Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Commercial Use of Emotion Artificial Intelligence (AI): Implications for Psychiatry

  • Psychiatry in the Digital Age (J Shore, Section Editor)
  • Published:
Current Psychiatry Reports Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose of Review

Emotion artificial intelligence (AI) is technology for emotion detection and recognition. Emotion AI is expanding rapidly in commercial and government settings outside of medicine, and will increasingly become a routine part of daily life. The goal of this narrative review is to increase awareness both of the widespread use of emotion AI, and of the concerns with commercial use of emotion AI in relation to people with mental illness.

Recent Findings

This paper discusses emotion AI fundamentals, a general overview of commercial emotion AI outside of medicine, and examples of the use of emotion AI in employee hiring and workplace monitoring.

Summary

The successful re-integration of patients with mental illness into society must recognize the increasing commercial use of emotion AI. There are concerns that commercial use of emotion AI will increase stigma and discrimination, and have negative consequences in daily life for people with mental illness. Commercial emotion AI algorithm predictions about mental illness should not be treated as medical fact.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

Papers of particular interest, published recently, have been highlighted as: • Of importance •• Of major importance

  1. Mordor Intelligence. Emotion detection and recognition (edr) market - growth, trends, covid-19 impact, and forecasts (2021 - 2026). 2020. https://www.mordorintelligence.com/industry-reports/emotion-detection-and-recognition-edr-market. Accessed 9 Dec 2021.

  2. Local Gold. 39.7% Increase of online transactions. 2021. https://www.localgold.com/2021/02/16/increase-of-online-transactions/. Accessed 9 Dec 2021.

  3. Alfonso V, Boar C, Frost J, Gambacorta L, Liu J. E-commerce in the pandemic and beyond. BIS (Bank for International Settlements) Bulletin. 2021;36.

  4. McKinsey & Company. How COVID-19 has pushed companies over the technology tipping point—and transformed business forever. 2020. https://www.mckinsey.com/business-functions/strategy-and-corporate-finance/our-insights/how-covid-19-has-pushed-companies-over-the-technology-tipping-point-and-transformed-business-forever. Accessed 9 Dec 2021.

  5. O’Halloran J. 2020 network upstream growth rate nearly 4x pre-pandemic levels. Computer Weekly. 2021. https://www.computerweekly.com/news/252498765/2020-network-upstream-growth-rate-nearly-4x-pre-pandemic-levels. Accessed 9 Dec 2021.

  6. Bauer M, Glenn T, Monteith S, Bauer R, Whybrow PC, Geddes J. Ethical perspectives on recommending digital technology for patients with mental illness. Int J Bipolar Disord. 2017;5:6.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  7. Calvo RA, D’Mello S. Affect detection: an interdisciplinary review of models, methods, and their applications. IEEE Trans Affect Comput. 2010;1:18–37.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Dzedzickis A, Kaklauskas A, Bucinskas V. Human emotion recognition: review of sensors and methods. Sensors. 2020;20:592.

    Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  9. NIST (US National Institute of Standards and Technology). Biometrics at NIST. 2020. https://www.nist.gov/topics/identity-access-management/biometrics-nist. Accessed 9 Dec 2021.

  10. Crawford K, Dobbe R, Dryer T, Fried G, Green B, Kaziunas E, et al. ​AI Now 2019 Report​. 2019. https://ainowinstitute.org/reports.html. Accessed 9 Dec 2021.

  11. Hildebrand C, Efthymiou F, Busquet F, Hampton WH, Hoffman DL, Novak TP. Voice analytics in business research: conceptual foundations, acoustic feature extraction, and applications. J Bus Res. 2020;121:364–74.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. McStay. Report on the right to privacy in the age of emotional AI. United Nations Office Of High Commissioner For Human Rights. 2018. https://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Issues/DigitalAge/ReportPrivacyinDigitalAge/AndrewMcStayProfessor%20of%20Digital%20Life,%20BangorUniversityWalesUK.pdf. Accessed 9 Dec 2021.

  13. •• Barrett LF, Adolphs R, Marsella S, Martinez AM, Pollak SD. Emotional expressions reconsidered: challenges to inferring emotion from human facial movements. Psychol Sci Public Interest. 2019;20:1–68. A review of over 1000 studies found that emotional state cannot reliably be inferred from facial movements.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  14. Davis N. Scientists create online games to show risks of AI emotion recognition. The Guardian. 2021. https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2021/apr/04/online-games-ai-emotion-recognition-emojify. Accessed 9 Dec 2021.

