arXiv:2607. 13562v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Knowing when to say "I don't know" is fundamental to human judgment, yet AI assistants offer a fluent answer to almost any question.
By Chiara Marcoccia, Walter Quattrociocchi, Valerio Capraro
arXiv:2508. 07617v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: AI has the potential to augment human decision making.
By Sarah Jabbour, David Fouhey, Nikola Banovic, Stephanie D. Shepard, Ella Kazerooni, Michael W. Sjoding, Jenna Wiens
The study tests deliberately biased AI assistants and finds that such bias improves human performance on tasks like misinformation evaluation, financial investment, and graduate education compared to neutral AI. However, participants undervalue biased AI and overvalue neutral AI, even when performance is similar. When two AI biases flank a participant’s perspective, performance gains are maintained while reducing the perceived cost and one‑sided influence.
By Shiyang Lai, Jiwoong Choi, Junsol Kim, Nadav Kunievsky, Yujin Potter, James Evans
arXiv:2604. 04721v3 Announce Type: replace Abstract: People often optimize for long-term goals in collaboration: A mentor or companion doesn't just answer questions, but also scaffolds learning, tracks progress, and prioritizes the other person's growth over immediate results.
By Grace Liu, Brian Christian, Tsvetomira Dumbalska, Michiel A. Bakker, Rachit Dubey
The paper examines how advisors should tailor recommendations when users consult personal AI assistants whose advice is predictable. It models the influence of personal AI through consultation probability and relative trust, finding that optimal counteraction and loss are hump‑shaped in these dimensions. The study also explores partial predictability, costly adjustments, richer information structures, and presents an online experiment showing participants weigh advisor, personal AI, and their own judgments differently.
By Yueyang Liu, Wichinpong Park Sinchaisri
arXiv:2607. 25166v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: AI chatbots can be ``sycophantic,'' or overly agreeable and flattering toward users.
By Meryl Ye, Robert Kraut, Steve Rathje
arXiv:2609.16793v1 Announce Type: cross
Abstract: People increasingly reason with large language models (LLMs), yet complementary capabilities do not guarantee outperforming both components. In a bet...
By Robin Welsch, Michelle Rausch, Pascal Knierim, Thomas Kosch, Jochen Kuhn, Albrecht Schmidt, Daniela Fernandes
arXiv:2509.08494v2 Announce Type: replace-cross
Abstract: As humans delegate more tasks and decisions to artificial intelligence (AI), we risk losing control of our individual and collective futures....
By Benjamin Sturgeon, Daniel Samuelson, Jacob Haimes, Jacy Reese Anthis
arXiv:2606. 11217v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: The proliferation of large language models (LLMs) and autonomous AI agents has given rise to a rapidly growing methodological paradigm: "in silico" behavioral experiments.
By Michelle Vaccaro
arXiv:2608.21841v1 Announce Type: new
Abstract: Conversational AI increasingly shapes consequential decisions, yet users have limited support for recognizing and resisting manipulation. We present AI...
By Rachel Poonsiriwong (Pub), Chayapatr (Pub), Archiwaranguprok, Constanze Albrecht, Monchai Lertsutthiwong, Pattie Maes, Pat Pataranutaporn
arXiv:2608.29453v1 Announce Type: cross
Abstract: As AI becomes increasingly integrated into clinical practice, it is playing a growing role in medical decision making. Medicine, however, is a high s...
By Jiayuan Zhu, Jiazhen Pan, Fenglin Liu, Minhao Hu, Junde Wu
arXiv:2409. 03500v4 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: The increasing use of artificial intelligence (AI) in news production raises important questions about how audiences perceive and respond to AI-generated journalism.
By Fabrizio Gilardi, Sabrina Di Lorenzo, Juri Ezzaini, Beryl Santa, Benjamin Streiff, Eric Zurfluh, Emma Hoes