Vol. 72 Núm. 2 (2026): Ética y regulación de la IA en la educación superior
Artículos

Marco EEPA para la evaluación ética de la inteligencia artificial en el bienestar universitario

PDF XML
  • Emgelberth Vargas,
  • Alberto Luis Ramírez
Emgelberth Vargas
Instituto Pedagógico de Caracas (IPC) / Universidad Pedagógica Experimental Libertador (UPEL)Escuela de Psicología, Carver University
Biografía
Alberto Luis Ramírez
Escuela de Ingeniería de Sistemas, Carver University
Biografía

Publicado 2026-07-06 — Actualizado el 2026-07-07

Palabras clave

  • Inteligencia artificial en educación ,
  • Bienestar psicológico estudiantil,
  • Ética de la IA,
  • Salud mental digital ,
  • Gobernanza universitaria,
  • Dependencia algorítmica
    • ...Más
    Menos

Derechos de autor 2026 AULA Revista de Humanidades y Ciencias Sociales

Creative Commons License

Esta obra está bajo una licencia internacional Creative Commons Atribución 4.0.

Cómo citar

Emgelberth Vargas, & Ramírez, A. L. . (2026). Marco EEPA para la evaluación ética de la inteligencia artificial en el bienestar universitario. AULA Revista De Humanidades Y Ciencias Sociales, 72(2). https://doi.org/10.33413/aulahcs.2026.72i2.484

Resumen

La incorporación de sistemas de inteligencia artificial (IA) en el acompañamiento emocional y psicológico de estudiantes universitarios, ha desplazado lo que parecía ser un problema técnico hacia una cuestión ética de primer orden. Este artículo examina, desde una perspectiva de revisión crítica y análisis documental, la relación entre la mediación algorítmica del bienestar psicológico y la experiencia subjetiva de adultos jóvenes en educación superior (denominados en este trabajo estudiantes universitarios o, en sentido amplio, adolescentes tardíos conforme a la definición de la OMS, que extiende este período hasta los 24 años), a partir de literatura especializada publicada entre 2019 y 2025. El análisis identifica tres tensiones que estructuran el debate contemporáneo, aunque no con el mismo peso. La más explorada, y paradójicamente la peor planteada, concierne a la eficacia parcial de los sistemas de IA frente a sus limitaciones empáticas constitutivas. La segunda, menos visible pero igualmente urgente, es el riesgo de que la narrativa democratizadora del acceso encubra procesos de mercantilización del malestar estudiantil. La tercera, y a juicio de los autores la más subestimada en la literatura reciente, es la posibilidad de que el uso intensivo de estas herramientas erosione, más que fortalezca, la autonomía psicológica del sujeto en formación. Los resultados indican que la evidencia disponible muestra efectos positivos acotados a síntomas leves en el corto plazo, mientras que los riesgos de dependencia algorítmica, mercantilización de datos emocionales y desresponsabilización institucional permanecen sistemáticamente subestimados. Frente a ese estado del conocimiento, el artículo propone el marco EEPA, Eficacia, Equidad, Privacidad y Autonomía, como instrumento analítico para la evaluación crítica de cualquier sistema de IA orientado al bienestar estudiantil. Se concluye que la legitimidad ética de estas herramientas depende de condiciones institucionales, pedagógicas y regulatorias específicas, cuya construcción es una responsabilidad impostergable de la educación superior.

