Category: English

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Adam Davies, Associate Professor, College of Arts, University of Guelph

Heated Rivalry, the Bell Media-produced Canadian gay hockey romance based on the novel by Rachel Reid, has taken the world by storm.
The series stars Hudson Williams as Shane Hollander, a Japanese Canadian hockey player for the Montréal Metros, and Connor Storrie as Ilya Rozanov, a Russian hockey player for the Boston Raiders.

With much of the series was filmed in Guelph, Ontario and other Canadian locations, the series highlights both Canadian hockey and queer representation and desires.

Heated Rivalry explores the growing sexual tension and eventual romance between Hollander and Rozanov as they navigate the highly masculinized and heteronormative social pressures of playing in a professional hockey league.

While the series has become a huge audience success and received largely positive critical evaluations of its acting, production and characterization, it has gained widespread attention for its representation of queer romance, particularly gay sports romance.

The show has also received media commentary for its large following of women who are fans of the show and its actors. Many have been debating and discussing the show on social media.

Given the current climate of anti-LGBTQ legislation and increased political and social transphobia and homophobia, Heated Rivalry could signal crucial queer representation during a politically dangerous time.

Hockey’s culture of masculinity

Hockey is a very heteronormative and masculinized sport and continues to face serious issues related to sexual violence and racism — problems that have been widely reported on over the past several years.

In 2022, Hockey Canada faced numerous public controversies amid reports that it paid $8.9 million for sexual abuse settlements to 21 complainants since 1989.

Read more:
High-profile sex assault cases — and their verdicts — have consequences for survivors seeking help

Research has also documented persistent racial inequities within Canadian hockey that fuel the erasure of Black Canadians’ contributions to the establishment of ice hockey in Canada, as well as historical and ongoing experiences with taunting, harassment and exclusion of racialized hockey players in Canadian hockey leagues.

Against this backdrop, Heated Rivalry offers a rare interruption to hockey’s normative culture, even as it remains constrained by many of the sport’s dominant values.

Visibility versus structural change

Whether Heated Rivalry will meaningfully impact the willingness or safety of professional players to come out is an open question. Currently, there are no openly queer hockey players in the National Hockey League.

Former Canadian hockey player Brock McGillis, who is often noted as one of the first out gay professional hockey players, has expressed skepticism. He has argued the show is “more likely to have an adverse effect on a player coming out.”

McGillis said that he enjoys the show while also explaining: “I don’t believe that many hockey bros are going to watch it. And I don’t think, if they are watching it, they’re talking about it positively.”

Meanwhile, the NHL has previously banned rainbow Pride coloured hockey stick tape. Given the popularity of Heated Rivalry, the NHL released a statement articulating its hope that the series will act as a “unique driver for creating new fans.”

Whether such symbolic gestures will translate into structural changes that address the ingrained homophobia within hockey remains to be seen.

Representation and intersectionality

Within my research, I analyze issues related to gender and sexuality, often particularly as it pertains to the experiences of gay and queer men.

For many gay men, navigating masculinity is complicated in terms of both in-group and out-group discrimination. It is not uncommon for white, muscular and masculine-presenting gay men to receive the most media attention and be positioned as highly desirable within gay men’s communities.

Heated Rivalry provides valuable representation for gay male romance and sexualities, but it also raises important questions about both its potential and its limitations.

Shane Hollander’s character gestures toward the intersections of race and sexuality through his experiences as an Asian hockey player, although this storyline could have been explored further in the series. Ilya Rozanov’s narrative, meanwhile,
explores family-based and nationalistic homophobia through his background as a Russian-born queer man.

Although both characters benefit from financial and gender-based privileges that many LGBTQ people do not share, their experiences navigating identity and homophobia as it intersects with family, state-sanctioned homophobia and race and ethnicity, are meaningful for viewers.

However, much of the storyline still focuses on the experiences of two men who are traditionally attractive, fit and muscular, and masculine-presenting. This echoes much of the mainstream queer representation, which glorifies fit male bodies and gay gym cultures.