  15. Heaven D. Why faces don’t always tell the truth about feelings. Nature. 2020;578:502–4.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Izard CE. The many meanings/aspects of emotion: definitions, functions, activation, and regulation. Emot Rev. 2010;2:363–70.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Stark L, Hoey J. The ethics of emotion in artificial intelligence systems. In: Proceedings of the 2021 ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency. 2021. p. 782–793.

  18. Tcherkassof A, Dupré D. The emotion-facial expression link: evidence from human and automatic expression recognition. Psychol Res. 2021;85:2954–69.

  19. Accenture. Getting emotional. 2020. https://www.accenture.com/_acnmedia/PDF-114/Accenture-Responsible-Use-Of-Emotional-AI-Final.pdf . Accessed 9 Dec 2021.

  20. Deloitte Insights. Tech trends 2020. 2019. https://www2.deloitte.com/content/campaigns/za/Tech-Trends-2020/Tech-Trends-2020/Tech-Trends-2020.html . Accessed 9 Dec 2021.

  21. Deloitte Insights. Tech trends 2021. 2020. https://www2.deloitte.com/content/dam/insights/articles/6730_TT-Landing-page/DI_2021-Tech-Trends.pdf . Accessed 9 Dec 2021.

  22. Gartner. Emotion AI will personalize interactions. 2018. https://www.gartner.com/smarterwithgartner/emotion-ai-will-personalize-interactions/ . Accessed 9 Dec 2021.

  23. McKinsey & Company. The future of personalization—and how to get ready for it. 2019. https://www.mckinsey.com/business-functions/marketing-and-sales/our-insights/the-future-of-personalization-and-how-to-get-ready-for-it . Accessed 9 Dec 2021.

  24. • Crawford, K. Atlas of AI: power, politics, and the planetary costs of artificial intelligence. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press. 2021. A book on AI for a general audience, including politics, natural resources, energy consumption, hidden labor, and the vast data extractions.

  25. Melumad S, Hadi R, Hildebrand C, Ward AF. Technology-augmented choice: how digital innovations are transforming consumer decision processes. Cust Needs Solut. 2020;7:90–101.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Murgia M. Emotion recognition: can AI detect human feelings from a face? Financial Times. May 11, 2021. https://www.ft.com/content/c0b03d1d-f72f-48a8-b342-b4a926109452 . Accessed 9 Dec 2021.

  27. Poria S, Cambria E, Bajpai R, Hussain A. A review of affective computing: from unimodal analysis to multimodal fusion. Inf Fusion. 2017;37:98–125.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Verma GK, Tiwary US. Multimodal fusion framework: a multiresolution approach for emotion classification and recognition from physiological signals. Neuroimage. 2014;102:162–72.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Akçay MB, Oguz K. Speech emotion recognition: emotional models, databases, features, preprocessing methods, supporting modalities, and classifiers. Speech Commun. 2020;116:56–76.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. • Cohn JF, De La Torre F. Automated face analysis for affective computing. In: Calvo R, D’Mello S, Gratch J, Kappas A, editors. The Oxford Handbook of Affective Computing. New York, NY: Oxford University Press. 2015. A broad and thorough review of affective computing techniques.

  31. Ko BC. A brief review of facial emotion recognition based on visual information. Sensors. 2018;18:401.

    Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  32. Bota PJ, Wang C, Fred AL, Da Silva HP. A review, current challenges, and future possibilities on emotion recognition using machine learning and physiological signals. IEEE Access. 2019;7:140990–1020.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Zacharatos H, Gatzoulis C, Chrysanthou YL. Automatic emotion recognition based on body movement analysis: a survey. IEEE Comput Graphics Appl. 2014;34:35–45.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Chakriswaran P, Vincent DR, Srinivasan K, Sharma V, Chang CY, Reina DG. Emotion AI-driven sentiment analysis: a survey, future research directions, and open issues. Appl Sci. 2019;9:5462.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Sailunaz K, Dhaliwal M, Rokne J, Alhajj R. Emotion detection from text and speech: a survey. Soc Netw Anal Min. 2018;8:1–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Kołakowska A. A review of emotion recognition methods based on keystroke dynamics and mouse movements. In: 2013 6th International Conference on Human System Interactions (HSI). IEEE; 2013. p. 548–555.