PDF XML

Referencias

  1. American College Health Association. (2023). ACHA guidelines on artificial intelligence in student mental health services. https://www.acha.org/ACHA/Resources/Topics/Mental_Health.aspx
  2. Arnett, J. J. (2000). Emerging adulthood: A theory of development from the late teens through the twenties. American Psychologist, 55(5), 469–480. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.55.5.469
  3. Barraza-Macías, A. (2022). Ansiedad académica en universitarios latinoamericanos: Una revisión sistemática. Revista de Psicología Educativa, 10(2), 45–63. https://doi.org/10.20511/pyr2022.v10n2.1654
  4. Baumel, A., Muench, F., Edan, S., & Kane, J. M. (2019). Objective user engagement with mental health apps: Systematic search and panel-based usage analysis. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 21(9), e14567. https://doi.org/10.2196/14567
  5. Beauchamp, T. L., & Childress, J. F. (2019). Principles of biomedical ethics (8th ed.). Oxford University Press.
  6. Bermúdez-Díaz, L., y Villanueva-Hernández, C. (2021). Estrés académico y salud mental en estudiantes universitarios de América Latina. Salud Mental, 44(3), 123–132. https://doi.org/10.17711/SM.0185-3325.2021.016
  7. Bickmore, T. W., Trinh, H., Asadi, R., & Olafsson, S. (2018). Safety first: Conversational agents for health communication. In Proceedings of the 2018 ACM International Conference on Intelligent Virtual Agents (pp. 2–9). ACM. https://doi.org/10.1145/3267851.3267881
  8. Billieux, J., Maurage, P., Lopez-Fernandez, O., Kuss, D. J., & Griffiths, M. D. (2015). Can disordered mobile phone use be considered a behavioral addiction? An update on current evidence and a comprehensive model for future research. Current Addiction Reports, 2(2), 156–162. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40429-015-0054-y
  9. Carr, N. (2010). The shallows: What the Internet is doing to our brains. W. W. Norton & Company.
  10. Choukas-Bradley, S., Maheux, A. J., Goldberg, M. H., Rouleau, C. R., & Roberts, S. R. (2022). Picture perfect during a pandemic: A study of adolescent social media use and well-being. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, 856763. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.856763
  11. Cushman, P. (2011). Toward a sociohistorical understanding of constructivism. Journal of Constructivist Psychology, 24(1), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1080/10720537.2011.535554
  12. Facer, K. (2011). Learning futures: Education, technology and social change. Routledge.
  13. Fernández-Berrocal, P., Extremera, N., & Ruiz-Aranda, D. (2021). Emotional intelligence and mental health in university students: A systematic review. Psicothema, 33(2), 161–170. https://doi.org/10.7334/psicothema2020.356
  14. Fink, A. (2019). Conducting research literature reviews: From the Internet to paper (5th ed.). SAGE.
  15. Fitzpatrick, K. K., Darcy, A., & Vierhile, M. (2017). Delivering cognitive behavior therapy to young adults with symptoms of depression and anxiety using a fully automated conversational agent (Woebot): A randomized controlled trial. JMIR Mental Health, 4(2), e19. https://doi.org/10.2196/mental.7785
  16. Freire, P. (2005). Pedagogía del oprimido (3.ª ed.). Siglo XXI Editores.
  17. Fricker, M. (2007). Epistemic injustice: Power and the ethics of knowing. Oxford University Press.
  18. Giroux, H. A. (2011). On critical pedagogy. Continuum.
  19. Grant, M. J., & Booth, A. (2009). A typology of reviews: An analysis of 14 review types and associated methodologies. Health Information & Libraries Journal, 26(2), 91–108. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-1842.2009.00848.x
  20. Gross, J. J. (2015). Emotion regulation: Current status and future prospects. Psychological Inquiry, 26(1), 1–26. https://doi.org/10.1080/1047840X.2014.940781
  21. Holmes, W., Porayska-Pomsta, K., Holstein, K., Sutherland, E., Baker, T., Buckingham Shum, S., & Koedinger, K. R. (2022). Ethics of AI in education: Towards a community-wide framework. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 32, 504–526. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40593-021-00239-1
  22. Hooks, B. (1994). Teaching to transgress: Education as the practice of freedom. Routledge.
  23. Illich, I. (1971). Deschooling society. Harper & Row.
  24. Inkster, B., Sarda, S., & Subramanian, V. (2018). An empathy-driven, conversational artificial intelligence agent (Wysa) for digital mental well-being: Real-world data evaluation mixed-methods study. JMIR mHealth and uHealth, 6(11), e12106. https://doi.org/10.2196/12106
  25. Kuss, D. J., & Griffiths, M. D. (2017). Social networking sites and addiction: Ten lessons learned. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 14(3), 311. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph14030311
  26. Linardon, J., Cuijpers, P., Carlbring, P., Messer, M., & Fuller-Tyszkiewicz, M. (2021). The efficacy of app-supported smartphone interventions for mental health problems: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. World Psychiatry, 18(3), 325–336. https://doi.org/10.1002/wps.20673
  27. Luger, E., & Sellen, A. (2016). “Like having a really bad PA”: The gulf between user expectation and experience of conversational agents. In Proceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 5286–5297). ACM. https://doi.org/10.1145/2858036.2858288