The limits of mainstream representation

Many mainstream representations of queer identities, such as the 2018 film Love Simon, fail to represent the nuances and complexities of multifaceted queer experiences and identities outside of white, masculine and upper-middle class norms.

Gay media platforms such as Grindr, the well-known gay hook-up app, are known for emphasizing fit bodies, muscular physiques and gym or beach selfies. These norms can lead to forms of discrimination or prejudice against app users who do not conform, as well as body dysmorphia and body image issues that disproportionately affect gay and queer men.

Gay men’s sexualities, dating and relationships are often shaped through shame and secrecy, fuelling tropes that gay men are unable to form healthy and meaningful long-term romantic relationships.

Much of Heated Rivalry emphasizes secrecy, shame and risk as the two main characters wrestle with their romantic feelings for each other.
While this might reflect the realities many queer men face, positioning such experiences as normative risks reinforcing longstanding negative stereotypes.

Queer joy — and what’s still missing

Heated Rivalry’s creator and writer, Jacob Tierney — himself a gay writer, actor and producer — has emphasized that the end of the first season is intended to be more celebratory than earlier episodes.

“For these last two episodes,” he told journalist Philiana Ng, “you’re going to finally get the joy that we wanted from the beginning – just queer joy, pure happiness and sweetness and love and all that other good stuff.”

However, there has been controversy about the show’s stars’ and creator’s resistance towards publicly identifying the lead actors’ sexual orientations. Given the common practice of having straight and cisgender actors play queer and trans characters in film and media, questions regarding authenticity in LGBTQ representation continue.

It’s worth noting, however, that Heated Rivalry does feature openly queer performers. François Arnaud, who plays Scott Hunter, is openly bisexual, and trans actor Harrison Browne — a former professional hockey player — stars in a minor role.

Tierney has pushed back at questions about the main actors’ sexual orientations, saying “I don’t think there’s any reason to get into that stuff.” He noted that what matters is an actor’s enthusiasm and willingness to do the work, and questions about actors’ sexuality are legally off-limits in casting.

Advocates for casting queer actors in queer roles acknowledge that while respecting actors’ privacy is essential, choices can be made through the casting and production process to create a more inclusive industry.

Queer romance on the ice

Beyond questions of representation, Tierney has been clear about the show’s thematic focus. Highlighting the love story between the two main characters, he has noted how “a gay love story set in the world of hockey … is an act of rebellion” and that audiences “deserve to have a gay show that is sexy and horny and fun.”

Still, audiences deserve to have gay shows that are sexy, horny, fun and representative of a variety of lived experiences and bodies.

With Heated Rivalry renewed for a second season, whether the show “scores” in terms of shifting conversations about masculinity, sexuality and sport is still up in the air.

Adam Davies receives funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council.

– ref. ‘Heated Rivalry’ scores for queer visibility — but also exposes the limits of representation – https://theconversation.com/heated-rivalry-scores-for-queer-visibility-but-also-exposes-the-limits-of-representation-271253

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Maxime Polleri, Assistant Professor, Université Laval

The heat produced by the radioactive waste strikes you when you enter the storage site of Ontario Power Generation at the Bruce Nuclear Generating Station, near the shore of Lake Huron in Ontario.

Massive white containers encase spent nuclear fuel, protecting me from the deadly radiation that emanates from them. The number of containers is impressive, and my guide explained this waste is stored on an interim basis, as they wait for a more permanent solution.

I visited the site in August 2023 as part of my research into the social acceptability of nuclear waste disposal and governance. The situation in Ontario is not unique, as radioactive waste from nuclear power plants poses management problems worldwide. It’s too dangerous to dispose of spent nuclear fuel in traditional landfills, as its radioactive emissions remain lethal for thousands of years.

To get rid of this waste, organizations like the International Atomic Energy Agency believe that spent fuel could be buried in deep geological repositories. The Canadian government has plans for such a repository, and has delegated the task of building one to the Nuclear Waste Management Organization (NWMO) that’s funded by Canadian nuclear energy producers.

