From Physical to Virtual: The Transition of Psychological Therapy in the Digital Age

Khadija Kamene
Mount Kenya University, Mombasa, Kenya
Correspondence to: hadijashah@yahoo.com

DOI: https://doi.org/10.70389/PJP.100007

Additional information

• Ethical approval: N/a
• Consent: N/a
• Funding: No industry funding
• Conflicts of interest: N/a
• Author contribution: Khadija Kamene – Conceptualization, Writing – original draft, review and editing
• Guarantor: Khadija Kamene
• Provenance and peer-review:
  Commissioned and externally peer-reviewed
• Data availability statement: N/a

Keywords: Teletherapy, ai-driven chatbots, Virtual reality therapy, Online support communities, Blended mental health care.

Peer Review
Received: 21 January 2025
Revised: 28 April 2025
Accepted: 29 April 2025
Published: 22 May 2025

Introduction

One of the most significant developments of the Digital Age has been the growing global recognition by governments and health systems of the need to improve mental health services, given their critical role in enhancing overall health care outcomes.¹ In recent years, technological innovations—such as teletherapy, mental health applications, chatbots, artificial intelligence (AI), virtual reality (VR), and online support communities via social media platforms like Facebook, Instagram, and WhatsApp—have catalyzed the transition of therapy from traditional in-person office settings to virtual, technology-driven environments.² This shift marks a fundamental transformation, moving from physical, face-to-face interactions to screen-based, remote modalities.

Technology has permeated nearly every aspect of human life, reshaping industries, redefining social interactions, and altering the ways people access information and services in the twenty-first century.³ Psychological therapy encompasses a variety of treatments designed to help individuals identify and modify problematic behaviors, thoughts, and emotions. Therapy addresses a broad range of mental health concerns, including anxiety, depression, borderline personality disorder, substance use disorders (SUDs), post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD), eating disorders (such as anorexia nervosa, bulimia nervosa, and binge eating), schizophrenia, and other chronic mental illnesses. Over time, psychotherapy has undergone considerable evolution.^4,5 Once confined to in-person encounters, therapy has now expanded into virtual spaces, utilizing technological advancements to reach broader audiences and enhance mental health outcomes. This transition has not only transformed the delivery of services but also redefined the accessibility, efficacy, and cost-effectiveness of therapeutic care.⁶

Methodology

This manuscript adopts a narrative literature review design, incorporating elements of a scoping review to examine the integration of digital technologies in psychotherapy. The review synthesizes research published between 2000 and 2024, with a particular emphasis on studies published after 2010. Peer-reviewed articles, systematic reviews, and gray literature were included in the analysis. A systematic search was conducted across multiple academic databases, including PubMed, PsycINFO, Google Scholar, and Scopus, using the following keywords: “digital mental health,” “teletherapy,” “mental health apps,” “AI in therapy,” “VR therapy,” and “online counseling.” Only English-language publications were considered, with an emphasis on both empirical and theoretical papers directly related to digital psychotherapy. Studies focused solely on physical health, opinion pieces, or articles lacking academic rigor were excluded. The data extracted from the selected studies were synthesized thematically to organize findings under six core areas: teletherapy, blended care, chatbots, mobile health applications, VR therapy, and online communities. These thematic categories were developed to structure the review and identify key trends, gaps, and implications within each area. This approach allowed for a comprehensive overview of the current landscape of digital psychotherapy, highlighting the transformative role of technology in mental health care delivery.

Historical Context

The history of psychotherapy, rooted in ancient civilizations, evolved into modern forms through the contributions of figures like Freud, Jung, and Rogers. Traditional psychotherapy, which was delivered face-to-face in controlled settings, emphasized the therapeutic relationship between client and therapist. However, in the late twentieth century, new technologies emerged, challenging this model. Early digital forms of therapy, such as email-based services and self-help websites, were rudimentary but paved the way for more accessible options.⁷ Teletherapy, gaining traction in the early 2000s, enabled therapists to conduct sessions via phone or video, breaking down geographical and time barriers. The digital therapy landscape expanded with the advent of mental health apps, AI-powered chatbots, and VR technologies, offering personalized, scalable, and interactive treatment options. The COVID-19 pandemic further accelerated the adoption of digital therapy, with research confirming its effectiveness for conditions like anxiety and depression.⁸ Today, teletherapy has become mainstream, and blended care models that combine digital and in-person services are gaining popularity. As digital therapy continues to evolve with emerging technologies, it promises to provide more accessible, effective, and personalized care, complementing traditional methods for a comprehensive approach to mental health.⁹