  37. Wampfler R, Klingler S, Solenthaler B, Schinazi VR, Gross M. Affective state prediction based on semi-supervised learning from smartphone touch data. In: Proceedings of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems 2020. ACM; 2020. p. 1–13.

  38. Saini TS, Bedekar M. Inferring user emotions from keyboard and mouse. In: Bhalla S, Bhateja V, Chandavale AA, Hiwale AS, Satapathy SC, editors. Intelligent Computing and Information and Communication. Singapore: Springer. 2018.

  39. NodeGraph. How much data is on the internet? The big data facts update 2020. https://www.nodegraph.se/big-data-facts/. Accessed 9 Dec 2021.

  40. Thomson TJ, Angus D, Dootson P, Hurcombe E, Smith A. Visual mis/disinformation in journalism and public communications: current verification practices, challenges, and future opportunities. Journalism Pract. 2020;1–25.

  41. Ekman P. An argument for basic emotions. Cogn Emot. 1992;6:169–200.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Yitzhak N, Giladi N, Gurevich T, Messinger DS, Prince EB, Martin K, et al. Gently does it: humans outperform a software classifier in recognizing subtle, nonstereotypical facial expressions. Emotion. 2017;17:1187.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. • Yang K, Wang C, Sarsenbayeva Z, Tag B, Dingler T, Wadley G, et al. Benchmarking commercial emotion detection systems using realistic distortions of facial image datasets. The visual computer. 2020:1–20. A study that found facial image distortions that occur in the real world change the results of commercial emotion detection systems.

  44. • Dupré D, Krumhuber EG, Küster D, McKeown GJ. A performance comparison of eight commercially available automatic classifiers for facial affect recognition. PLoS One. 2020;15:e0231968. A study that found considerable variance in the results of 8 commercially available classifier systems for facial affect recognition.

  45. Sariyanidi EE, Gunes H, Cavallaro A. Automatic analysis of facial affect: a survey of registration, representation, and recognition. IEEE Trans Pattern Anal Mach Intell. 2015;37:1113–33.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Chen Z, Whitney D. Tracking the affective state of unseen persons. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2019;116:7559–64.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  47. Jack RE, Garrod OG, Yu H, Caldara R, Schyns PG. Facial expressions of emotion are not culturally universal. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2012;109:7241–4.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  48. Srinivasan R, Martinez AM. Cross-cultural and cultural-specific production and perception of facial expressions of emotion in the wild. IEEE Trans Affec Comput. 2018;12:707–21. https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/8580373 . Accessed 9 Dec 2021.

  49. Fan Y, Lam JC, Li VOK. Demographic effects on facial emotion expression: an interdisciplinary investigation of the facial action units of happiness. Sci Rep. 2021;11:5214.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  50. Fölster M, Hess U, Werheid K. Facial age affects emotional expression decoding. Front Psychol. 2014;5:30.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  51. Xu T, White J, Kalkan S, Gunes H. Investigating bias and fairness in facial expression recognition. In: European Conference on Computer Vision. Springer, Cham. 2020;506–23.

  52. Pantic M, Bartlett MS. Machine analysis of facial expressions. In: Delac K, Grgic M, editors. Handbook of Face Recognition. I-Tech Education and Publishing. 2007.

  53. Krumhuber EG, Küster D, Namba S, Skora L. Human and machine validation of 14 databases of dynamic facial expressions. Behav Res Methods. 2021;53:686–701.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Khanal SR, Barroso J, Lopes N, Sampaio J, Filipe V. Performance analysis of Microsoft’s and Google’s emotion recognition API using pose-invariant faces. In: Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Software Development and Technologies for Enhancing Accessibility and Fighting Info-exclusion. ACM; 2018. p. 172–178.

  55. Dupré D, Andelic N, Morrison G, McKeown G. Accuracy of three commercial automatic emotion recognition systems across different individuals and their facial expressions. In: 2018 IEEE International Conference on Pervasive Computing and Communications Workshops (PerCom Workshops). 2018;627–32.

  56. Pallas F, Staufer D, Kuhlenkamp J. Evaluating the accuracy of cloud NLP services using ground-truth experiments. In: 2020 IEEE International Conference on Big Data (Big Data). 2020;341–50.

  57. Keijsers M, Bartneck C, Kazmi HS. Cloud-based sentiment analysis for interactive agents. In: Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Human-Agent Interaction. ACM; 2019. p. 43–50. https://doi.org/10.1145/3349537.3351883 . Accessed 9 Dec 2021.