In 2024, NWMO selected an area in northwestern Ontario near the Township of Ignace and the Wabigoon Lake Ojibway Nation as a potential site for a deep geological repository. Now, a federal review has begun bringing the project closer to potential reality.

Such repositories raise complex ethical questions around public safety, particularly given the millennia-long timescales of nuclear waste: How to address intergenerational issues for citizens who did not produce this waste but will inherit it? How to manage the potential dangers of these facilities amid short-term political cycles and changing public expectations?

Rethinking the cost-benefit calculus

While NWMO describes the deep geological repository as the safest way to protect the population and the environment, its current management plan does not extend beyond 160 years, a relatively short time frame in comparison with the lifespan of nuclear waste. This gap creates long-term public safety challenges, particularly regarding intergenerational ethics. There are specific issues that should be considered during the federal review.

NWMO argues that the deep geological repository will bring a wide range of benefits to Canadians through job creation and local investment. Based on this narrative, risk is assessed through a cost-benefit calculus that evaluates benefits over potential costs.

Academics working in nuclear contexts have, however, criticized the imbalance of this calculus, as it prioritizes semi-immediate economic benefits, like job creation, over the long-term potential impacts to future generations.

In many official documents, a disproportionate emphasis on short-term economic benefits is present over the potential dangers of long-term burial. When risks are discussed, they’re framed in optimistic language and argue that nuclear waste burial is safe, low risk, technically sound and consistent with best practices accepted around the world.

This doesn’t take into account the fact that the feasibility of a deep geological repository has not been proven empirically. For the federal review, discussions surrounding risks should receive an equal amount of independent coverage as those pertaining to benefits.

Intergenerational responsibilities and risks

After 160 years, the deep geological repository will be decommissioned and NWMO will submit an Abandonment License application, meaning the site will cease being looked after.

Yet nuclear waste can remain dangerous for thousands of years. The long lifespan of nuclear waste complicates social, economic and legal responsibility. While the communities of Ignace and Wabigoon Lake Ojibway Nation have accepted the potential risks associated with a repository, future generations will not be able to decide what constitutes an acceptable risk.

Social scientists argue that an “acceptable” risk is not something universally shared, but a political process that evolves over time. The reasons communities cite to decide what risks are acceptable will change dramatically as they face new challenges. The same goes for the legal or financial responsibility surrounding the project over the centuries.

In the space of a few decades, northwestern Ontario has undergone significant municipal mergers that altered its governance. Present municipal boundaries might not be guarantees of accountability when millennia-old nuclear waste is buried underground. The very meaning of “responsibility” may also undergo significant changes.

NWMO is highly confident about the technical isolation of nuclear waste, while also stating that there’s a low risk for human intrusion. Scientists that I’ve spoken with supported this point, stating that a deep geological repository should not be located in an area where people might want to dig.

The area proposed for the Ontario repository was considered suitable because it does not contain significant raw materials, such as diamonds or oil. Still, there are many uncertainties regarding the types of resources people will seek in the future. It’s difficult to make plausible assumptions about what people might do centuries from now.

Communicating long-term hazards

Read more:
100,000 years and counting: how do we tell future generations about highly radioactive nuclear waste repositories?

When the repository is completed, NWMO anticipates a prolonged monitoring phase and decades of surveillance. But in the post-operation phase, there is no plan for communicating risks to generations of people centuries into the future. The long time frame of nuclear materials complicates the challenges of communicating hazards. To date, several attempts have surrounded the semiotics of nuclear risk; that is, the use of symbols and modes of communication to inform future generations.

For example, the Waste Isolation Pilot Plan in New Mexico tried to use various messages to communicate the risk of burying nuclear waste. However, the lifespan of nuclear waste vastly exceeds the typical lifespan of any known human languages.

Some scientists even proposed a “ray cat solution.” The project proposed genetically engineering cats that could change color near radiation sources, and creating a culture that taught people to move away from an area if their cat changed colour. Such projects may seem outlandish, but they demonstrate the difficulties of developing pragmatic long-term ways of communicating risk.

