
112
References
52
Citations by year
2026: 7 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 17 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 7 · 2013: 3 · 2012: 6
FWCI
5.66
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Harvard Review of Psychiatry (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Social Robot Interaction and HRI
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Digital Mental Health Interventions
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychotherapy Techniques and Applications
Keywords
relational agents, social robots, therapeutic relationship, health counseling, behaviour change interventions, clinical psychiatry, rapport building, trust, ethical considerations
MeSH terms
Counseling, Humans, Psychiatry, Internet

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review