  58. Kresge L. Data and algorithms in the workplace: a primer on new technologies. University of California Berkeley Labor Center. 2020. https://laborcenter.berkeley.edu/working-paper-data-and-algorithms-in-the-workplace-a-primer-on-new-technologies/ . Accessed 9 Dec 2021.

  59. Black JS, van Esch P. AI-enabled recruiting: what is it and how should a manager use it? Bus Horiz. 2020;63:215–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  60. Bogen M, Rieke A. Help wanted: an examination of hiring algorithms, equity, and bias. 2019. Upturn. https://www.upturn.org/reports/2018/hiring-algorithms/ . Accessed 9 Dec 2021.

  61. Ribeiro J. 5 companies that are revolutionizing recruiting using artificial intelligence. 2020. https://towardsdatascience.com/5-companies-that-are-revolutionizing-recruiting-using-artificial-intelligence-9a70986c7a7e?gi=64dc18ef3f38 . Accessed 9 Dec 2021.

  62. Select Software Reviews. The top 12 best AI recruiting tools - March 2021. https://www.selectsoftwarereviews.com/buyer-guide/ai-recruiting . Accessed 9 Dec 2021.

  63. Mercer. 2020 Global talent trends study. 2020. https://www.mmc.com/insights/publications/2020/march/2020-global-talent-trends-study.html. Accessed 9 Dec 2021.

  64. Cha S. ‘Smile with your eyes’: how to beat South Korea’s AI hiring bots and land a job. Reuters. 2020. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-southkorea-artificial-intelligence-jo/smile-with-your-eyes-how-to-beat-south-koreas-ai-hiring-bots-and-land-a-job-idUSKBN1ZC022 . Accessed 9 Dec 2021.

  65. Engler A. Auditing employment algorithms for discrimination. Brookings Institute, Center for Technology Innovation. 2021. https://www.brookings.edu/research/auditing-employment-algorithms-for-discrimination/. Accessed 9 Dec 2021.

  66. Schellmann H. Auditors are testing hiring algorithms for bias, but there’s no easy fix. MIT Technology Review. 2021. https://www.technologyreview.com/2021/02/11/1017955/auditors-testing-ai-hiring-algorithms-bias-big-questions-remain/. Accessed 9 Dec 2021.

  67. Bencharit LZ, Ho YW, Fung HH, Yeung DY, Stephens NM, Romero-Canyas R, et al. Should job applicants be excited or calm? The role of culture and ideal affect in employment settings. Emotion. 2019;19:377.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  68. Opher A, Chou A, Onda A, Sounderrajan K. The rise of the data economy: driving value through internet of things data monetization. IBM Corporation. 2016. https://www.ibm.com/downloads/cas/4JROLDQ7. Accessed 9 Dec 2021.

  69. Collins L, Fineman DR, Tshuchica A. People analytics: recalculating the route. Deloitte. 2017. https://www2.deloitte.com/us/en/insights/focus/human-capital-trends/2017/people-analytics-in-hr.html. Accessed 9 Dec 2021.

  70. Maltseva K. Wearables in the workplace: the brave new world of employee engagement. Bus Horiz. 2020;63:493–505.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  71. Montealegre R, Cascio WF. Technology-driven changes in work and employment. Commun ACM. 2017;60:60–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  72. Kropp B. The future of employee monitoring. Gartner 2019. https://www.gartner.com/smarterwithgartner/the-future-of-employee-monitoring/. Accessed 9 Dec 2021.

  73. Accenture. More responsible use of workforce data required to strengthen employee trust and unlock growth, according to Accenture report. 2019. https://newsroom.accenture.com/news/more-responsible-use-of-workforce-data-required-to-strengthen-employee-trust-and-unlock-growth-according-to-accenture-report.htm. Accessed 9 Dec 2021.

  74. Cyphers B, Gullo J. Inside the invasive, secretive “Bossware” tracking workers. Electronic Frontier Foundation. 2020. https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2020/06/inside-invasive-secretive-bossware-tracking-workers. Accessed 9 Dec 2021.

  75. Mosendz P, Melin A. Bosses panic-buy spy software to keep tabs on remote workers. Bloomberg. 2020. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2020-03-27/bosses-panic-buy-spy-software-to-keep-tabs-on-remote-workers. Accessed 9 Dec 2021.