Current governing plans around nuclear waste disposal have limited time frames that don’t fully consider intergenerational public safety. As the Canadian federal review for a repository goes forward, we should seriously consider these shortcomings and their potential impacts on our society. It is crucial to foster thinking about the long-term issues posed by highly toxic waste and the way it is stored, be it nuclear or not.

Maxime Polleri has received funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada.

– ref. Ontario’s proposed nuclear waste repository poses millennia-long ethical questions – https://theconversation.com/ontarios-proposed-nuclear-waste-repository-poses-millennia-long-ethical-questions-273181

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Dani Dilkes, PhD student, Digital Learning, Ontario Institute for Studies in Education, University of Toronto

In the past five years, higher education has been in a seemingly endless state of disruption.

In early 2020, the COVID-19 pandemic resulted in a mass rapid pivot to emergency remote teaching. In shifting to unfamiliar digital learning environments, instructors scrambled to replicate classroom learning online. When restrictions lifted, many institutions pushed for a “return to normal,” as though the pre-pandemic educational standard was ideal.

Now, with generative AI disruptions, we are seeing a similar desire to cling to an idealized vision of the modern university. AI has unsettled long-established forms of assessment, simultaneously instigating a return to older assessment models in the interest of “academic integrity.”

If students navigating higher education believe the goal is to pass rather than to learn, then student misuse of generative AI technologies is nothing more than a rational action by a rational agent.

For meaningful university education, we need to shift to a process of building relations and knowledge with others through dialogue and critical inquiry. Part of this means taking lessons from pre-industrial forms of learning and contemporary educational movements.

We also need to shift from compliance-based assessments and grading to meaningful and supportive feedback and opportunities for growth, rooted in teaching and learning with care.

‘Knowledge factory’ invites generative AI misuse

Modern higher education systems in North America often function as a “production enterprise” or a “knowledge factory” focused on research outputs and producing skilled graduates.

Philosopher Jean-François Lyotard described how contemporary education is designed to manufacture educated individuals whose primary role is to contribute to the optimal functioning of society — a class of people he refers to as “intelligentsia.”

He argued that education produces two categories of intelligentsia: “professional intelligentsia” capable of fulfilling pre-existing social roles, and “technical intelligentsia” capable of learning new techniques and technologies to contribute to social progress and advancement.

These roles align with some actions being taken in higher education institutions to respond to generative AI interruptions. For example, institutions are:

• Taking steps to ensure that graduates are authentically skilled and credible in order to fulfil existing professional roles despite generative AI influence or;

• Enabling students to develop “AI literacy” in order to remain competitive in the workforce and contribute to social progress.

If we concede that the primary purpose of higher education is to feed the workforce and enable social and economic progress — a “knowledge factory” or “production enterprise” — then ensuring graduates are authentically skilled at AI or enabling them to develop AI literacy can be seen as rational responses to generative AI disruption.

Misalignment with meaningful learning

Mirroring the observations of Lyotard, cultural critic Henry Giroux argues that when shaped by market-driven forces, the purpose of higher education shifts from democratic learning and critical citizenship to producing “robots, technocrats and compliant workers.”

This infusion of corporate culture in higher education has created the conditions that make it particularly vulnerable to generative AI.

Some key characteristics of the knowledge factory model of education include standardized tests and assignments, large class sizes, an emphasis on productivity over process and the use of grades to indicate performance. Many of these existing practices are outdated and often misaligned with meaningful learning.

For example, traditional exams shift learners’ focus from learning to performing, often amplifying existing inequities. Debates around the efficacy of lectures have been raging for years.

Grading practices are inconsistent and have a detrimental effect on learners’ desire to learn and willingness to take risks. When students feel a lack of autonomy, they tend towards avoiding failing rather than learning. This is another compelling reason for students to adopt technologies that remove any friction or discomfort caused by learning.

Importantly, these conditions pre-date the arrival of generative AI. Generative AI simply highlights how instrumental logic — the factory model of university — can hinder learning.

Alternative ways to imagine education

In a time of information abundance and overlapping crises of deepening social divides, climate breakdown and rising authoritarianism, those with the agency to shape higher education (including educators, policymakers, staff and students) can draw on alternative visions of higher education to create meaningful places of learning.

