View in EDS HTML Full Text PDF Full Text

Social workers' evaluation of ChatGPT for solving ethical dilemmas within the limits of confidentiality.

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Title: Social workers' evaluation of ChatGPT for solving ethical dilemmas within the limits of confidentiality.
Authors: Segal, Michal (AUTHOR)
Source: Journal of Social Work Practice. Mar2026, Vol. 40 Issue 1, p5-18. 14p.
Subjects: Violence prevention, Generative artificial intelligence, Empathy, Social workers, Professional ethics, Qualitative research, Privacy, Clinical decision support systems, Legal liability, Research evaluation, Ethical problems, Social worker attitudes, Emotions, Problem solving, Social case work, Ethical decision making, Students, Thematic analysis, Trust, Phenomenology, Therapeutic alliance, Judgment (Psychology), Medical ethics, Professional competence, Disclosure
Abstract: This study examined how social workers evaluate the use of ChatGPT in solving ethical dilemmas related to confidentiality in social work. The study employed qualitative document analysis based on a phenomenological approach, analysing assignments of 70 master's degree students in social work. Participants compared their own solutions to ethical dilemmas with those proposed by ChatGPT. The analysis revealed three main issues: disparities in analysing complex professional dilemmas, differences in reference to ethical codes and laws, and disparities in emotional aspects and empathy. Study participants perceived their responses as more comprehensive, legally based, and empathetic compared to ChatGPT's solutions, which were perceived as superficial and lacking emotional understanding. While ChatGPT offers potential as a supportive tool, it cannot replace social workers' ethical judgement and empathy. Recommendations include developing AI training workshops and examining AI tools for ethical training while maintaining the profession's human element. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
Copyright of Journal of Social Work Practice is the property of Taylor & Francis Ltd and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)
Database: Psychology and Behavioral Sciences Collection
Full text is not displayed to guests.
FullText Links:
  – Type: pdflink
Text:
  Availability: 1
Header DbId: pbh
DbLabel: Psychology and Behavioral Sciences Collection
An: 191375093
AccessLevel: 6
PubType: Academic Journal
PubTypeId: academicJournal
PreciseRelevancyScore: 0
IllustrationInfo
Items – Name: Title
  Label: Title
  Group: Ti
  Data: Social workers' evaluation of ChatGPT for solving ethical dilemmas within the limits of confidentiality.
– Name: Author
  Label: Authors
  Group: Au
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Segal%2C+Michal%22">Segal, Michal</searchLink> (AUTHOR)
– Name: TitleSource
  Label: Source
  Group: Src
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="JN" term="%22Journal+of+Social+Work+Practice%22">Journal of Social Work Practice</searchLink>. Mar2026, Vol. 40 Issue 1, p5-18. 14p.
– Name: Subject
  Label: Subjects
  Group: Su
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Violence+prevention%22">Violence prevention</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Generative+artificial+intelligence%22">Generative artificial intelligence</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Empathy%22">Empathy</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Social+workers%22">Social workers</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Professional+ethics%22">Professional ethics</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Qualitative+research%22">Qualitative research</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Privacy%22">Privacy</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Clinical+decision+support+systems%22">Clinical decision support systems</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Legal+liability%22">Legal liability</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Research+evaluation%22">Research evaluation</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Ethical+problems%22">Ethical problems</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Social+worker+attitudes%22">Social worker attitudes</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Emotions%22">Emotions</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Problem+solving%22">Problem solving</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Social+case+work%22">Social case work</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Ethical+decision+making%22">Ethical decision making</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Students%22">Students</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Thematic+analysis%22">Thematic analysis</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Trust%22">Trust</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Phenomenology%22">Phenomenology</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Therapeutic+alliance%22">Therapeutic alliance</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Judgment+%28Psychology%29%22">Judgment (Psychology)</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Medical+ethics%22">Medical ethics</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Professional+competence%22">Professional competence</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Disclosure%22">Disclosure</searchLink>
– Name: Abstract
  Label: Abstract
  Group: Ab
  Data: This study examined how social workers evaluate the use of ChatGPT in solving ethical dilemmas related to confidentiality in social work. The study employed qualitative document analysis based on a phenomenological approach, analysing assignments of 70 master's degree students in social work. Participants compared their own solutions to ethical dilemmas with those proposed by ChatGPT. The analysis revealed three main issues: disparities in analysing complex professional dilemmas, differences in reference to ethical codes and laws, and disparities in emotional aspects and empathy. Study participants perceived their responses as more comprehensive, legally based, and empathetic compared to ChatGPT's solutions, which were perceived as superficial and lacking emotional understanding. While ChatGPT offers potential as a supportive tool, it cannot replace social workers' ethical judgement and empathy. Recommendations include developing AI training workshops and examining AI tools for ethical training while maintaining the profession's human element. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
– Name: AbstractSuppliedCopyright
  Label:
  Group: Ab
  Data: <i>Copyright of Journal of Social Work Practice is the property of Taylor & Francis Ltd and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract.</i> (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)
PLink https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=pbh&AN=191375093
RecordInfo BibRecord:
  BibEntity:
    Identifiers:
      – Type: doi
        Value: 10.1080/02650533.2025.2480092
    Languages:
      – Code: eng
        Text: English
    PhysicalDescription:
      Pagination:
        PageCount: 14
        StartPage: 5
    Subjects:
      – SubjectFull: Violence prevention
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Generative artificial intelligence
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Empathy
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Social workers
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Professional ethics
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Qualitative research
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Privacy
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Clinical decision support systems
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Legal liability
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Research evaluation
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Ethical problems
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Social worker attitudes
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Emotions
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Problem solving
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Social case work
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Ethical decision making
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Students
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Thematic analysis
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Trust
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Phenomenology
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Therapeutic alliance
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Judgment (Psychology)
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Medical ethics
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Professional competence
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Disclosure
        Type: general
    Titles:
      – TitleFull: Social workers' evaluation of ChatGPT for solving ethical dilemmas within the limits of confidentiality.
        Type: main
  BibRelationships:
    HasContributorRelationships:
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Segal, Michal
    IsPartOfRelationships:
      – BibEntity:
          Dates:
            – D: 01
              M: 03
              Text: Mar2026
              Type: published
              Y: 2026
          Identifiers:
            – Type: issn-print
              Value: 02650533
          Numbering:
            – Type: volume
              Value: 40
            – Type: issue
              Value: 1
          Titles:
            – TitleFull: Journal of Social Work Practice
              Type: main
ResultId 1