Suppr超能文献

人工智能与人类教练:审视单次会话中工作联盟的发展

Artificial intelligence vs. human coaches: examining the development of working alliance in a single session.

作者信息

Barger Amber S

机构信息

Teachers College, Columbia University, New York, NY, United States.

出版信息

Front Psychol. 2025 Apr 15;15:1364054. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1364054. eCollection 2024.

Abstract

The collaborative relationship, or working alliance, between a client and their coach is a well-recognized factor that contributes to the effectiveness of coaching. The rise of artificial intelligence (AI) challenges us to explore whether human-to-human relationships can extend to AI, potentially reshaping the future of coaching. Our presumption that the skills of professional human coaches surpass AI in forging effective relationships stands untested - but can we really claim this advantage? The purpose of this study was to examine client perceptions of being coached by a simulated AI coach, who was embodied as a conversational vocal live-motion avatar, compared to client perceptions of partnering with a human coach. The mixed methods randomized controlled trial explored if and how client ratings of working alliance and the coaching process aligned between the two coach types in an alternative treatments design. Both treatment groups identified a personal goal to pursue and had one 60-min session guided by the CLEAR (contract, listen, explore, action, review) coaching model. Quantitative data were captured through surveys and qualitative input was captured through open-ended survey questions and debrief interviews. To sidestep the rapid obsolescence of technology, the study was engineered using the Wizard of Oz approach to facilitate an advanced AI coaching experience, with participants unknowingly interacting with expert human coaches. The aim was to glean insights into client reactions to a future, fully autonomous AI with the capabilities of a human coach. The results showed that participants built similar moderately high levels of working alliance with both coach types, with no significant difference between treatments. Qualitative themes indicated the client's connection with their coach existed within the context of the study wherein the coach was a guide who used a variety of techniques to support the client to plan towards their goal. Overall, participants believed they were engaging with their assigned coach type, while the five professional coaches, acting as confederates, were blinded to their roles. Clients are willing to and appreciate building coaching partnerships with AI, which has both research and practical implications.

摘要

客户与其教练之间的合作关系,即工作联盟,是一个公认的有助于教练辅导成效的因素。人工智能(AI)的兴起促使我们探索人与人之间的关系是否能够延伸至与AI的关系,这有可能重塑教练辅导的未来。我们认为专业的人类教练在建立有效关系方面的技能优于AI这一假设尚未得到检验——但我们真的能宣称拥有这一优势吗?本研究的目的是考察客户对由模拟AI教练进行辅导的看法,该AI教练以对话式语音实时动作化身的形式呈现,并将其与客户对与人类教练合作的看法进行比较。这项混合方法随机对照试验在替代治疗设计中探讨了两种教练类型在工作联盟和辅导过程方面的客户评分是否一致以及如何一致。两个治疗组都确定了一个要追求的个人目标,并在CLEAR(合同、倾听、探索、行动、回顾)教练模型的指导下进行了一次60分钟的辅导课程。通过调查收集定量数据,并通过开放式调查问题和汇报访谈收集定性意见。为了避免技术迅速过时,本研究采用了奥兹国魔法师方法来促进先进的AI辅导体验,参与者在不知情的情况下与专业人类教练进行互动。目的是深入了解客户对具有人类教练能力的未来全自主AI的反应。结果表明,参与者与两种教练类型都建立了类似的中等高水平的工作联盟,不同治疗组之间没有显著差异。定性主题表明,客户与教练的联系存在于研究背景中,在该背景下,教练是一个使用各种技巧来支持客户朝着目标制定计划的引导者。总体而言,参与者认为他们正在与分配给他们的教练类型进行互动,而作为同盟的五位专业教练对自己的角色不知情。客户愿意并乐于与AI建立教练合作关系,这具有研究和实践意义。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/9fd0/12044884/d723cb789374/fpsyg-15-1364054-g001.jpg

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验