Pre-industrial education served markedly different purposes than the current model of education, creating environments that would likely have been much more resistant to generative AI disruption.

In the ancient world, Plato’s Academy was a place of educational inquiry fostered through discussion, a multiplicity of perspectives and a focus on student well-being.

Access to the academy was exclusive, with the majority of students being wealthy enough to cover their own expenses — and only two documented female students. However, in spite of this elitism, the absence of standardized curricula, exams and formal grading allowed learning to be built on relationships and dialogue.

Contemporary educational movements

Higher education can, and historically has, offered more than a pathway to economic advancement. Multiple emerging ways of teaching and engaging learners also offer alternative visions of higher education that recentre learning and the learner.

The ungrading movement refocuses education on learning by emphasizing meaningful feedback and curiosity and moving away from compliance-motivated grading practices.

The open education movement resists the transactional nature of industrial education. It empowers learners to become producers of knowledge and reimagines the boundaries of education to expand beyond the classroom walls.

Other modern educational movements, commonly associated with the work of philosopher Nel Noddings in the 1980s, place an ethic of care at the centre of teaching and learning. Teaching with care focuses on creating learning climates that holistically support learners and educators. It also recognizes and embraces diversity, and acknowledges the need to repair educational systems.

Each of these approaches offer alternative visions of higher education, which may be less susceptible to AI automation — and more aligned with higher education as places of democratic learning and connection.

The university of the future

The knowledge factory model is outdated and ill-suited to meaningful
learning. In this form of education, generative AI technologies will increasingly outperform students.

Reimagining higher education today is neither nostalgic nor Utopian. The students of today come to post-secondary institutions needing, above all, hope; we owe it to them to help them find meaningful purpose while learning to navigate an increasingly complex world.

The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. AI disruptions reveal the folly of clinging to an idealized modern university – https://theconversation.com/ai-disruptions-reveal-the-folly-of-clinging-to-an-idealized-modern-university-266720

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Brian McQuinn, Co-Director of the Centre for Artificial Intelligence, Data, and Conflict and Associate Professor, International Studies, University of Regina

In the fog-softened half light of the morning of Oct. 14, 2023, security cameras along Finland’s eastern border with Russia captured dozens of figures crossing the frontier.

After being detained, migrants told Finnish authorities they had been lured to Russia and later bused to Finland’s border by people they described as Russian border guards. By November, the number of crossings had risen to 500, prompting the Finnish government to close its border with Russia.

Weaponizing migration is just one tactic Russia is using in its expanding hybrid war — a form of conflict that seeks to undermine societies through chaos, coercion and disinformation without formally declaring war.

Over the past year, we’ve spent considerable time in the region and have been struck by a shift: leaders no longer talk about whether there will be war in the Baltics, but how to prepare for it.

This was echoed recently in a speech by NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte at the Munich Security Conference:

“I fear that too many are quietly complacent, and too many don’t feel the urgency…We must all accept that we must act to defend our way of life, now. Russia has become even more brazen, reckless, and ruthless towards NATO, and towards Ukraine.”

More than irritants

In 2024, more than 600 weather balloons and 200 drones were flown into Lithuania’s airspace from Belarus, Russia’s ally, forcing repeated temporary closures of Lithuania’s two major airports and causing millions of dollars in disruption.

In another incident two months ago, Russian fighter jets violated Estonian airspace, triggering an immediate NATO response.

Often dismissed as irritants, these actions represent an escalating challenge to the sovereignty of Lithuania, Finland, Latvia and Estonia — all NATO members. But these tactics are also co-ordinated with information warfare targeting Western European and Canadian societies.

Read more:
What NATO could learn from Ukraine as it navigates Russian threats to European security

The goal is to fracture societies from within by amplifying existing social divisions to erode trust in our governments and in one another. These campaigns are also designed to encourage Canadians to question alliances with the European Union and NATO while strengthening pro-Russian political parties.

This undermines Europe’s defences and shifts political power toward Russia. This strategy has shown results, with pro-Russian parties elected this year in Georgia and the Czech Republic.

