Total: 1
People increasingly bring mental-health concerns to consumer AI chatbots. In these conversations, clinically relevant information rarely arrives all at once. Instead, it unfolds over multiple turns, often in response to the questions the chatbot asks. Recognizing risk therefore depends on how a chatbot integrates newly disclosed information (inference) and on the questions it asks on each turn to elicit this information (context-seeking). Here we evaluated the conversational triage performance of 13 frontier AI chatbots tasked with engaging in 10-turn conversations with simulated users. Simulated users were grounded in one of 112 structured mental-health case files, each with an associated clinician-validated urgency level, from routine care to emergency. Chatbots failed to recognize one in five mental-health emergencies (20.3%), nearly four times the failure rate when all relevant clinical details were presented in a single message (5.6%). This gap was not explained by missing information: by the final turn, decisive facts had almost always been disclosed, and simply re-presenting those same facts as a single message reduced emergency under-triage to 12.1%. The problem lay instead in how the conversation unfolded, a phenomenon we refer to as path dependence. Early triage dispositions increasingly anchored later ones, such that emergencies missed early were rarely recovered as evidence accumulated. Context-seeking narrowed onto a small number of stereotyped questioning trajectories, with chatbots perseverating more than human clinicians given the same transcripts. Because the chatbot's running judgment shaped what it asked next, these two biases were plausibly coupled across turns. These dynamics are invisible to single-turn benchmarks but measurable in multi-turn evaluation, and point to concrete mitigations for safer conversational triage in consumer health AI.