Debates

How debates appear on exams

Best argument, strongest critique, unintended consequence, or balanced conclusion

Primary pro-AI argument

Increases access and efficiency in under-resourced mental health systems

Workforce shortage statistic relevance

AI addresses clinician scarcity and time limitations

AI advantage in data processing

Can analyze longitudinal and multimodal data beyond human capacity

AI strength in biomarkers

More accurate at detecting neurobiological patterns than clinicians

Correct role of AI in diagnosis

Supplement to clinical judgment, not replacement

Primary anti-AI concern

Bias in training datasets may reproduce diagnostic disparities

Why DSM conflicts with AI checklists

DSM diagnosis requires contextual and clinical judgment

Automation bias definition

Clinicians over-rely on AI outputs at expense of judgment

Key limitation of AI diagnosis

No single objective biomarker exists for mental disorders

Privacy risk of AI

Data security breaches involving sensitive patient information

Most balanced AI conclusion

AI may assist diagnosis but cannot independently diagnose

Primary pro-censorship argument

Reduces social contagion and accidental triggering

Social contagion definition

Exposure increases likelihood of imitation behaviors

Algorithm amplification problem

Extreme content spreads more than recovery content

Triggering content prevalence

Most users encountering self-harm content were not searching for it

Primary anti-censorship argument

Open discussion provides support, connection, and hope

Papageno Effect definition

Recovery-oriented narratives reduce suicide risk

Werther Effect definition

Detailed suicide portrayals increase imitation

Key censorship downside

Pushes users toward underground or extreme platforms

Lexical creep effect

New euphemisms replace censored words, complicating research and moderation

Best compromise solution

Content warnings and contextual moderation

Primary pro-CHR diagnosis argument

Early intervention may reduce long-term disability

CHR conversion rate to psychosis

Approximately 20–25%

CHR suicide risk

Very high rates of suicidal ideation and attempts

Benefit of CHR diagnosis structure

Guides monitoring and early treatment access

Primary anti-CHR diagnosis concern

Most individuals never develop psychosis

Risk of pathologizing normal distress

Label may increase anxiety and stigma

Stress-diathesis interaction

Diagnosis itself can increase stress and symptoms

Equity concern in CHR

Overidentification of marginalized populations

Best exam conclusion on CHR

Useful as risk marker but ethically controversial as diagnosis

Primary pro-legalization argument

Harm reduction through regulation and education

Criminal justice argument

Reduces overpolicing and racial disparities

Public health benefit claim

Cannabis less lethal than alcohol

Primary anti-legalization argument

Increases addiction and psychosis risk

Cannabis addiction prevalence

About 1 in 10 users develop cannabis use disorder

Psychosis risk finding

Early, frequent, high-THC use increases risk

Developing brain concern

Prefrontal cortex not fully matured in adolescents and young adults

Self-medication problem

Short-term relief worsens long-term mental health

Key regulatory weakness

Potency is poorly regulated even in legal markets

Balanced marijuana conclusion

Legalization may reduce harms only with strict regulation and education

Primary pro-violence argument

Repeated exposure increases aggressive thoughts and desensitization

Physiological evidence

Increased cortisol and sympathetic activation

Social learning theory relevance

Children model observed behaviors

Primary anti-violence argument

Correlation does not imply causation

Confounding variables

Poor supervision, family stress, peer factors

Longitudinal evidence issue

Mixed findings across studies

Effect size debate

Statistical significance may not equal real-world impact

Moderating factor importance

Game context, supervision, and prosocial content

Best exam conclusion

Violent games may increase aggression modestly, but effects are context-dependent

Primary pro-parental consent argument

Parents support treatment adherence and decision-making

Neurodevelopmental argument

Adolescents’ prefrontal cortex still developing

Primary anti-parental consent argument

Reduces access to care for vulnerable youth

LGBTQ+ youth concern

Higher suicide risk if confidentiality removed

Autonomy benefit

Confidential care increases help-seeking

Legal variability issue

Laws differ significantly across states

Ethical tension

Protection vs autonomy

Best exam framing for minor autonomy and access to healthcare

Parental involvement beneficial but mandatory consent may deter care

Most common exam trap

Missing tradeoffs and choosing absolutist answers