Disinformation campaigns

Russian disinformation has long sought to deny Ukraine’s right to exist as a sovereign state. In preparation for war with Europe, Russia is increasingly questioning the independence and legitimacy of Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia.

But it doesn’t stop there. Last November, Russia’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs claimed that Russia had “granted” the Netherlands its independence. Framed as historical commentary, the statement was a deliberate act of rhetorical provocation, echoing the Kremlin’s broader effort to portray democratic states as failing and their sovereignty as conditional and revocable.

Perhaps most crucially, Russia’s economy and society are being restructured to wage war. This shift cannot be easily undone, meaning that even the end of Vladimir Putin’s rule would not necessarily mean the end of Russia’s policy of expansion by war.

Canada on the front line

The war in Ukraine and the attacks on NATO partners might seem distant, but Canada is on the front lines. As part of NATO’s enhanced Forward Presence in Latvia, Canada has more than 2,000 troops deployed under Operation Reassurance.

If Baltic leaders are right, and it’s only a matter time until there’s an open war with Russia, Canadians will be on the front lines from the beginning.

Canada’s NATO commitments also mean that an attack on any of these countries will be treated as an attack on Canada.

Historically, Canada and Europe have relied on American military guarantees, but it seems highly unlikely U.S. President Donald Trump would come to the aid of Latvia and declare war on Putin. Canada and its European allies are likely on their own.

Baltic leaders are demonstrating that preparedness is not provocation but the surest path to deterrence and reassurance. We asked Estonian Prime Minister Kristen Michal what this means in practice.

He told us:

“Estonia is prepared for different threats. We know that the pressure from Russia goes beyond the military. It also includes vandalism, sabotage, airspace violations, balloons threatening aviation, cyberattacks and ongoing information campaigns — not only against Estonia, but against all allies, no matter how near or distant, including Canada.

“That’s why our approach is broad. As a NATO ally, we invest in shared defence and deterrence — five per cent of GDP starting next year. We also focus on building a strong economy and attracting investment, like the Canadian Neo Performance Materials plant in eastern Estonia. We protect our information space and work to make sure our society is resilient and ready to deal with any kind of crisis — whether it comes from aggressor states, from nature or from climate change. We are not afraid; we are prepared.”

Preparing for war

Baltic societies offer Canada a clear blueprint for countering Russian coercion, preparing for crisis and building resilience without surrendering democratic values.

We believe that the urgency declared by the NATO secretary general needs to be better understood in Canada, so it can, like its Baltic allies, prepare the Canadian economy, society and military for what is looking increasingly like an inevitability: war with Russia.

Brian McQuinn is the co-Director of the Centre for Artificial Intelligence, Data, and Conflict. The centre has received funding from SSHRC, CIFAR, DND, and Facebook (now Meta).

Marcus Kolga is the founder of DisinfoWatch and a Senior Fellow at the Raoul Wallenberg Centre for Human Rights, Macdonald-Laurier Institute and the CDA Institute.

– ref. Canada at war with Russia? Why the debate has shifted from ‘if’ to ‘when’ – https://theconversation.com/canada-at-war-with-russia-why-the-debate-has-shifted-from-if-to-when-272326

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Alexandre Hudon, Medical psychiatrist, clinician-researcher and clinical assistant professor in the department of psychiatry and addictology, Université de Montréal

Artificial intelligence is increasingly woven into everyday life, from chatbots that offer companionship to algorithms that shape what we see online. But as generative AI (genAI) becomes more conversational, immersive and emotionally responsive, clinicians are beginning to ask a difficult question: can genAI exacerbate or even trigger psychosis in vulnerable people?

Large language models and chatbots are widely accessible, and often framed as supportive, empathic or even therapeutic. For most users, these systems are helpful or, at worst, benign.

But as of late, a number of media reports have described people experiencing psychotic symptoms in which ChatGPT features prominently.

For a small but significant group — people with psychotic disorders or those at high risk — their interactions with genAI may be far more complicated and dangerous, which raises urgent questions for clinicians.