  28. Ly, K. H., Ly, A. M., & Andersson, G. (2017). A fully automated conversational agent for promoting mental well-being: A pilot RCT using mixed methods. Internet Interventions, 10, 39–46. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.invent.2017.10.002
  29. Matos, L., Reyes, C., y Castellanos, M. (2022). Primera generación universitaria y bienestar psicológico en contextos latinoamericanos. Revista Latinoamericana de Psicología, 54, 112–121. https://doi.org/10.14349/rlp.2022.v54.13
  30. Montero-Marín, J., Allwood, M., Ball, S., Crane, C., Austin, T., & Kuyken, W. (2022). School-based mindfulness training in early adolescence: What works, for whom and how in the MYRIAD trial? Evidence-Based Mental Health, 25(3), 117–124. https://doi.org/10.1136/ebmental-2022-300439
  31. Muñoz, R. F., Chavira, D. A., Himle, J. A., & Ho, J. (2022). Technology-based mental health interventions for Latinos: Current status and future directions. Psychiatric Services, 73(7), 799–806. https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.ps.202100096
  32. Norcross, J. C., & Wampold, B. E. (2019). Evidence-based psychotherapy responsiveness: The third task force report. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 75(11), 1899–1906. https://doi.org/10.1002/jclp.22893
  33. Odgers, C. L., & Jensen, M. R. (2020). Annual research review: Adolescent mental health in the digital age: Facts, fears, and future directions. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 61(3), 336–348. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcpp.13190
  34. Oxford Internet Institute. (2023). Responsible AI for student well-being: Principles and governance. University of Oxford. https://www.oii.ox.ac.uk/research/responsible-ai-governance/
  35. Prinsloo, P., & Slade, S. (2017). An elephant in the learning analytics room: The obligation to act. In Proceedings of the Seventh International Learning Analytics & Knowledge Conference (pp. 46–55). ACM. https://doi.org/10.1145/3027385.3027406
  36. Ryff, C. D. (1989). Happiness is everything, or is it? Explorations on the meaning of psychological well-being. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57(6), 1069–1081. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.57.6.1069
  37. Selwyn, N. (2019). Should robots replace teachers? AI and the future of education. Polity Press.
  38. Selwyn, N., & Hillman, T. (2022). Algorithms and the governance of educational data. Learning, Media and Technology, 47(2), 159–163. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439884.2022.2037792
  39. Stanford HAI. (2023). AI and student well-being: Principles for responsible integration in higher education. Stanford Human-Centered Artificial Intelligence. https://hai.stanford.edu/news/ai-student-wellbeing
  40. Stade, E. C., Stirman, S. W., Ungar, L. H., Boland, C. L., Schwartz, H. A., Yaden, D. B., & Eichstaedt, J. C. (2024). Large language models could change the future of behavioral health research and practice. NPJ Mental Health Research, 3, 12. https://doi.org/10.1038/s44184-024-00056-z
  41. Thompson, R. A. (2014). Stress and child development. The Future of Children, 24(1), 41–59. https://doi.org/10.1353/foc.2014.0004
  42. Torous, J., Bucci, S., Bell, I. H., Kessing, L. V., Faurholt-Jepsen, M., Whelan, P., & Firth, J. (2021). The growing field of digital psychiatry: Current evidence and the future of apps, social media, sensing, and artificial intelligence. World Psychiatry, 20(3), 318–335. https://doi.org/10.1002/wps.20883
  43. Turkle, S. (2011). Alone together: Why we expect more from technology and less from each other. Basic Books.
  44. Turkle, S. (2015). Reclaiming conversation: The power of talk in a digital age. Penguin Press.
  45. Twenge, J. M. (2017). iGen: Why today’s super-connected kids are growing up less rebellious, more tolerant, less happy, and completely unprepared for adulthood. Atria Books.
  46. Wampold, B. E. (2015). How important are the common factors in psychotherapy? An update. World Psychiatry, 14(3), 270–277. https://doi.org/10.1002/wps.20238
  47. Weizenbaum, J. (1966). ELIZA—A computer program for the study of natural language communication between man and machine. Communications of the ACM, 9(1), 36–45. https://doi.org/10.1145/365153.365168
  48. Williamson, B., & Eynon, R. (2020). Historical threads, missing links, and future directions in AI in education. Learning, Media and Technology, 45(3), 223–235. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439884.2020.1798995
  49. Williamson, B., Gulson, K. N., Perrotta, C., & Witzenberger, K. (2022). AI and datafication of schooling. Learning, Media and Technology, 47(2), 157–158. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439884.2022.2062196
  50. Woebot Health. (2021). Real-world evidence: Woebot outcomes and impact. https://woebothealth.com/real-world-evidence
  51. Organización Mundial de la Salud. (2022). Salud mental de los adolescentes. https://www.who.int/es/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/adolescent-mental-health
  52. Zuboff, S. (2019). The age of surveillance capitalism: The fight for a human future at the new frontier of power. PublicAffairs.