Explore the vast range of titles available.

The rapid embracing of artificial intelligence in psychiatry has a flavor of being the current “wild west”; a multidisciplinary approach that is very technical and complex, yet seems to produce findings that resonate. These studies are hard to review as the methods are often opaque and it is tricky to find the suitable combination of reviewers. This issue will only get more complex in the absence of a rigorous framework to evaluate such studies and thus nurture trustworthiness. Therefore, our paper discusses the urgency of the field to develop a framework with which to evaluate the complex methodology such that the process is done honestly, fairly, scientifically, and accurately. However, evaluation is a complicated process and so we focus on three issues, namely explainability, transparency, and generalizability, that are critical for establishing the viability of using artificial intelligence in psychiatry. We discuss how defining these three issues helps towards building a framework to ensure trustworthiness, but show how difficult definition can be, as the terms have different meanings in medicine, computer science, and law. We conclude that it is important to start the discussion such that there can be a call for policy on this and that the community takes extra care when reviewing clinical applications of such models..

Collaborative problem solving (CPS) has been receiving increasing international attention because much of the complex work in the modern world is performed by teams. However, systematic education and training on CPS is lacking for those entering and participating in the workforce. In 2015, the Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA), a global test of educational progress, documented the low levels of proficiency in CPS. This result not only underscores a significant societal need but also presents an important opportunity for psychological scientists to develop, adopt, and implement theory and empirical research on CPS and to work with educators and policy experts to improve training in CPS. This article offers some directions for psychological science to participate in the growing attention to CPS throughout the world. First, it identifies the existing theoretical frameworks and empirical research that focus on CPS. Second, it provides examples of how recent technologies can automate analyses of CPS processes and assessments so that substantially larger data sets can be analyzed and so students can receive immediate feedback on their CPS performance. Third, it identifies some challenges, debates, and uncertainties in creating an infrastructure for research, education, and training in CPS. CPS education and assessment are expected to improve when supported by larger data sets and theoretical frameworks that are informed by psychological science. This will require interdisciplinary efforts that include expertise in psychological science, education, assessment, intelligent digital technologies, and policy.

Abstract Objectives Machine learning (ML) and natural language processing have great potential to improve efficiency and accuracy in diagnosis, treatment recommendations, predictive interventions, and scarce resource allocation within psychiatry. Researchers often conceptualize such an approach as operating in isolation without much need for human involvement, yet it remains crucial to harness human-in-the-loop practices when developing and implementing such techniques as their absence may be catastrophic. We advocate for building ML-based technologies that collaborate with experts within psychiatry in all stages of implementation and use to increase model performance while simultaneously increasing the practicality, robustness, and reliability of the process. Methods We showcase pitfalls of the traditional ML framework and explain how it can be improved with human-in-the-loop techniques. Specifically, we applied active learning strategies to the automatic scoring of a story recall task and compared the results to a traditional approach. Results Human-in-the-loop methodologies supplied a greater understanding of where the model was least confident or had knowledge gaps during training. As compared to the traditional framework, less than half of the training data were needed to reach a given accuracy. Conclusions Human-in-the-loop ML is an approach to data collection and model creation that harnesses active learning to select the most critical data needed to increase a model’s accuracy and generalizability more efficiently than classic random sampling would otherwise allow. Such techniques may additionally operate as safeguards from spurious predictions and can aid in decreasing disparities that artificial intelligence systems otherwise propagate.

Abstract Background and Hypothesis Despite decades of “proof of concept” findings supporting the use of Natural Language Processing (NLP) in psychosis research, clinical implementation has been slow. One obstacle reflects the lack of comprehensive psychometric evaluation of these measures. There is overwhelming evidence that criterion and content validity can be achieved for many purposes, particularly using machine learning procedures. However, there has been very little evaluation of test-retest reliability, divergent validity (sufficient to address concerns of a “generalized deficit”), and potential biases from demographics and other individual differences. Study Design This article highlights these concerns in development of an NLP measure for tracking clinically rated paranoia from video “selfies” recorded from smartphone devices. Patients with schizophrenia or bipolar disorder were recruited and tracked over a week-long epoch. A small NLP-based feature set from 499 language samples were modeled on clinically rated paranoia using regularized regression. Study Results While test–retest reliability was high, criterion, and convergent/divergent validity were only achieved when considering moderating variables, notably whether a patient was away from home, around strangers, or alone at the time of the recording. Moreover, there were systematic racial and sex biases in the model, in part, reflecting whether patients submitted videos when they were away from home, around strangers, or alone. Conclusions Advancing NLP measures for psychosis will require deliberate consideration of test-retest reliability, divergent validity, systematic biases and the potential role of moderators. In our example, a comprehensive psychometric evaluation revealed clear strengths and weaknesses that can be systematically addressed in future research.