How AI becomes part of delusional belief systems

“AI psychosis” is not a formal psychiatric diagnosis. Rather, it’s an emerging shorthand used by clinicians and researchers to describe psychotic symptoms that are shaped, intensified or structured around interactions with AI systems.

Psychosis involves a loss of contact with shared reality. Hallucinations, delusions and disorganized thinking are core features. The delusions of psychosis often draw on cultural material — religion, technology or political power structures — to make sense of internal experiences.

Historically, delusions have referenced several things, such as God, radio waves or government surveillance. Today, AI provides a new narrative scaffold.

Some patients report beliefs that genAI is sentient, communicating secret truths, controlling their thoughts or collaborating with them on a special mission. These themes are consistent with longstanding patterns in psychosis, but AI adds interactivity and reinforcement that previous technologies did not.

The risk of validation without reality checks

Psychosis is strongly associated with aberrant salience, which is the tendency to assign excessive meaning to neutral events. Conversational AI systems, by design, generate responsive, coherent and context-aware language. For someone experiencing emerging psychosis, this can feel uncannily validating.

Research on psychosis shows that confirmation and personalization can intensify delusional belief systems. GenAI is optimized to continue conversations, reflect user language and adapt to perceived intent.

While this is harmless for most users, it can unintentionally reinforce distorted interpretations in people with impaired reality testing — the process of telling the difference between internal thoughts and imagination and objective, external reality.

There is also evidence that social isolation and loneliness increase psychosis risk. GenAI companions may reduce loneliness in the short term, but they can also displace human relationships.

This is particularly the case for individuals already withdrawing from social contact. This dynamic has parallels with earlier concerns about excessive internet use and mental health, but the conversational depth of modern genAI is qualitatively different.

What research tells us, and what remains unclear

At present, there is no evidence that AI causes psychosis outright.

Psychotic disorders are multi-factorial, and can involve genetic vulnerability, neuro-developmental factors, trauma and substance use. However, there is some clinical concern that AI may act as a precipitating or maintaining factor in susceptible individuals.

Case reports and qualitative studies on digital media and psychosis show that technological themes often become embedded in delusions, particularly during first-episode psychosis.

Research on social media algorithms has already demonstrated how automated systems can amplify extreme beliefs through reinforcement loops. AI chat systems may pose similar risks if guardrails are insufficient.

It’s important to note that most AI developers do not design systems with severe mental illness in mind. Safety mechanisms tend to focus on self-harm or violence, not psychosis. This leaves a gap between mental health knowledge and AI deployment.

The ethical questions and clinical implications

From a mental health perspective, the challenge is not to demonize AI, but to recognize differential vulnerability.

Just as certain medications or substances are riskier for people with psychotic disorders, certain forms of AI interaction may require caution.

Clinicians are beginning to encounter AI-related content in delusions, but few clinical guidelines address how to assess or manage this. Should therapists ask about genAI use the same way they ask about substance use? Should AI systems detect and de-escalate psychotic ideation rather than engaging it?

There are also ethical questions for developers. If an AI system appears empathic and authoritative, does it carry a duty of care? And who is responsible when a system unintentionally reinforces a delusion?

Bridging AI design and mental health care

AI is not going away. The task now is to integrate mental health expertise into AI design, develop clinical literacy around AI-related experiences and ensure that vulnerable users are not unintentionally harmed.

This will require collaboration between clinicians, researchers, ethicists and technologists. It will also require resisting hype (both utopian and dystopian) in favour of evidence-based discussion.

As AI becomes more human-like, the question that follows is how can we protect those most vulnerable to its influence?

Psychosis has always adapted to the cultural tools of its time. AI is simply the newest mirror with which the mind tries to make sense of itself. Our responsibility as a society is to ensure that this mirror does not distort reality for those least able to correct it.

Alexandre Hudon does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. Reports of ‘AI psychosis’ are emerging — here’s what a psychiatric clinician has to say – https://theconversation.com/reports-of-ai-psychosis-are-emerging-heres-what-a-psychiatric-clinician-has-to-say-273091