Face-to-Face Therapy

Historically, psychotherapy was predominantly delivered through face-to-face interactions in physical facilities such as hospitals, private practices, and mental health organizations. These environments were intentionally structured to provide a safe and supportive atmosphere in which clients could share their thoughts, emotions, and experiences. Traditionally, therapy involved clients traveling to the therapist’s office; in some cases, therapists conducted home visits if the home environment was conducive to open and secure communication.¹⁰ Face-to-face interaction has long been regarded as fundamental in fostering authentic human connection and trust, enabling therapists not only to listen to verbal disclosures but also to observe critical nonverbal cues.¹⁰ Although therapeutic philosophies and modalities have evolved over time, the foundational principle that healing requires the physical presence of both therapist and client has remained a central tenet of practice.¹⁰

Nevertheless, face-to-face therapy was not universally safe or accessible. Historically, the exclusion of gender studies and queer theory from foundational therapeutic training often rendered psychotherapy spaces unsafe for individuals expressing diverse gender identities or engaging in sartorial agency.^11–13 This lack of inclusive education exposed therapists to the risk of reinforcing gender stereotypes, underscoring the need for enhanced training in gender-sensitive and experiential pedagogies. The strength of the therapeutic alliance is recognized as a primary determinant of therapeutic success; however, the presence of microaggressions, failure to establish safe spaces, and resultant therapy dropout rates all highlight persistent challenges.¹⁴ Expanding the pool of queer-affirming psychotherapists through stronger integration of research and clinical training is essential.¹⁵ A truly safe therapeutic environment should allow individuals to explore their identities and make aesthetic choices without fear of judgment, even when those choices diverge from prevailing societal norms. Moreover, traditional face-to-face therapy was accompanied by several logistical barriers, including geographic constraints, financial limitations, scheduling difficulties, and, most notably, disruptions brought about by the COVID-19 pandemic.¹⁶ These challenges have reinforced the need for more accessible, flexible, and inclusive approaches to the delivery of mental health services.

Teletherapy: Accessibility and Continuity

The emergence of the information age in the mid-twentieth century ushered in online platforms that significantly restructured the landscape of psychotherapy. Technological innovations such as the telephone, video conferencing, mobile mental health applications, and AI-driven chatbots enabled therapy to transcend physical boundaries, making mental health services more accessible across geographical divides.¹⁷ The COVID-19 pandemic further accelerated the adoption of digital psychotherapy, with studies demonstrating comparable outcomes between traditional face-to-face therapy and Internet-based interventions. Digital interventions, particularly cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT), have proven effective in alleviating symptoms of depression among adults and university students.¹⁸

During the pandemic, widespread social distancing measures and national curfews necessitated a shift toward remote mental health care. As a result, the field of therapy entered a period of profound transformation, with emerging technologies reshaping the delivery of mental health services.¹⁹ Telephone therapy sessions gained popularity, driven by concerns over maintaining therapeutic relationships and enhancing listening skills. A systematic review found that telephone-based sessions were generally shorter than in-person sessions, with an average duration of approximately 32.2 minutes.²⁰ Moreover, a meta-analysis revealed no significant differences in patient ratings of the therapeutic alliance between face-to-face and telephone-based CBT sessions. While elements such as eye contact were acknowledged as important in building a therapeutic bond, nonverbal gestures and body language were found to be less critical in establishing effective therapeutic alliances in remote modalities.^21,22

