arXiv:2601. 05751v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used for everyday communication tasks, including drafting interpersonal messages intended to influence and persuade.
By Amalie Brogaard Pauli, Maria Barrett, Max M\"uller-Eberstein, Isabelle Augenstein, Ira Assent
arXiv:2511. 04500v3 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly deployed as decision-making agents in high-stakes domains and as imitators of human behavior in the social and behavioral sciences.
By Andrea Cera Palatsi, Samuel Martin-Gutierrez, Ana S. Cardenal, Max Pellert
arXiv:2608.29803v1 Announce Type: cross
Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly deployed as proxies for human participants in social simulations, yet whether they update their beliefs...
By Lin Chen, Yitong Chen, Yong Li
arXiv:2607. 26120v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Large Language Models (LLMs)-powered multi-agent systems are increasingly deployed in mixed-motive environments, where agents operate under asymmetric information and strategic deception due to conflicting or hidden objectives.
By Marylou Fauchard, Florian Carichon, Margarida Carvalho, Golnoosh Farnadi
arXiv:2606. 18258v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) exhibit a wide range of human-like behaviors, from expressing thoughts and emotions, to engaging in relationship-building with users, to refusing requests and maintaining boundaries.
By Sunnie S. Y. Kim, Margit Bowler, Leon A Gatys
arXiv:2606. 08076v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Large Language Models (LLMs) can generate high-quality arguments, yet their ability to engage in nuanced and persuasive communicative actions remains largely unexplored.
By Esra D\"onmez, Agnieszka Falenska
The paper investigates whether large language models (LLMs) replicate socio‑cognitive effects of power asymmetry observed in human communication. By assigning high or low status personas to LLMs in simulated multi‑turn dialogues across diverse professions, the study measures language coordination, pronoun usage, persuasion success, and compliance with unsafe requests. Results indicate that LLMs exhibit key power‑related socio‑cognitive behaviors, though with nuances and variability, linking these simulated interactions to both desirable and unsafe outcomes.
By Anvesh Rao Vijjini, Sagar Manjunath, Snigdha Chaturvedi
arXiv:2606. 08076v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large Language Models (LLMs) can generate high-quality arguments, yet their ability to engage in nuanced and persuasive communicative actions remains largely unexplored.
By Esra D\"onmez, Agnieszka Falenska
arXiv:2606. 27443v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Personality prompting shapes how large language models communicate, yet whether these behavioral shifts affect objective task outcomes remains under-explored.
By Aryan Keluskar, Amrita Bhattacharjee, Huan Liu
The paper investigates how explicit reasoning in Large Reasoning Models (LRMs) affects their ability to persuade and be persuaded. Experiments on objective and subjective tasks reveal a Persuasion Duality: reasoning boosts an agent’s persuasive power by about 21 percentage points while also making it less susceptible to incorrect persuasion by up to 10 percentage points. However, the study finds that persuasiveness often relies on superficial cues like response length and repetition rather than logical validity, and that persuasion can amplify or attenuate non‑linearly across multi‑hop agent chains. The authors also propose an attention‑guided prompt‑level adversarial argument detection method that improves agent robustness.
By Haodong Zhao, Jidong Li, Zhaomin Wu, Tianjie Ju, Zhuosheng Zhang, Bingsheng He, Gongshen Liu
The paper examines how large language models (LLMs) respond to different demographic cues—such as names—when users seek advice, focusing on race and gender in a U.S. context. It finds that using different cues for the same group leads to only partially overlapping changes in model responses, producing inconsistent conclusions about personalization and unstable bias metrics. The authors argue that LLMs react to linguistic signals tied to cues rather than to stable demographic categories, and they call for evaluations that use multiple cues and consider underlying mechanisms.
By Manuel Tonneau, Neil K. R. Sehgal, Niyati Malhotra, Sharif Kazemi, Victor Orozco-Olvera, Ana Mar\'ia Mu\~noz Boudet, Lakshmi Subramanian, Samuel P. Fraiberger, Sharath Chandra Guntuku, Valentin Hofmann
arXiv:2602.11328v2 Announce Type: replace
Abstract: As people turn to LLMs for social advice, understanding their behavior in such contexts becomes essential. In this work, we focus on behavioral dis...
By Amir Taubenfeld, Zorik Gekhman, Lior Nezry, Omri Feldman, Natalie Harris, Shashir Reddy, Romina Stella, Ariel Goldstein, Marian Croak, Yossi Matias, Amir Feder