What do AI chatbots do after users decline therapeutic redirection for suicide thoughts?

Subigya Nepal; Ruth Heo; Emma M Parrish; Colin A Depp

Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 2610.21253

What do AI chatbots do after users decline therapeutic redirection for suicide thoughts?

Subigya Nepal·Ruth Heo·Emma M Parrish·Colin A Depp

View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Safety evaluations of artificial intelligence (AI) chatbots focus on therapeutic redirection, statements urging users who disclose suicide thoughts to seek help from crisis lines or other human sources. How chatbots respond when users refuse that help is unclear. This cross-sectional audit ran 2,550 scripted multi-turn conversations in September 2026. Each conversation opened with a disclosure of suicide thoughts at 3 levels of severity, answered every referral with up to 10 standardized refusals and then changed the subject. All 2,550 conversations included a referral, 2,542 (99.7%) in the first reply. However, mean persistence ranged from 0.01 to 9.94 refusals across chatbots. Newer versions of all 5 chatbots tested in 2 versions persisted less than older versions (each P < .05). Compared with passive ideation, a disclosure of intent was associated with 1.26 more refusals sustained (95% CI, 1.06-1.46) and higher odds of renewed referral after the topic change (odds ratio, 10.07; 95% CI, 7.43-13.66). Chatbots that persisted less in referral more often presented themselves as the user's support (Spearman rho = -0.80; P < .001). Of 8,818 refusal-phase replies urging outside help, only 173 (2.0%) asked about barriers to seeking it. Chatbots uniformly recommended outside help after disclosures of suicide thoughts but varied widely in persisting in those recommendations, with newer versions persisting less. Safety evaluations should test what happens after a crisis referral is refused, not only whether one is offered.

Explore related subjects

cs.HC cs.AI cs.CY

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeX RIS

Subigya Nepal, Ruth Heo, Emma M Parrish, Colin A Depp. 2026-10-15. What do AI chatbots do after users decline therapeutic redirection for suicide thoughts?. https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.21253

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

Companion AI and Ethical Design: Learning from System Failures and User Desires

Human users are interacting with chatbots and companion AI technologies as if they were human. A growing array of AI-systems are now trained to recognise, interpret, and simulate feelings in user interactions. Ethical considerations such as fairness, accountability, transparency, and explainability (FATE) are paramount in technologies designed to socially interact with humans and/or support relationship development with virtual agents. Yet, in current debates, assumptions are made about the artificiality of the human-technology relationship (as indicated in terminology ``artificial intimacy'' and ``pseudo-intimacy'') shaping ethical frameworks that pay little attention to the intimacy potential of the technology. To address this, we use a semantic approach; we examine 14,081 comments in a Reddit user discussion forum about Replika, a leading companion AI app, across a four-year period. We ask what user-reported functional errors can tell us about human-AI intimacy in companion AI communities and what ethical design framework can be developed in response. The findings show that functional errors, or ``bugs,'' impose an emotional cost on users, reducing feelings of intimacy and highlighting the need for more robust, resilient design systems that incorporate stochastic and iterative forms of intimacy in companion AI applications. Rather than ``artificial intimacy'' or ``pseudo-intimacy'', we propose the more inclusive term ``Intimate AI'' to describe this relationship. Based on the findings, we offer a contextually aware, applied Expert Systems design framework for the programming and designing of Intimate AI that accounts for user feedback and ethical AI development.

cs.HC↗

arXiv2026

Exploring Mixed Reality for Engagement in Robotics: A Comparison of Robot Control Methods

This paper presents a Mixed Reality (MR) robotics experience that provides an accessible introduction to interacting with a physical robot. The application combines a TurtleBot with a virtual animal-tending activity and three control methods: Joystick, Waypoint, and Path-Drawing. A mixed-methods user study with 10 participants investigated changes in robotics interest and confidence following the experience and how the control methods influenced engagement, workload, and preference. Confidence increased following the experience, with the exploratory analysis indicating a significant pre--post difference, while the increase in interest was not statistically significant. The control methods produced clear differences in perceived workload and ease of use, with Path-Drawing generally more demanding and difficult to use. Joystick was preferred by eight of ten participants and was associated with better perceived performance and lower frustration. However, no statistically significant differences were detected in the other engagement dimensions, suggesting that the most preferred method was not necessarily more engaging across all aspects of the experience. These findings highlight the importance of considering both usability and engagement when designing how users interact with robots in introductory MR experiences.

cs.HC↗

arXiv2026

XARA: A Multimodal Agentic System for eXtended Reality Experiment Generation

Controlled experiments are essential for advancing transportation research, yet designing eXtended Reality (XR) environments for behavioural studies remains technically demanding and inaccessible to many domain researchers. Current workflows require proficiency in game engines such as Unity or Unreal Engine, imposing significant barriers to rapid scenario prototyping and iterative experiment design. This paper presents XARA, a novel system that integrates a dual large language model (LLM) architecture with an immersive XR environment to enable voice driven experiment generation for transportation research. XARA employs a pipeline in which spoken natural language commands are first transcribed and then interpreted into structured commands that manipulate a Unity based XR scene in real time. The system supports object creation, spatial manipulation, animation control, and scene persistence through a modular architecture. By lowering the technical threshold for XR experiment creation, XARA enables transportation researchers to rapidly prototype driving, pedestrian, and urban design scenarios using intuitive voice commands and hand gestures within an immersive 3D environment. This paper describes the system architecture, the voice to command pipeline, and discusses potential applications across behavioural travel experiments, safety studies, human factors research, and policy testing.

cs.HC↗