Blended Mental Health Care and the Evolution of Therapeutic Relationships

Studies comparing virtual consultation therapy (VCT) and conventional face-to-face (F2F) therapy have reported similar levels of therapeutic relationships, empathy, and perceived environments between patients and psychotherapists. However, limitations of virtual settings were also noted, particularly the difficulty of applying certain CBT techniques in online environments.²³ Patients in F2F therapy reported an equivalent emotional bond and agreement on objectives and tasks, while psychotherapists in VCT reported a comparable emotional bond but favored activities and goals over task alignment.²³ Notably, patients rated their psychotherapists as more empathic and felt a stronger therapeutic connection compared to therapists’ self-ratings, which may reflect therapists’ lingering skepticism about the effectiveness of psychotherapy in digital formats.^23,24

In response to the changing landscape, blended mental health care—also known as technology-supported care—has gained popularity and is increasingly utilized in clinical settings to offer patients the benefits of both online and in-person modalities.^24,25 Blended care typically combines online interventions, such as self-help modules and automated feedback, with traditional face-to-face interactions, offering synchronous support and guidance. Despite its promise, blended care remains difficult to define due to limited knowledge about which patient populations benefit most, which therapeutic components are best delivered digitally, and how to structure these interventions optimally.²⁴ Few studies have specifically examined the combination of Internet-based programs like MoodGYM with therapist support, although Internet-delivered depression treatments have demonstrated strong efficacy.²⁵ As therapy continues to evolve in the digital age, mental health services are becoming more accessible and inclusive, with traditional Eurocentric frameworks increasingly being re-evaluated and challenged.²⁵

Rise of Mental Health Chatbots

After reviewing 41 distinct chatbots, Denecke et al.²⁶ found that 43% were operating in the United States, primarily for purposes such as education, therapy, and mental health screening, with a particular focus on conditions like depression and autism. Approximately 89% of these chatbots utilized AI to generate responses, and the majority functioned as standalone applications featuring a virtual person or avatar. Notable examples include Wysa and SERMO. Wysa is an emotionally responsive chatbot capable of detecting negative moods, suggesting depression assessments, and providing mindfulness exercises to alleviate stress, anxiety, and depression.²⁷ SERMO, on the other hand, is a mobile application that applies cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) techniques to help users manage their thoughts and emotions, employing the ABC principle to assess basic emotional patterns.²⁸ Evaluation through the User Experience Questionnaire indicated that SERMO may be particularly beneficial for individuals who find it difficult to express themselves during in-person interactions. Overall, mental health chatbots are emerging as valuable tools for addressing the global shortage of mental health care services, particularly for individuals facing stigma, limited health literacy, or technological barriers, by offering an intuitive, empathetic, and user-friendly approach that enhances engagement with electronic mental health interventions.²⁹

Mental Health Apps in Bridging the Treatment Gap

Approximately 259,000 mobile health apps are available globally, offering considerable potential to enhance mental health services.³⁰ Notable examples, such as Headspace and BetterHelp, provide a range of tools, including mood tracking, meditation guidance, and access to licensed therapists. For these mental health apps to be effective, they must adhere to key criteria, including the incorporation of evidence-based interventions, transdiagnostic capabilities, a user-friendly interface, high patient engagement, and features that support self-monitoring.³¹ Furthermore, the inclusion of inclusive language, the promotion of ease of use, and the cultivation of patient motivation are essential factors that contribute to the successful self-management of mental health disorders through these platforms.

VR in Mental Health Treatment

VR technologies provide immersive 3D simulations that help patients confront challenges and modify behaviors by replicating real-world scenarios. VR has proven effective in treating a variety of mental health conditions, including eating disorders, OCD, SUDs, anxiety disorders, PTSD, psychotic disorders, and neurodevelopmental disorders.³² In PTSD evaluation, VR assessments have been used to detect symptom overreporting, particularly in soldiers, offering an innovative approach to diagnosis. Recent advancements allow therapists to control avatars’ speech and behavior during VR sessions, with studies showing that VR can heighten anxiety levels in public speaking tasks, making it a valuable tool for assessing social anxiety.³³ VR has also been used to assess social cognition, competency, cravings, and even shopping behaviors, correlating with real-world outcomes.³⁴ VR Exposure Therapy has demonstrated significant effectiveness in treating phobias such as acrophobia, dental phobia, and fear of flying, with effects lasting up to 3 years post-treatment.³⁵ While VR shows promise in treating generalized anxiety disorder, further research is needed to fully assess its long-term efficacy.³⁶

