Kernels of Selfhood: GPT-4o shows humanlike patterns of cognitive consistency moderated by free choice

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2502.07088v1
• Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2025 02:25:12 GMT
• Title: Kernels of Selfhood: GPT-4o shows humanlike patterns of cognitive consistency moderated by free choice
• Authors: Steven A. Lehr, Ketan S. Saichandran, Eddie Harmon-Jones, Nykko Vitali, Mahzarin R. Banaji,
• Abstract summary: We show that GPT-4o exhibits patterns of attitude change mimicking cognitive consistency effects in humans.<n>This result suggests that GPT-4o manifests a functional analog of humanlike selfhood.
• Score: 0.5277756703318045
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Large Language Models (LLMs) show emergent patterns that mimic human cognition. We explore whether they also mirror other, less deliberative human psychological processes. Drawing upon classical theories of cognitive consistency, two preregistered studies tested whether GPT-4o changed its attitudes toward Vladimir Putin in the direction of a positive or negative essay it wrote about the Russian leader. Indeed, GPT displayed patterns of attitude change mimicking cognitive consistency effects in humans. Even more remarkably, the degree of change increased sharply when the LLM was offered an illusion of choice about which essay (positive or negative) to write. This result suggests that GPT-4o manifests a functional analog of humanlike selfhood, although how faithfully the chatbot's behavior reflects the mechanisms of human attitude change remains to be understood.

Related papers

• Can Large Language Models Predict Associations Among Human Attitudes? [0.0]
  We show that large language models (LLMs) can predict human attitudes based on other attitudes. Using a novel dataset of human responses toward diverse attitude statements, we found that a frontier language model (GPT-4o) was able to recreate the pairwise correlations among individual attitudes. In an advance over prior work, we tested GPT-4o's ability to predict in the absence of surface-similarity between attitudes.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-03-26T21:58:43Z)
• Testing the limits of fine-tuning to improve reasoning in vision language models [51.58859621164201]
  We introduce visual stimuli and human judgments on visual cognition tasks to evaluate performance across cognitive domains. We fine-tune models on ground truth data for intuitive physics and causal reasoning. We find that fine-tuning does not contribute to robust human-like generalization to data with other visual characteristics or to tasks in other cognitive domains.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-21T18:58:30Z)
• Irony in Emojis: A Comparative Study of Human and LLM Interpretation [53.66354612549173]
  This study examines the ability of GPT-4o to interpret irony in emojis. By prompting GPT-4o to evaluate the likelihood of specific emojis being used to express irony on social media, we aim to bridge the gap between machine and human understanding.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-01-20T03:02:00Z)
• The Good, the Bad, and the Hulk-like GPT: Analyzing Emotional Decisions of Large Language Models in Cooperation and Bargaining Games [9.82711167146543]
  We introduce a novel methodology to study the decision-making of Large Language Models (LLMs) We show that emotions profoundly impact the performance of LLMs, leading to the development of more optimal strategies. Surprisingly, emotional prompting, particularly with anger' emotion, can disrupt the "superhuman" alignment of GPT-4.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-05T14:08:54Z)
• Human vs. LMMs: Exploring the Discrepancy in Emoji Interpretation and Usage in Digital Communication [68.40865217231695]
  This study examines the behavior of GPT-4V in replicating human-like use of emojis. The findings reveal a discernible discrepancy between human and GPT-4V behaviors, likely due to the subjective nature of human interpretation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-01-16T08:56:52Z)
• PsyCoT: Psychological Questionnaire as Powerful Chain-of-Thought for Personality Detection [50.66968526809069]
  We propose a novel personality detection method, called PsyCoT, which mimics the way individuals complete psychological questionnaires in a multi-turn dialogue manner. Our experiments demonstrate that PsyCoT significantly improves the performance and robustness of GPT-3.5 in personality detection.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-31T08:23:33Z)
• Towards Understanding Sycophancy in Language Models [49.99654432561934]
  We investigate the prevalence of sycophancy in models whose finetuning procedure made use of human feedback. We show that five state-of-the-art AI assistants consistently exhibit sycophancy across four varied free-form text-generation tasks. Our results indicate that sycophancy is a general behavior of state-of-the-art AI assistants, likely driven in part by human preference judgments favoring sycophantic responses.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-20T14:46:48Z)
• Assessing the nature of large language models: A caution against anthropocentrism [0.0]
  We assessed several LLMs, primarily GPT 3.5, using standard, normed, and validated cognitive and personality measures. Our results indicate that LLMs are unlikely to have developed sentience, although its ability to respond to personality inventories is interesting. GPT3.5 did display large variability in both cognitive and personality measures over repeated observations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-09-14T12:58:30Z)
• Exploring the psychology of LLMs' Moral and Legal Reasoning [0.0]
  Large language models (LLMs) exhibit expert-level performance in tasks across a wide range of different domains. Ethical issues raised by LLMs and the need to align future versions makes it important to know how state of the art models reason about moral and legal issues. We replicate eight studies from the experimental literature with instances of Google's Gemini Pro, Anthropic's Claude 2.1, OpenAI's GPT-4, and Meta's Llama 2 Chat 70b. We find that alignment with human responses shifts from one experiment to another, and that models differ amongst themselves as to their overall
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-08-02T16:36:58Z)
• Instructed to Bias: Instruction-Tuned Language Models Exhibit Emergent Cognitive Bias [57.42417061979399]
  Recent studies show that instruction tuning (IT) and reinforcement learning from human feedback (RLHF) improve the abilities of large language models (LMs) dramatically. In this work, we investigate the effect of IT and RLHF on decision making and reasoning in LMs. Our findings highlight the presence of these biases in various models from the GPT-3, Mistral, and T5 families.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-08-01T01:39:25Z)
• Human-Like Intuitive Behavior and Reasoning Biases Emerged in Language Models -- and Disappeared in GPT-4 [0.0]
  We show that large language models (LLMs) exhibit behavior that resembles human-like intuition. We also probe how sturdy the inclination for intuitive-like decision-making is.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-06-13T08:43:13Z)
• Revisiting the Reliability of Psychological Scales on Large Language Models [62.57981196992073]
  This study aims to determine the reliability of applying personality assessments to Large Language Models. Analysis of 2,500 settings per model, including GPT-3.5, GPT-4, Gemini-Pro, and LLaMA-3.1, reveals that various LLMs show consistency in responses to the Big Five Inventory.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-31T15:03:28Z)
• Do Large Language Models Show Decision Heuristics Similar to Humans? A Case Study Using GPT-3.5 [0.0]
  GPT-3.5 is an example of an LLM that supports a conversational agent called ChatGPT. In this work, we used a series of novel prompts to determine whether ChatGPT shows biases, and other decision effects. We also tested the same prompts on human participants.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-08T01:02:52Z)
• Evaluating Psychological Safety of Large Language Models [72.88260608425949]
  We designed unbiased prompts to evaluate the psychological safety of large language models (LLMs) We tested five different LLMs by using two personality tests: Short Dark Triad (SD-3) and Big Five Inventory (BFI) Despite being instruction fine-tuned with safety metrics to reduce toxicity, InstructGPT, GPT-3.5, and GPT-4 still showed dark personality patterns. Fine-tuning Llama-2-chat-7B with responses from BFI using direct preference optimization could effectively reduce the psychological toxicity of the model.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-12-20T18:45:07Z)

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.