Half of young users told no one, and only 27% rated GenAI effective support
One in three young people surveyed in Canada used generative artificial intelligence at least once a month for mental health purposes, and nearly half had not told anyone they were doing it.
Jack.org’s Youth Voice Report New Technology, Familiar Barriers, released ahead of World Mental Health Day, found that 96 percent of the 471 young people who responded used GenAI for any purpose and 84 percent used it for mental health purposes.
Three in five respondents had used GenAI to seek advice about a specific situation, most often social relationships including friendships, romantic relationships and family dynamics, at 46 percent, followed by academic challenges at 23 percent and self-care strategies at 15 percent.
Asked to describe their experience with the technology, 41 percent said it was a tool like Googling something, 18 percent likened it to a journal, and 11 percent said it felt like talking to a real person who understands them.
Jack.org reported that 78 percent of young people surveyed experienced at least one barrier to accessing mental health support, including wait times, cost, limited availability and stigma.
Respondents who perceived greater mental health stigma in their communities and those facing greater financial barriers were more likely to report difficulty accessing support, with Spearman correlation coefficients of r = 0.23 and r = 0.26 respectively.
Human sources of support were rated more effective than the technology.
Half of respondents rated a friend or peer as effective, followed by a mental health professional or service at 47 percent and a trusted adult at 43 percent.
GenAI was rated effective by 27 percent.
Respondents who had previously accessed professional mental health services rated GenAI as less effective and reported lower comfort using it in both struggle and crisis scenarios, at p < .01.
The same group reported significantly greater comfort seeking support from a mental health professional during a crisis.
Among respondents, 49.9 percent reported not disclosing their GenAI use to anyone.
Of those who did disclose, friends and peers were the most common confidants at 37.2 percent, followed by siblings at 15.9 percent, parents at 12.1 percent, mental health professionals at 10.1 percent and teachers at 6.3 percent.
The most common reason for keeping use private was a preference for privacy, at 25.1 percent, followed by concerns about being judged at 6.1 percent, feeling embarrassed at 5.8 percent, uncertainty about how others would react at 5.6 percent, and being unsure whether adults would understand at 2.03 percent.
Asked whether talking to GenAI about their mental health felt safer than talking to people, 58 percent agreed in terms of emotional safety, 48 percent in terms of physical safety and 26 percent in terms of digital safety.
Michael Braithwaite, president and CEO of Jack.org, said in the organization’s release announcing the report that young people use technologies that did not exist a few years ago.
He said understanding “how these tools are affecting them” and having “open conversations about it” is necessary to support young people.
A smaller group of 73 respondents was asked how the Canadian government should invest in young people and GenAI for mental health.
The highest ranked priority was regulating GenAI to protect young people’s data and privacy, followed by teaching young people how to use GenAI safely and requiring GenAI creators to connect users to real-world mental health services when required.
Banning GenAI use for young people under the age of 16 ranked lowest of the options provided, with 13 respondents selecting it as their first priority.
