The Persuasive Power of Large Language Models

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2312.15523v1
• Date: Sun, 24 Dec 2023 16:21:11 GMT
• Title: The Persuasive Power of Large Language Models
• Authors: Simon Martin Breum, Daniel V{\ae}dele Egdal, Victor Gram Mortensen, Anders Giovanni M{\o}ller, Luca Maria Aiello
• Abstract summary: We design a synthetic persuasion dialogue scenario on the topic of climate change. A 'convincer' agent generates a persuasive argument for a'skeptic' agent, who subsequently assesses whether the argument changed its internal opinion state. We ask human judges to evaluate the persuasiveness of machine-generated arguments. Our findings suggest that artificial agents have the potential of playing an important role in collective processes of opinion formation in online social media.
• Score: 0.0
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: The increasing capability of Large Language Models to act as human-like social agents raises two important questions in the area of opinion dynamics. First, whether these agents can generate effective arguments that could be injected into the online discourse to steer the public opinion. Second, whether artificial agents can interact with each other to reproduce dynamics of persuasion typical of human social systems, opening up opportunities for studying synthetic social systems as faithful proxies for opinion dynamics in human populations. To address these questions, we designed a synthetic persuasion dialogue scenario on the topic of climate change, where a 'convincer' agent generates a persuasive argument for a 'skeptic' agent, who subsequently assesses whether the argument changed its internal opinion state. Different types of arguments were generated to incorporate different linguistic dimensions underpinning psycho-linguistic theories of opinion change. We then asked human judges to evaluate the persuasiveness of machine-generated arguments. Arguments that included factual knowledge, markers of trust, expressions of support, and conveyed status were deemed most effective according to both humans and agents, with humans reporting a marked preference for knowledge-based arguments. Our experimental framework lays the groundwork for future in-silico studies of opinion dynamics, and our findings suggest that artificial agents have the potential of playing an important role in collective processes of opinion formation in online social media.

Related papers

• Debate-to-Write: A Persona-Driven Multi-Agent Framework for Diverse Argument Generation [25.43678472601801]
  We propose a persona-based multi-agent framework for argument writing. Inspired by the human debate, we first assign each agent a persona representing its high-level beliefs from a unique perspective. We then design an agent interaction process so that the agents can collaboratively debate and discuss the idea to form an overall plan for argument writing.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-28T04:21:20Z)
• Persona Inconstancy in Multi-Agent LLM Collaboration: Conformity, Confabulation, and Impersonation [16.82101507069166]
  Multi-agent AI systems can be used for simulating collective decision-making in scientific and practical applications. We examine AI agent ensembles engaged in cross-national collaboration and debate by analyzing their private responses and chat transcripts. Our findings suggest that multi-agent discussions can support collective AI decisions that more often reflect diverse perspectives.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-06T21:20:35Z)
• The Future of Cognitive Strategy-enhanced Persuasive Dialogue Agents: New Perspectives and Trends [23.68567141617251]
  We present several fundamental cognitive psychology theories and give the formalized definition of three typical cognitive strategies. We propose a new system architecture by incorporating the formalized definition to lay the foundation of CogAgent.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-07T07:28:34Z)
• On the Discussion of Large Language Models: Symmetry of Agents and Interplay with Prompts [51.3324922038486]
  This paper reports the empirical results of the interplay of prompts and discussion mechanisms. It also proposes a scalable discussion mechanism based on conquer and merge.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-13T04:56:48Z)
• DiPlomat: A Dialogue Dataset for Situated Pragmatic Reasoning [89.92601337474954]
  Pragmatic reasoning plays a pivotal role in deciphering implicit meanings that frequently arise in real-life conversations. We introduce a novel challenge, DiPlomat, aiming at benchmarking machines' capabilities on pragmatic reasoning and situated conversational understanding.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-06-15T10:41:23Z)
• Persua: A Visual Interactive System to Enhance the Persuasiveness of Arguments in Online Discussion [52.49981085431061]
  Enhancing people's ability to write persuasive arguments could contribute to the effectiveness and civility in online communication. We derived four design goals for a tool that helps users improve the persuasiveness of arguments in online discussions. Persua is an interactive visual system that provides example-based guidance on persuasive strategies to enhance the persuasiveness of arguments.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-04-16T08:07:53Z)
• Towards Socially Intelligent Agents with Mental State Transition and Human Utility [97.01430011496576]
  We propose to incorporate a mental state and utility model into dialogue agents. The hybrid mental state extracts information from both the dialogue and event observations. The utility model is a ranking model that learns human preferences from a crowd-sourced social commonsense dataset.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-03-12T00:06:51Z)
• Strategic Argumentation Dialogues for Persuasion: Framework and Experiments Based on Modelling the Beliefs and Concerns of the Persuadee [6.091096843566857]
  Two key dimensions for determining whether an argument is good in a particular dialogue are the degree to which the intended audience believes the argument and counterarguments, and the impact that the argument has on the concerns of the intended audience. We present a framework for modelling persuadees in terms of their beliefs and concerns, and for harnessing these models in optimizing the choice of move in persuasion dialogues.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-01-28T08:49:24Z)
• You Impress Me: Dialogue Generation via Mutual Persona Perception [62.89449096369027]
  The research in cognitive science suggests that understanding is an essential signal for a high-quality chit-chat conversation. Motivated by this, we propose P2 Bot, a transmitter-receiver based framework with the aim of explicitly modeling understanding.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-04-11T12:51:07Z)
• What Changed Your Mind: The Roles of Dynamic Topics and Discourse in Argumentation Process [78.4766663287415]
  This paper presents a study that automatically analyzes the key factors in argument persuasiveness. We propose a novel neural model that is able to track the changes of latent topics and discourse in argumentative conversations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-02-10T04:27:48Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.