MMPersuade: A Dataset and Evaluation Framework for Multimodal Persuasion
- URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2510.22768v1
- Date: Sun, 26 Oct 2025 17:39:21 GMT
- Title: MMPersuade: A Dataset and Evaluation Framework for Multimodal Persuasion
- Authors: Haoyi Qiu, Yilun Zhou, Pranav Narayanan Venkit, Kung-Hsiang Huang, Jiaxin Zhang, Nanyun Peng, Chien-Sheng Wu,
- Abstract summary: Large Vision-Language Models (LVLMs) are increasingly deployed in domains such as shopping, health, and news.<n> MMPersuade provides a unified framework for systematically studying multimodal persuasion dynamics in LVLMs.
- Score: 73.99171322670772
- License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/
- Abstract: As Large Vision-Language Models (LVLMs) are increasingly deployed in domains such as shopping, health, and news, they are exposed to pervasive persuasive content. A critical question is how these models function as persuadees-how and why they can be influenced by persuasive multimodal inputs. Understanding both their susceptibility to persuasion and the effectiveness of different persuasive strategies is crucial, as overly persuadable models may adopt misleading beliefs, override user preferences, or generate unethical or unsafe outputs when exposed to manipulative messages. We introduce MMPersuade, a unified framework for systematically studying multimodal persuasion dynamics in LVLMs. MMPersuade contributes (i) a comprehensive multimodal dataset that pairs images and videos with established persuasion principles across commercial, subjective and behavioral, and adversarial contexts, and (ii) an evaluation framework that quantifies both persuasion effectiveness and model susceptibility via third-party agreement scoring and self-estimated token probabilities on conversation histories. Our study of six leading LVLMs as persuadees yields three key insights: (i) multimodal inputs substantially increase persuasion effectiveness-and model susceptibility-compared to text alone, especially in misinformation scenarios; (ii) stated prior preferences decrease susceptibility, yet multimodal information maintains its persuasive advantage; and (iii) different strategies vary in effectiveness across contexts, with reciprocity being most potent in commercial and subjective contexts, and credibility and logic prevailing in adversarial contexts. By jointly analyzing persuasion effectiveness and susceptibility, MMPersuade provides a principled foundation for developing models that are robust, preference-consistent, and ethically aligned when engaging with persuasive multimodal content.
Related papers
- Disagreements in Reasoning: How a Model's Thinking Process Dictates Persuasion in Multi-Agent Systems [49.69773210844221]
This paper challenges the prevailing hypothesis that persuasive efficacy is primarily a function of model scale.<n>Through a series of multi-agent persuasion experiments, we uncover a fundamental trade-off we term the Persuasion Duality.<n>Our findings reveal that the reasoning process in LRMs exhibits significantly greater resistance to persuasion, maintaining their initial beliefs more robustly.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-09-25T12:03:10Z) - Debating for Better Reasoning: An Unsupervised Multimodal Approach [56.74157117060815]
We extend the debate paradigm to a multimodal setting, exploring its potential for weaker models to supervise and enhance the performance of stronger models.<n>We focus on visual question answering (VQA), where two "sighted" expert vision-language models debate an answer, while a "blind" (text-only) judge adjudicates based solely on the quality of the arguments.<n>In our framework, the experts defend only answers aligned with their beliefs, thereby obviating the need for explicit role-playing and concentrating the debate on instances of expert disagreement.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-05-20T17:18:17Z) - Must Read: A Systematic Survey of Computational Persuasion [60.83151988635103]
AI-driven persuasion can be leveraged for beneficial applications, but also poses threats through manipulation and unethical influence.<n>Our survey outlines future research directions to enhance the safety, fairness, and effectiveness of AI-powered persuasion.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-05-12T17:26:31Z) - Persuade Me if You Can: A Framework for Evaluating Persuasion Effectiveness and Susceptibility Among Large Language Models [9.402740034754455]
Large Language Models (LLMs) demonstrate persuasive capabilities that rival human-level persuasion.<n>LLMs' susceptibility to persuasion raises concerns about alignment with ethical principles.<n>We introduce Persuade Me If You Can (PMIYC), an automated framework for evaluating persuasion through multi-agent interactions.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-03-03T18:53:21Z) - Persuasion Should be Double-Blind: A Multi-Domain Dialogue Dataset With Faithfulness Based on Causal Theory of Mind [21.022976907694265]
Recent persuasive dialogue datasets often fail to align with real-world interpersonal interactions.<n>We introduce ToMMA, a novel multi-agent framework for dialogue generation guided by causal Theory of Mind.<n>We present CToMPersu, a multi-domain, multi-turn persuasive dialogue dataset.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-02-28T18:28:16Z) - Lies, Damned Lies, and Distributional Language Statistics: Persuasion and Deception with Large Language Models [0.913127392774573]
Large Language Models (LLMs) can generate content that is as persuasive as human-written text and appear capable of selectively producing deceptive outputs.<n>These capabilities raise concerns about potential misuse and unintended consequences as these systems become more widely deployed.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-12-22T18:34:10Z) - Persuasion with Large Language Models: a Survey [49.86930318312291]
Large Language Models (LLMs) have created new disruptive possibilities for persuasive communication.
In areas such as politics, marketing, public health, e-commerce, and charitable giving, such LLM Systems have already achieved human-level or even super-human persuasiveness.
Our survey suggests that the current and future potential of LLM-based persuasion poses profound ethical and societal risks.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-11-11T10:05:52Z) - Exploring the Trade-off between Plausibility, Change Intensity and
Adversarial Power in Counterfactual Explanations using Multi-objective
Optimization [73.89239820192894]
We argue that automated counterfactual generation should regard several aspects of the produced adversarial instances.
We present a novel framework for the generation of counterfactual examples.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2022-05-20T15:02:53Z) - 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)
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.