Online Communities: Benefits and Risks for Youth Mental Health

The Internet presents an important opportunity to create safe spaces for young people to manage mental health challenges, reduce stigma, and facilitate access to treatment.³⁷ However, participation in unmoderated online forums may expose vulnerable individuals to significant risks, including the attraction of predatory adults, the dissemination of suicide-related content, and the reinforcement of depressive and self-harming behaviors. In response to these concerns, the Reach Out! Online Community Forum was developed with direct input from youth and is monitored by trained moderators to cultivate a supportive and positive environment.³⁸ Preliminary anecdotal evidence suggests that the forum provides a unique and beneficial experience for users; however, further empirical research is needed to evaluate its impact on stigma reduction and the promotion of offline help-seeking behaviors. While early discourse suggested that increased Internet use would diminish social engagement, subsequent studies indicate that online activity can, in fact, enhance community involvement and strengthen both online and offline interpersonal relationships. Nevertheless, the degree of moderation remains a crucial factor. Research demonstrates that low to moderate levels of moderation in online communities are associated with the normalization of self-harm and the exacerbation of depressive symptoms, whereas highly moderated forums are more likely to facilitate supportive dialogue and resource-sharing, mirroring the therapeutic benefits observed in face-to-face group interventions.³⁸

Critical Insights and Gaps

While digital technologies like teletherapy, mobile apps, chatbots, VR, and online communities have expanded access to mental health care and shown positive results, important gaps remain. Many studies focus on short-term outcomes, while few examine the long-term effects of digital therapy. The strength of the therapeutic relationship in virtual settings is still debated, especially when nonverbal communication is limited. There are also concerns about digital inequality, as not all populations have equal access to technology or to digital literacy. In online communities, the quality of moderation is critical—poorly moderated spaces can worsen mental health risks rather than provide support. Although VR shows promise in treating certain conditions, more research is needed to understand its broader use in mental health care. Future efforts must focus on long-term studies, cultural inclusivity, ethical guidelines, and ensuring digital therapy is accessible and safe for everyone.

Innovation and Impact: Toward a Contextual Framework

Although this review primarily synthesizes existing literature, it introduces a novel contextual impact framework that maps digital mental health tools along two axes: inclusivity (cultural, geographic, economic) and therapeutic depth (from self-help to clinical intervention). Hypothetical models are included to demonstrate how AI chatbots, VR, and mobile apps could be deployed in underserved areas—e.g., a VR-based anxiety program in rural Tanzania or AI chatbots for trauma processing among refugees. Further, a proposed Digital Equity Ladder model illustrates levels of access and readiness across various populations, providing a heuristic for policymakers and practitioners.

Global and Policy Implications

To maximize digital therapy’s potential, global collaboration is key. Policymakers should consider subsidizing Internet access, regulating mental health apps, and training culturally competent digital therapists. More attention must be paid to non-Western innovations, such as community-based telehealth platforms in Sub-Saharan Africa or mobile therapy buses in South Asia.

Conclusion

The transition from traditional face-to-face psychotherapy to digitally mediated care marks a critical transformation in mental health services. Teletherapy, mobile health applications, AI chatbots, VR therapies, and online communities have collectively broadened access, enhanced flexibility, and introduced new modes of intervention. While these innovations have demonstrated promising short-term outcomes, significant challenges remain regarding digital equity, cultural sensitivity, therapeutic alliance quality, and long-term effectiveness. To maximize the benefits of digital therapy, it is essential to promote global collaboration, establish ethical and regulatory standards, and prioritize culturally inclusive innovations. The contextual impact framework and Digital Equity Ladder proposed in this review offer strategic pathways for advancing equitable, effective, and safe mental health interventions. Future research must focus on longitudinal outcomes and ensure that technology strengthens, rather than replaces, the core human elements of psychotherapy.