  76. Awolusi I, Marks E, Hallowell M. Wearable technology for personalized construction safety monitoring and trending: review of applicable devices. Autom Constr. 2018;85:96–106.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  77. Fukumura YE, Gray JM, Lucas GM, Becerik-Gerber B, Roll SC. Worker perspectives on incorporating artificial intelligence into office workspaces: implications for the future of office work. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2021;18:1690.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  78. Howard J. Artificial intelligence: implications for the future of work. Am J Ind Med. 2019;62:917–26.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  79. Ravid DM, Tomczak DL, White JC, Behrend TS. EPM 20/20: a review, framework, and research agenda for electronic performance monitoring. J Manag. 2020;46:100–26.

    Google Scholar 

  80. Saner E. Employers are monitoring computers, toilet breaks – even emotions. Is your boss watching you? The Guardian. 2018. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/may/14/is-your-boss-secretly-or-not-so-secretly-watching-you. Accessed 9 Dec 2021.

  81. Levy K, Barocas S. Privacy at the margins| refractive surveillance: monitoring customers to manage workers. Int J Commun. 2018;12:23.

    Google Scholar 

  82. Burrell J. How the machine ‘thinks’: understanding opacity in machine learning algorithms. Big Data Soc. 2016;3:2053951715622512.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  83. Kellogg KC, Valentine MA, Christin A. Algorithms at work: the new contested terrain of control. Acad Manag Ann. 2020;14:366–410.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  84. Pasquale F. The black box society. The secret algorithms that control money and information. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. 2015.

  85. • Nakamura K. My algorithms have determined you're not human: AI-ML, reverse turing-tests, and the disability experience. In: The 21st International ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers and Accessibility. 2019;1–2. A short speech on the negative aspects of AI for the disability community.

  86. Trewin S, Basson S, Muller M, Branham S, Treviranus J, Gruen D, et al. Considerations for AI fairness for people with disabilities. AI Matters. 2019;5:40–63.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  87. Fruchterman J, Mellea J. Expanding employment success for people with disabilities. Benetech. 2018. https://benetech.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/Tech-and-Disability-Employment-Report-November-2018.pdf. Accessed 9 Dec 2021.

  88. OECD. Mental health and work. 2018. https://www.oecd.org/employment/mental-health-and-work.htm. Accessed 9 Dec 2021.

  89. Brohan E, Henderson C, Wheat K, Malcolm E, Clement S, Barley EA, et al. Systematic review of beliefs, behaviours and influencing factors associated with disclosure of a mental health problem in the workplace. BMC Psychiatry. 2012;12:11.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  90. Brouwers EP, Mathijssen J, Van Bortel T, Knifton L, Wahlbeck K, Van Audenhove C, et al. Discrimination in the workplace, reported by people with major depressive disorder: a cross-sectional study in 35 countries. BMJ Open. 2016;6:e009961.

  91. Brouwers EP. Social stigma is an underestimated contributing factor to unemployment in people with mental illness or mental health issues: position paper and future directions. BMC Psychol. 2020;8:1–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  92. Von Schrader S, Malzer V, Bruyère S. Perspectives on disability disclosure: the importance of employer practices and workplace climate. Empl Responsib Rights J. 2014;26:237–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  93. Hutchinson B, Prabhakaran V, Denton E, Webster K, Zhong Y, Denuyl S. Social biases in NLP models as barriers for persons with disabilities. In: Proceedings of the 58th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics. 2020;5491–5501. https://aclanthology.org/2020.acl-main.487/. Accessed 9 Dec 2021.

  94. Straw I, Callison-Burch C. Artificial intelligence in mental health and the biases of language based models. PLoS One. 2020;15:e0240376.

  95. Morgeson FP, Campion MA, Dipboye RL, Hollenbeck JR, Murphy K, Schmitt N. Reconsidering the use of personality tests in personnel selection contexts. Pers Psychol. 2007;60:683–729.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  96. Weber L, Dwoskin E. Are workplace personality tests fair. Wall Street Journal. 2014 Sep 29;29.

  97. W3C (World Wide Web Consortium). Inaccessibility of CAPTCHA. Alternatives to visual Turing tests on the web. 2021. https://w3c.github.io/apa/captcha/. Accessed 9 Dec 2021.

