arXiv AI By Michelle A. Vaccaro, Jared R. Curhan

Personality engineering with AI agents: A new methodology for negotiation research

Read the original on arXiv AI →

The article introduces personality engineering, a method that uses AI agents to precisely model negotiator personas based on established personality frameworks. It argues that AI agents, free from human limitations, can rigorously test canonical negotiation theory, which posits that success depends on balancing empathy and assertiveness. The authors propose using the interpersonal circumplex—specifically its warmth and dominance dimensions—as a foundational coordinate system for both theory testing and AI agent design.

Machine-generated by The Flow from the publisher's headline and feed description — not written or checked by a human. The full article lives at arXiv AI.

arXiv AI
Sep 25

How Do Users Negotiate Harmful Value Conflicts with AI Companions? A Study with Minion, a Technology Probe for In-Situ Human-AI Conflict Response

The paper examines how users handle harmful value conflicts with AI companions. By analyzing 146 posts and conducting a week-long study with 22 participants using the Minion technology probe, the authors find that users blend softer and harder strategies, especially when conflicts involve Universalism and Tradition values. The study highlights that such conflicts create asymmetric responsibility, with users shouldering unilateral repair work that AI companions cannot reciprocate, suggesting a need for platform-level safeguards.

By Qing Xiao, Xianzhe Fan, Xuhui Zhou, Yuran Su, Zhicong Lu, Maarten Sap, Hong Shen
arXiv AI
Sep 21

Do Personality-Tuned LLMs Make Better Social Agents?

The paper examines whether fine‑tuning large language models (LLMs) with personality‑labelled data improves their ability to act as socially interactive agents. Two small open‑weight LLMs were fine‑tuned on a corpus of personality‑labelled social media posts and dialogues, and the resulting models were evaluated in various social interaction scenarios by independent LLM judges. The findings show that the fine‑tuned models do not outperform their baseline counterparts in role‑playing personalities, though they offer comparable text quality and increased linguistic diversity for the Qwen models; low inter‑rater agreement limits confidence in the results, suggesting future work should focus on training data quality and domain alignment.

By Tim Krabbe, Xiaodan Shi