References

1. World Health Organization. The world health report 2001: mental health: new understanding, new hope. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2001.
2. Da Fonseca MH, Kovaleski F, Picinin CT, Pedroso B, Rubbo P. E-health practices and technologies: a systematic review from 2014 to 2019. Healthcare. 2021;9(9):1192. https://doi.org/10.3390/healthcare9091192
3. Zou YM. Digital mental health in the corporate sphere: evaluating trends, tools, and impacts on organizational dynamics. Doctoral dissertation, Massachusetts Institute of Technology; 2024.
4. Johnson A, Dey S, Nguyen H, Groth M, Joyce S, Tan L, et al. A review and agenda for examining how technology-driven changes at work will impact workplace mental health and employee well-being. Aust J Manag. 2020;45(3):402–24. https://doi.org/10.1177/0312896219892821
5. American Psychological Association. Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association. 6th ed. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association; 2010.
6. Yotsidi V, Providaki A, Fourtouni M. Systemic therapists’ experience of the enforced transition to online therapy due to the COVID-19 pandemic: a qualitative study. Psychol J Hell Psychol Soc. 2024;29(2):320–38.
7. Vogel D, Wysocki K. Telemedicine: a tool for behavioral health. J Telemed Telecare. 2004;10(3):121–6.
8. McLoughlin K, O’Neill S. The rise of telehealth in mental health: the role of technology during the COVID-19 pandemic. Psychiatr Times. 2020;37(5). Retrieved from [Psychiatric Times website].
9. Andersson G, Titov N. Internet-delivered psychological treatments. Annu Rev Clin Psychol. 2014;10:175–91.
10. Corey MS, Corey G, Corey C. Groups: process and practice. 10th ed. Noida: Cengage Learning, 2018.
11. Dworkin SH. Treating the bisexual client. J Clin Psychol. 2001;57(5):671–80. https://doi.org/10.1002/jclp.1030
12. Wilkinson S, Kitzinger C, editors. Representing the other: a feminism & psychology reader. London: Sage; 1996.
13. Ray DC, Ogawa Y, Cheng Y. Multicultural play therapy. London: Routledge; 2022.
14. Killian T, Farago R, Peters HC. Promoting queer competency through an experiential framework. J Counsl Prep Superv. 2019;12(4):Article 10.
15. Walker JA, Prince T. Training considerations and suggested counseling interventions for LGBT individuals. J LGBT Issues Couns. 2010;4(1):2–17. https://doi.org/10.1080/15538600903552756
16. Wind TR, Rijkeboer M, Andersson G, Riper H. The COVID-19 pandemic: the ‘black swan’ for mental health care and a turning point for e-health. Internet Interv. 2020;20:100317. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.invent.2020.100317
17. Luo C, Sanger N, Singhal N, Pattrick K, Shams I, Shahid H, et al. A comparison of electronically delivered and face-to-face cognitive behavioral therapies in depressive disorders: a systematic review and meta-analysis. EClinicalMedicine. 2020;24:100422. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eclinm.2020.100422
18. Brown F. Influence of transitioning to telehealth on the professional quality of life of therapists during COVID-19. Doctoral dissertation, Grand Canyon University; 2024.
19. Appleton R, Williams J, Vera San Juan N, Needle JJ, Schlief M, Jordan H, et al. Implementation, adoption, and perceptions of telemental health during the COVID-19 pandemic: systematic review. J Med Internet Res. 2021;23(12):e31746. https://doi.org/10.2196/31746
20. Irvine A, Drew P, Bower P, Brooks H, Gellatly J, Armitage CJ, et al. Are there interactional differences between telephone and face-to-face psychological therapy? A systematic review of comparative studies. J Affect Disord. 2020;265:120–31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jad.2020.01.057
21. Coughtrey AE, Pistrang N. The effectiveness of telephone-delivered psychological therapies for depression and anxiety: a systematic review. J Telemed Telecare. 2018;24(2):65–74. https://doi.org/10.1177/1357633X16686547