  98. Whittaker M, Alper M, Bennett CL, Hendren S, Kaziunas L, Mills M, et al. Disability, bias, and AI. AI Now Institute. 2019.

  99. Crampton JW. Platform biometrics. Surveill Soc. 2019;17:54–62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  100. Morris MR. AI and accessibility. Commun ACM. 2020;63:35–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  101. Barocas S, Selbst AD. Big data’s disparate impact. Calif Law Rev. 2016;104:671.

    Google Scholar 

  102. Hao K. This is how AI bias really happens—and why it’s so hard to fix. MIT Technology Review. 2019. https://www.technologyreview.com/2019/02/04/137602/this-is-how-ai-bias-really-happensand-why-its-so-hard-to-fix/. Accessed 9 Dec 2021.

  103. Selbst AD, Boyd D, Friedler SA, Venkatasubramanian S, Vertesi J. Fairness and abstraction in sociotechnical systems. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency. ACM; 2019. p. 59–68.

  104. Ajunwa I, Crawford K, Schultz J. Limitless worker surveillance. Calif. Law Rev. 2017;105:735.

    Google Scholar 

  105. Aloisi A, Gramano E. Artificial intelligence is watching you at work: digital surveillance, employee monitoring, and regulatory issues in the EU context. Comparative Labor Law & Policy Journal. 2019;41:95.

    Google Scholar 

  106. Bard JS. Developing Legal Framework for Regulating Emotion AI. BUJ Sci & Tech L. 2021;27:271. https://ssrn.com/abstract=3680909 . Accessed 9 Dec 2021.

  107. EU-OSHA. OSH and the future of work: benefits and risks of artificial intelligence tools in workplaces. 2019. https://osha.europa.eu/en/publications/osh-and-future-work-benefits-and-risks-artificial-intelligence-tools-workplaces/view. Accessed 9 Dec 2021.

  108. NSA. The Next Wave. Deception research. 2021;23:1. https://www.nsa.gov/portals/75/documents/resources/everyone/digital-media-center/publications/the-next-wave/TNW_23-1.pdf. Accessed 9 Dec 2021.

  109. Monteith S, Bauer M, Alda M, Geddes J, Whybrow PC, Glenn T. Increasing cybercrime since the pandemic: concerns for psychiatry. Curr Psychiatry Rep. 2021;23:18.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  110. Bauer M, Glenn T, Geddes J, Gitlin M, Grof P, Kessing LV, et al. Smartphones in mental health: a critical review of background issues, current status and future concerns. Int J Bipolar Disord. 2020;8:2.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  111. Monteith S, Glenn T, Geddes J, Severus E, Whybrow PC, Bauer M. Internet of things issues related to psychiatry. Int J Bipolar Disord. 2021;9:11.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  112. Strubell E, Ganesh A, McCallum A. Energy and policy considerations for deep learning in NLP. arXiv preprint arXiv:1906.02243. 2019.

  113. Lipton ZC, Steinhardt J. Troubling trends in machine learning scholarship: some ML papers suffer from flaws that could mislead the public and stymie future research. ACM Queue. 2019;17:45–77.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Required Author Forms

Disclosure forms provided by the authors available with the online version of this article.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Michigan State University College of Human Medicine, Traverse City Campus, 1400 Medical Campus Drive, Traverse City, MI, 49684, USA

    Scott Monteith

  2. ChronoRecord Association, Fullerton, CA, USA

    Tasha Glenn

  3. Department of Psychiatry, University of Oxford, Warneford Hospital, Oxford, UK

    John Geddes

  4. Department of Psychiatry and Biobehavioral Sciences, Semel Institute for Neuroscience and Human Behavior, University of California Los Angeles (UCLA), Los Angeles, CA, USA

    Peter C. Whybrow

  5. Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus Medical Faculty, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany

    Michael Bauer

Authors
  1. Scott Monteith
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Tasha Glenn
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. John Geddes
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Peter C. Whybrow
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Michael Bauer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Scott Monteith.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare no competing interests.

Human and Animal Rights and Informed Consent

This article does not contain any studies with human or animal subjects performed by any of the authors.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

This article is part of the Topical Collection on Psychiatry in the Digital Age

Supplementary Information

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Monteith, S., Glenn, T., Geddes, J. et al. Commercial Use of Emotion Artificial Intelligence (AI): Implications for Psychiatry. Curr Psychiatry Rep 24, 203–211 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11920-022-01330-7

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11920-022-01330-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation