Neural embedding of beliefs reveals the role of relative dissonance in human decision-making

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2408.07237v1
• Date: Tue, 13 Aug 2024 23:58:45 GMT
• Title: Neural embedding of beliefs reveals the role of relative dissonance in human decision-making
• Authors: Byunghwee Lee, Rachith Aiyappa, Yong-Yeol Ahn, Haewoon Kwak, Jisun An,
• Abstract summary: We propose a method for extracting nuanced relations between thousands of beliefs by leveraging large-scale user participation data from an online debate platform. This belief embedding space effectively encapsulates the interconnectedness of diverse beliefs as well as polarization across various social issues. We find that the relative distance between one existing beliefs and new beliefs can serve as a quantitative estimate of cognitive dissonance.
• Score: 6.558951808581431
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Beliefs serve as the foundation for human cognition and decision-making. They guide individuals in deriving meaning from their lives, shaping their behaviors, and forming social connections. Therefore, a model that encapsulates beliefs and their interrelationships is crucial for quantitatively studying the influence of beliefs on our actions. Despite its importance, research on the interplay between human beliefs has often been limited to a small set of beliefs pertaining to specific issues, with a heavy reliance on surveys or experiments. Here, we propose a method for extracting nuanced relations between thousands of beliefs by leveraging large-scale user participation data from an online debate platform and mapping these beliefs to an embedding space using a fine-tuned large language model (LLM). This belief embedding space effectively encapsulates the interconnectedness of diverse beliefs as well as polarization across various social issues. We discover that the positions within this belief space predict new beliefs of individuals. Furthermore, we find that the relative distance between one's existing beliefs and new beliefs can serve as a quantitative estimate of cognitive dissonance, allowing us to predict new beliefs. Our study highlights how modern LLMs, when combined with collective online records of human beliefs, can offer insights into the fundamental principles that govern human belief formation and decision-making processes.

Related papers

• Belief in the Machine: Investigating Epistemological Blind Spots of Language Models [51.63547465454027]
  Language models (LMs) are essential for reliable decision-making in fields like healthcare, law, and journalism. This study systematically evaluates the capabilities of modern LMs, including GPT-4, Claude-3, and Llama-3, using a new dataset, KaBLE. Our results reveal key limitations. First, while LMs achieve 86% accuracy on factual scenarios, their performance drops significantly with false scenarios. Second, LMs struggle with recognizing and affirming personal beliefs, especially when those beliefs contradict factual data.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-28T16:38:20Z)
• Learning mental states estimation through self-observation: a developmental synergy between intentions and beliefs representations in a deep-learning model of Theory of Mind [0.35154948148425685]
  Theory of Mind (ToM) is the ability to attribute beliefs, intentions, or mental states to others. We show a developmental synergy between learning to predict low-level mental states and attributing high-level ones. We propose that our computational approach can inform the understanding of human social cognitive development.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-25T13:15:25Z)
• Belief sharing: a blessing or a curse [3.2614942160776823]
  Communication can be cast as sharing beliefs between free-energy minimizing agents. We demonstrate that naively sharing posterior beliefs can give rise to the negative social dynamics of echo chambers and self-doubt.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-02T17:46:42Z)
• Grounding Language about Belief in a Bayesian Theory-of-Mind [5.058204320571824]
  We take a step towards an answer by grounding the semantics of belief statements in a Bayesian theory-of-mind. By modeling how humans jointly infer coherent sets of goals, beliefs, and plans, our framework provides a conceptual role semantics for belief. We evaluate this framework by studying how humans attribute goals and beliefs while watching an agent solve a doors-and-keys gridworld puzzle.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-16T02:47:09Z)
• Decoding Susceptibility: Modeling Misbelief to Misinformation Through a Computational Approach [61.04606493712002]
  Susceptibility to misinformation describes the degree of belief in unverifiable claims that is not observable. Existing susceptibility studies heavily rely on self-reported beliefs. We propose a computational approach to model users' latent susceptibility levels.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-16T07:22:56Z)
• On the steerability of large language models toward data-driven personas [98.9138902560793]
  Large language models (LLMs) are known to generate biased responses where the opinions of certain groups and populations are underrepresented. Here, we present a novel approach to achieve controllable generation of specific viewpoints using LLMs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-08T19:01:13Z)
• Leveraging Contextual Counterfactuals Toward Belief Calibration [1.418033127602866]
  meta-alignment problem is that human beliefs are diverse and not aligned across populations. In high regret situations, we observe that contextual counterfactuals and recourse costs are important in updating a decision maker's beliefs and the strengths to which such beliefs are held. We introduce the belief calibration cycle' framework to more holistically calibrate this diversity of beliefs with context-driven counterfactual reasoning.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-07-13T01:22:18Z)
• Causal Deep Learning [77.49632479298745]
  Causality has the potential to transform the way we solve real-world problems. But causality often requires crucial assumptions which cannot be tested in practice. We propose a new way of thinking about causality -- we call this causal deep learning.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-03-03T19:19:18Z)
• Flexible social inference facilitates targeted social learning when rewards are not observable [58.762004496858836]
  Groups coordinate more effectively when individuals are able to learn from others' successes. We suggest that social inference capacities may help bridge this gap, allowing individuals to update their beliefs about others' underlying knowledge and success from observable trajectories of behavior.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-12-01T21:04:03Z)
• Robot Learning Theory of Mind through Self-Observation: Exploiting the Intentions-Beliefs Synergy [0.0]
  Theory of Mind (TOM) is the ability to attribute to other agents' beliefs, intentions, or mental states in general. We show the synergy between learning to predict low-level mental states, such as intentions and goals, and attributing high-level ones, such as beliefs. We propose that our architectural approach can be relevant for the design of future adaptive social robots.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-10-17T21:12:39Z)
• Do Language Models Have Beliefs? Methods for Detecting, Updating, and Visualizing Model Beliefs [76.6325846350907]
  Dennett (1995) famously argues that even thermostats have beliefs, on the view that a belief is simply an informational state decoupled from any motivational state. In this paper, we discuss approaches to detecting when models have beliefs about the world, and we improve on methods for updating model beliefs to be more truthful.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-11-26T18:33:59Z)

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.