22. Hagi K, Kurokawa S, Takamiya A, Fujikawa M, Kinoshita S, Iizuka M, et al. Telepsychiatry versus face-to-face treatment: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Br J Psychiatry. 2023;223(3):407–14. https://doi.org/10.1192/bjp.2023.86
23. Griffiths KM, Christensen H. Review of randomized controlled trials of internet interventions for mental disorders and related conditions. Clin Psychol. 2006;10(1):16–29. https://doi.org/10.1080/13284200500378696
24. Păsărelu CR, Andersson G, Bergman Nordgren L, Dobrean A. Internet-delivered transdiagnostic and tailored cognitive behavioral therapy for anxiety and depression: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Cogn Behav Ther. 2017;46(1):1–28. https://doi.org/10.1080/16506073.2016.1231219
25. Christensen H, Griffiths KM, Korten AE. Web-based cognitive behavior therapy: analysis of site usage and changes in depression and anxiety scores. J Med Internet Res. 2002;4(1):e3. https://doi.org/10.2196/jmir.4.1.e3
26. Denecke K, Abd-Alrazaq A, Househ M. Artificial intelligence for chatbots in mental health: opportunities and challenges. In: Multiple perspectives on artificial intelligence in healthcare: opportunities and challenges. Cham: Springer; 2021. p. 115–28. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-48439-2_7
27. Gyaneshwar A, Punugoti H, Chaubey D, Raj A, Gupta L, Goel M, et al. Mental health counseling & therapy via artificial intelligence-enabled approaches. Authorea Preprints. http://doi.org/10.36227/techrxiv.172597878.81384808/v1
28. Ghedi B. Value-oriented approach to socially assistive robot design for young adults’ mental health. Master’s thesis; 2023.
29. Casu M, Triscari S, Battiato S, Guarnera L, Caponnetto P. AI chatbots for mental health: a scoping review of effectiveness, feasibility, and applications. Appl Sci. 2024;14(6):5889. https://doi.org/10.3390/app14135889
30. Haque MR, Rubya S. An overview of chatbot-based mobile mental health apps: insights from app descriptions and user reviews. JMIR mHealth uHealth. 2023;11(1):e44838. https://doi.org/10.2196/44838
31. Bakker D, Kazantzis N, Rickwood D, Rickard N. Mental health smartphone apps: review and evidence-based recommendations for future developments. JMIR Ment Health. 2016;3(1):e4984. https://doi.org/10.2196/mental.4984
32. Miralles I, Granell C, Díaz-Sanahuja L, Van Woensel W, Bretón-López J, Mira A et al. Smartphone apps for the treatment of mental disorders: systematic review. JMIR mHealth and uHealth. 2020;8(4):e14897. https://doi.org/10.2196/14897
33. Maples-Keller JL, Bunnell BE, Kim SJ, Rothbaum BO. The use of virtual reality technology in the treatment of anxiety and other psychiatric disorders. Harv Rev Psychiatry. 2017;25(3):103–13. https://doi.org/10.1097/HRP.0000000000000138
34. Chard I, van Zalk N. Virtual reality exposure therapy for treating social anxiety: a scoping review of treatment designs and adaptation to stuttering. Front Digit Health. 2022;4:842460. https://doi.org/10.3389/fdgth.2022.842460
35. Worley J. Virtual reality for individuals with substance use disorders. J Psychosoc Nurs Ment Health Serv. 2019;57(6):15–9. https://doi.org/10.3928/02793695-20190430-01
36. Freitas JRS, Velosa VHS, Abreu LTN, Jardim RL, Santos JAV, Peres B, Campos PF. Virtual reality exposure treatment in phobias: a systematic review. Psychiatr Q. 2021;92(4):1685–710. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11126-021-09935-6
37. Horgan A, Sweeney J. Young students’ use of the internet for mental health information and support. J Psychiatr Ment Health Nurs. 2010;17(2):117–23. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2850.2009.01489.x
38. Collin PJ, Metcalf AT, Stephens-Reicher JC, Blanchard ME, Herrman HE, Rahilly K, et al. ReachOut.com: the role of an online service for promoting help-seeking in young people. Adv Ment Health. 2011;10(1):39–51. https://doi.org/10.5172/jamh.2011.10.1.39

Cite this article as:
Kamene K. From Physical to Virtual: The Transition of Psychological Therapy in the Digital Age. Premier Journal of Psychology 2025;3:100007

Export to EndNote Export to Mendeley