There's No "I" in TEAMMAIT: Impacts of Domain and Expertise on Trust in AI Teammates for Mental Health Work
Nathaniel Swinger, Cynthia M. Baseman, Myeonghan Ryu, Saeed Abdullah, Christopher W. Wiese, Andrew M. Sherrill, Rosa I. Arriaga
Abstract
The mental health crisis in the United States spotlights the need for more scalable training for mental health workers. While present-day AI systems have sparked hope for addressing this problem, we must not be too quick to incorporate or solely focus on technological advancements. We must ask empirical questions about how to ethically collaborate with and integrate autonomous AI into the clinical workplace. For these Human-Autonomy Teams (HATs), poised to make the leap into the mental health domain, special consideration around the construct of trust is in order. A reflexive look toward the multidisciplinary nature of such HAT projects illuminates the need for a deeper dive into varied stakeholder considerations of ethics and trust. In this paper, we investigate the impact of domain---and the ranges of expertise within domains---on ethics- and trust-related considerations for HATs in mental health. We outline our engagement of 23 participants in two speculative activities: design fiction and factorial survey vignettes. Grounded by a video storyboard prototype, AI- and Psychotherapy-domain experts and novices alike imagined TEAMMAIT, a prospective AI system for psychotherapy training. From our inductive analysis emerged 10 themes surrounding ethics, trust, and collaboration. Three can be seen as substantial barriers to trust and collaboration, where participants imagined they would not work with an AI teammate that didn't meet these ethical standards. Another five of the themes can be seen as interrelated, context-dependent, and variable factors of trust that impact collaboration with an AI teammate. The final two themes represent more explicit engagement with the prospective role of an AI teammate in psychotherapy training practices. We conclude by evaluating our findings through the lens of Mayer et al.'s Integrative Model of Organizational Trust to discuss the risks of HATs and adapt models of ability-, benevolence-, and integrity-based trust. These updates motivate implications for the design and integration of HATs in mental health work.
Ask about this paper
Ask your agent about it.
Lune has read the top-tier papers around this one, so every answer names the papers it rests on.
Your agent calls
Lunesearch_papers
Free to start. No credit card required.
Terminal
Install the CLIlune papers get 0c17c4b5-4631-4b80-b613-aff31ac181c5Cited by top-tier papers3
- Beyond a Conventional Chatbot: How AI Streamers Transcend Live Streaming Experiences from Viewers' PerspectivesYang Hu, Guo FreemanCHI 2026 · 2 citations
- Designing with Medical Mistrust: Perspectives from Black Older Adults in Publicly Subsidized HousingCynthia M. Baseman, Reeda Shimaz Huda, Rosa I. ArriagaCHI 2026 · 1 citation
- "Is This Really a Human Peer Supporter?": Misalignments Between Peer Supporters and Experts in LLM-Supported InteractionsKellie Yu Hui Sim, Roy Ka-Wei Lee, Kenny Tsu Wei ChooCSCW 2026
Related papers
- Trusting Autonomous Teammates in Human-AI Teams - A Literature ReviewWen Duan, Christopher Flathmann, Nathan J. McNeese, Matthew J. Scalia et al.CHI 2025 · 23 citations
- "If They Don't Even Trust Their AI Teammate, Why Should We?": Understanding Trust Contagion Across Multiple Human-AI Teams CSCW019Wen Duan, Shiwen Zhou, Matthew J. Scalia, Nan Weng et al.CSCW 2026 · 1 citation
- Human-Centered Team Training for Human-AI Teams: From Training with AI Tools to Training for AI TeammatesCaitlin Marie Lancaster, Wen Duan, Rohit Mallick, Nathan J. McNeeseCSCW 2025 · 13 citations
- Understanding the Evolvement of Trust Over Time within Human-AI TeamsWen Duan, Shiwen Zhou, Matthew J. Scalia, Xiaoyun Yin et al.CSCW 2024 · 42 citations
- To be Healed or Hacked? - User-Centered Ethical Design for Embodied AI in Mental Health CareDavid Obremski, Paula Friedrich, Carolin WienrichIEEE VR 2026 · 2 citations