Artificial intelligence (AI)-based digital phenotyping, including computational speech analysis, increasingly allows for the collection of diagnostically relevant information from an ever-expanding number of sources. Such information usually assesses human behaviour, which is a consequence of the nervous system, and so digital phenotyping may be particularly helpful in diagnosing neurological illnesses such as Alzheimer’s disease. As illustrated by the use of computational speech analysis of Alzheimer’s disease, however, neurological illness also introduces ethical considerations beyond commonly recognised concerns regarding machine learning and data collection in everyday environments. Individuals’ decision-making capacity cannot be assumed. Understanding of analytical results will likely be limited even as the personal significance of those results is both highly sensitive and personal. In a traditional clinical evaluation, there is an opportunity to ensure that information is relayed in a way that is highly customised to the individual’s ability to understand results and make decisions, and privacy is closely protected. Can any such assurance be offered as digital phenotyping technology continues to advance? AI-supported digital phenotyping offers great promise in neurocognitive disorders such as Alzheimer’s disease, but it also poses ethical challenges. We outline some of these risks as well as strategies for risk mitigation.

The Institute for Student‐AI Teaming (iSAT) addresses the foundational question: how to promote deep conceptual learning via rich socio‐collaborative learning experiences for all students?—a question that is ripe for AI‐based facilitation and has the potential to transform classrooms. We advance research in speech, computer vision, human‐agent teaming, computer‐supported collaborative learning, expansive co‐design, and the science of broadening participation to design and study next generation AI technologies (called AI Partners) embedded in student collaborative learning teams in coordination with teachers. Our institute ascribes to theoretical perspectives that aim to create a normative environment of widespread engagement through responsible design of technology, curriculum, and pedagogy in partnership with K–12 educators, racially diverse students, parents, and other community members.

Verbal memory deficits are some of the most profound neurocognitive deficits associated with schizophrenia and serious mental illness in general. As yet, their measurement in clinical settings is limited to traditional tests that allow for limited administrations and require substantial resources to deploy and score. Therefore, we developed a digital ambulatory verbal memory test with automated scoring, and repeated self-administration via smart devices. One hundred and four adults participated, comprising 25 patients with serious mental illness and 79 healthy volunteers. The study design was successful with high quality speech recordings produced to 92% of prompts (Patients: 86%, Healthy: 96%). The story recalls were both transcribed and scored by humans, and scores generated using natural language processing on transcriptions were comparable to human ratings (R = 0.83, within the range of human-to-human correlations of R = 0.73–0.89). A fully automated approach that scored transcripts generated by automatic speech recognition produced comparable and accurate scores (R = 0.82), with very high correlation to scores derived from human transcripts (R = 0.99). This study demonstrates the viability of leveraging speech technologies to facilitate the frequent assessment of verbal memory for clinical monitoring purposes in psychiatry.

Digital technologies hold the potential to transform educational assessment. Recent advances reveal that digital environments will support the development of learning and assessment activities in ways that will both increase the inferential fidelity of assessments and change the form of assessments altogether. Digital technologies can also automate data collection and the production of assessment inferences on a massive scale. Here, we discuss the wide variation in digital learning experiences and explain how they are transforming traditional language for discussing assessment. We argue that the predigital constraints on assessment have skewed our thinking about assessment and give examples of new and novel approaches. Second, we discuss how digital environments can allow us to capture and make inferences from simple or complex learning activities in new ways. Third, we point to advances in machine learning and AI that have the potential to change current and future assessment practices. Finally, we argue for balancing enthusiasm for digital environments against the challenges of making appropriate assessment inferences.

\"Automated scoring engines [...] require a careful balancing of the contributions of technology, NLP, psychometrics, artificial intelligence, and the learning sciences. The present handbook is evidence that the theories, methodologies, and underlying technology that surround automated scoring have reached maturity, and that there is a growing acceptance of these technologies among experts and the public.\" From the Foreword by Alina von Davier, ACTNext Senior Vice President

The Stroop interference task is indispensable to current neuropsychological practice. Despite this, it is limited in its potential for repeated administration, its sensitivity and its demands on professionals and their clients. We evaluated a digital Stroop deployed using a smart device. Spoken responses were timed using automated speech recognition. Participants included adult nonpatients (N = 113; k = 5 sessions over 5 days) and patients with psychiatric diagnoses (N = 85; k = 3–4 sessions per week over 4 weeks). Traditional interference (difference in response time between color incongruent words vs. color neutral words; M = 0.121 s) and facilitation (neutral vs. color congruent words; M = 0.085 s) effects were robust and temporally stable over testing sessions (ICCs 0.50–0.86). The performance showed little relation to clinical symptoms for a two-week window for either nonpatients or patients but was related to self-reported concentration at the time of testing for both groups. Performance was also related to treatment outcomes in patients. The duration of response word utterances was longer in patients than in nonpatients. Measures of intra-individual variability showed promise for understanding clinical state and treatment outcome but were less temporally stable than measures based solely on average response time latency. This framework of remote assessment using speech processing technology enables the fine-grained longitudinal charting of cognition and verbal behavior. However, at present, there is a problematic lower limit to the absolute size of the effects that can be examined when using voice in such a brief ‘out-of-the-laboratory condition’ given the temporal resolution of the speech-to-text detection system (in this case, 10 ms). This resolution will limit the parsing of meaningful effect sizes.