arXiv:2607. 23927v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: A conversational AI that cannot tell its own output from what a user said will treat its own mistakes as user-provided facts.
arXiv:2610.29413v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Recently, we see a rise in conversational agents as a form of social and emotional support, where disclosure will unfold over time. Yet, current evalua...
arXiv:2606. 26982v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly being integrated into mental health support tools and other psychologically sensitive conversational applications.
arXiv:2604.03058v3 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: LLMs can be socially sycophantic, affirming users when they ask questions like "am I in the wrong?" rather than providing genuine assessment....
arXiv:2512. 04124v4 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Frontier language models increasingly participate in conversations about distress and mental health, yet the mechanisms that generate anthropomorphic self narratives remain unclear.
arXiv:2610.08513v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: LLMs are increasingly deployed as autonomous agents in social environments, making it critical to study their ability to faithfully simulate human in...
arXiv:2608.21389v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Generative AI enables customized misinformation at scale, yet defenses remain largely reactive. We present empirical findings from a human-subject st...
arXiv:2607. 29334v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Conversational AI developed by geopolitical rivals reaches citizens worldwide, raising concerns that it could sway public opinion or be rejected as foreign propaganda, with consequences for democratic discourse and information sovereignty.
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...
arXiv:2607. 14593v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: As conversational AI systems are designed for repeated use, a central question is how a series of interactions becomes a relationship.
The paper investigates whether large language models (LLMs) can generate synthetic cyberbullying conversations that replicate the social dynamics of real interactions. Using a comprehensive framework, the authors compare authentic dialogues with synthetic ones from GPT, Grok, and LLaMA across structural, linguistic, affective, and temporal dimensions, and conduct human evaluations of realism. Results show that while LLMs preserve high‑level interaction patterns, they systematically distort finer‑grained social phenomena, with model‑specific biases such as GPT’s suppression of harmful content and Grok’s amplification of aggression.
In long, multi-turn dialogue a large language model maintains an implicit relational stance toward the user, spanning from "push the user toward real-world others" to "position itself as the user's sole support. " When it slides toward the latter, "support" degrades into "you only have me" -- a harm documented in real companion conversations (Moore et al.