Maintenance Notice

Due to necessary scheduled maintenance, the JMIR Publications website will be unavailable from Wednesday, July 01, 2020 at 8:00 PM to 10:00 PM EST. We apologize in advance for any inconvenience this may cause you.

Who will be affected?

Accepted for/Published in: JMIR Mental Health

Date Submitted: Jul 10, 2025
Date Accepted: Oct 27, 2025

The final, peer-reviewed published version of this preprint can be found here:

AI-Facilitated Cognitive Reappraisal via Socrates 2.0: Mixed Methods Feasibility Study

Held P, Pridgen SA, Szoke DR, Chen Y, Akhtar Z, Amin D

AI-Facilitated Cognitive Reappraisal via Socrates 2.0: Mixed Methods Feasibility Study

JMIR Ment Health 2025;12:e80461

DOI: 10.2196/80461

PMID: 41348953

PMCID: 12680128

AI-Facilitated Cognitive Reappraisal via Socrates 2.0: A Mixed Methods Feasibility Study

  • Philip Held; 
  • Sarah A. Pridgen; 
  • Daniel R. Szoke; 
  • Yaozhong Chen; 
  • Zuhaib Akhtar; 
  • Darpan Amin

ABSTRACT

Background:

Innovative, scalable mental health tools are needed to address systemic provider shortages and accessibility barriers. Large language model (LLM)-based tools can provide real-time, tailored feedback to help users engage in cognitive reappraisal outside traditional therapy sessions. Socrates 2.0 is a multi-agent artificial intelligence (AI) tool that guides users through Socratic dialogue.

Objective:

Using a mixed method approach, this study examined the feasibility, acceptability, and potential for symptom reduction of Socrates 2.0.

Methods:

Sixty-one adults enrolled in a four-week mixed-methods pre-clinical feasibility study. Participants used Socrates 2.0 as desired and completed self-report measures of depression, social anxiety, posttraumatic stress, and obsessive-compulsive symptoms at baseline and one-month follow-up. Feasibility, acceptability, and appropriateness along with usability and working alliance were assessed via validated measures. Semi-structured interviews explored user experiences and perceptions.

Results:

Participants engaged with Socrates 2.0 an average of 6.70 (SD=4.57) times over four weeks. Feasibility (mean=4.26, SD=0.67), acceptability (mean=4.16, SD=0.84), and usability ratings were high. Participants reported moderate reductions in depression (effect size d=0.30), social anxiety (d=0.25), obsessive-compulsive (d=0.33), and posttraumatic stress (d=0.28) symptoms. Working alliance scores suggested a moderately strong perceived bond with the AI tool. Qualitative feedback indicated that the nonjudgmental, on-demand nature of Socrates 2.0 encouraged self-reflection and exploration. Some users critiqued the repeated questioning style and limited conversation depth.

Conclusions:

Socrates 2.0 was perceived as feasible, acceptable, and moderately helpful for self-guided cognitive reappraisal, demonstrating potential as an adjunct to traditional therapy. Further research, including randomized trials, is needed to determine effectiveness across different populations, optimize personalization, and address repetitive conversational loops. Clinical Trial: Held P, Pridgen S, Chen Y, Akhtar Z, Amin D, Pohorence S A Novel Cognitive Behavioral Therapy–Based Generative AI Tool (Socrates 2.0) to Facilitate Socratic Dialogue: Protocol for a Mixed Methods Feasibility Study JMIR Res Protoc 2024;13:e58195 URL: https://www.researchprotocols.org/2024/1/e58195 DOI: 10.2196/58195


 Citation

Please cite as:

Held P, Pridgen SA, Szoke DR, Chen Y, Akhtar Z, Amin D

AI-Facilitated Cognitive Reappraisal via Socrates 2.0: Mixed Methods Feasibility Study

JMIR Ment Health 2025;12:e80461

DOI: 10.2196/80461

PMID: 41348953

PMCID: 12680128

Download PDF


Request queued. Please wait while the file is being generated. It may take some time.

© The authors. All rights reserved. This is a privileged document currently under peer-review/community review (or an accepted/rejected manuscript). Authors have provided JMIR Publications with an exclusive license to publish this preprint on it's website for review and ahead-of-print citation purposes only. While the final peer-reviewed paper may be licensed under a cc-by license on publication, at this stage authors and publisher expressively prohibit redistribution of this draft paper other than for review purposes.