IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/socpsy/v69y2023i8p1882-1889.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Old dog, new tricks? Exploring the potential functionalities of ChatGPT in supporting educational methods in social psychiatry

Author

Listed:
  • Alexander Smith
  • Stefanie Hachen
  • Roman Schleifer
  • Dinesh Bhugra
  • Anna Buadze
  • Michael Liebrenz

Abstract

Background: Artificial Intelligence is ever-expanding and large-language models are increasingly shaping teaching and learning experiences. ChatGPT is a prominent recent example of this technology and has generated much debate around the benefits and disadvantages of chatbots in educational domains. Aim: This study seeks to demonstrate the possible use-cases of ChatGPT in supporting educational methods specific to social psychiatry. Methods: Through interactions with ChatGPT 3.5, we asked this technology to list six ways in which it could aid social psychiatry teaching. Subsequently, we requested that ChatGPT perform one of the tasks it identified in its responses. Findings: ChatGPT highlighted several roles it could fulfil in educational settings, including as an information provider, a tool for debates and discussions, a facilitator of self-directed learning and a content-creator for course materials. For the latter scenario, based on another prompt, ChatGPT generated a hypothetical case vignette for a topic relevant to social psychiatry. Conclusions: Based on our experiences, ChatGPT can be an effective teaching tool, offering opportunities for active and case-based learning for students and instructors in social psychiatry. However, in their current form, chatbots have several limitations that must be considered, including misinformation and inherent biases, although these may only be temporary in nature as these technologies continue to advance. Accordingly, we argue that large-language models can support social psychiatry education with appropriate caution and encourage educators to become attuned to their potential through further detailed research in this area.

Suggested Citation

  • Alexander Smith & Stefanie Hachen & Roman Schleifer & Dinesh Bhugra & Anna Buadze & Michael Liebrenz, 2023. "Old dog, new tricks? Exploring the potential functionalities of ChatGPT in supporting educational methods in social psychiatry," International Journal of Social Psychiatry, , vol. 69(8), pages 1882-1889, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:socpsy:v:69:y:2023:i:8:p:1882-1889
    DOI: 10.1177/00207640231178451
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/00207640231178451
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/00207640231178451?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Alexander Smith & Anna Buadze & Michael Liebrenz, 2023. "The United Kingdom’s Rwanda asylum policy and the European Court of Human Rights’ Interim Measure: Challenges for mental health and the importance of social psychiatry," International Journal of Social Psychiatry, , vol. 69(2), pages 239-242, March.
    2. Jurgen Ruesch, 1961. "Research and Training in Social Psychiatry in the United States," International Journal of Social Psychiatry, , vol. 7(2), pages 87-96, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Wei, Xinyi & Chu, Xiaoyuan & Geng, Jingyu & Wang, Yuhui & Wang, Pengcheng & Wang, HongXia & Wang, Caiyu & Lei, Li, 2024. "Societal impacts of chatbot and mitigation strategies for negative impacts: A large-scale qualitative survey of ChatGPT users," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 77(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.

      Corrections

      All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:socpsy:v:69:y:2023:i:8:p:1882-1889. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

      If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

      If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

      If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

      For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

      Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

      IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.