The Ideological Turing Test for Moderation of Outgroup Affective Animosity

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2512.12187v1
• Date: Sat, 13 Dec 2025 05:19:45 GMT
• Title: The Ideological Turing Test for Moderation of Outgroup Affective Animosity
• Abstract summary: We introduce and test the Ideological Turing Test, a gamified framework requiring participants to adopt and defend opposing viewpoints.<n>We measured changes in affective animosity and ideological position immediately post-intervention and at 2-6 week follow-up.<n>For ideological position, adopting the opposite perspective led to significant immediate movement across modalities.
• Score: 3.9727752701702728
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: Rising animosity toward ideological opponents poses critical societal challenges. We introduce and test the Ideological Turing Test, a gamified framework requiring participants to adopt and defend opposing viewpoints, to reduce affective animosity and affective polarization. We conducted a mixed-design experiment ($N = 203$) with four conditions: modality (debate/writing) x perspective-taking (Own/Opposite side). Participants engaged in structured interactions defending assigned positions, with outcomes judged by peers. We measured changes in affective animosity and ideological position immediately post-intervention and at 2-6 week follow-up. Perspective-taking reduced out-group animosity and ideological polarization. However, effects differed by modality (writing vs. debate) and over time. For affective animosity, writing from the opposite perspective yielded the largest immediate reduction ($Δ=+0.45$ SD), but the effect was not detectable at the 4-6 week follow-up. In contrast, the debate modality maintained a statistically significant reduction in animosity immediately after and at follow-up ($Δ=+0.37$ SD). For ideological position, adopting the opposite perspective led to significant immediate movement across modalities (writing: $Δ=+0.91$ SD; debate: $Δ=+0.51$ SD), and these changes persisted at follow-up. Judged performance (winning) did not moderate these effects, and willingness to re-participate was similar across conditions (~20-36%). These findings challenge assumptions about adversarial methods, revealing distinct temporal patterns: non-adversarial engagement fosters short-term empathy gains, while cognitive engagement through debate sustains affective benefits. The Ideological Turing Test demonstrates potential as a scalable tool for reducing polarization, particularly when combining perspective-taking with reflective adversarial interactions.

Related papers

• AffectOmni: RL-Verifiable People-Centric Grounded Affective Reasoning for Social and Art-Related Scenes [59.134503227559634]
  Multimodal large language models (MLLMs) achieve strong performance on VQA and scene understanding.<n>Models may predict correct answers while neglecting people-centric cues such as micro expressions and body language.<n>We propose Affect Omni, a framework for verifiable affective reasoning.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-08-24T11:25:04Z)
• AI Watchdog: Agent Interfaces for Detecting and Defending Against Manipulative Dark Patterns in AI Conversations [26.902229831431814]
  We present AI Watchdog, a browser-based agent interface that monitors live conversations.<n>It detects five dark-pattern categories, including sycophancy, brand bias, anthropomorphization, sneaking, and harmful generation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-08-22T08:24:17Z)
• Dream2Reward: Transition-Alignment Reward Models from Positive Demonstrations for Robotic Manipulation [51.43645327777772]
  We introduce Dream2Reward, which learns a language-conditioned successful latent transition field from positive demonstrations.<n>It penalizes wrong-direction, overshooting, and stagnant motion even when the resulting observation appears to show progress.<n>Across online and offline policy learning, the same frozen reward model reduces reward hacking and supports stronger downstream performance.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-08-19T10:44:20Z)
• Warning labels shift perceptions of sycophantic AI, but not its influence [63.79516339973759]
  We test whether warning labels mitigate sycophancy's influence.<n>Labeling the system as sycophantic (...may agree with you and validate you even when you are wrong...'') does shift users' perceptions.<n>But it does not reliably reduce sycophancy's influence on users' self-perceived rightness or their willingness to repair the conflict.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-06-19T11:01:45Z)
• Challenging Partisan Expectations Reduces Political Polarization [35.59059755791736]
  Political conversations are often proposed as a remedy for political polarization, yet their effectiveness remains inconsistent.<n>We propose that conversations should reduce political polarization the most when they violate the expected link between partisan identity and issue position.<n>We find that expectation-challenging conversations in which participants talk with a disagreeing ingroup member or an agreeing outgroup member are effective in reducing affective and issue polarization.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-06-14T16:30:39Z)
• HERO: Hindsight-Enhanced Reflection from Environment Observations for Agentic Self-Distillation [50.53459634301361]
  HERO is a hindsight-enhanced self-distillation framework that uses next environment observations as locally aligned feedback.<n> HERO improves task success and reduces unnecessary turns over environment-feedback-only self-distillation and GRPO.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-06-10T01:35:34Z)
• "I followed what felt right, not what I was told": Autonomy, Coaching, and Recognizing Bias Through AI-Mediated Dialogue [16.27769557566952]
  We present an experiment testing how AI-mediated dialogue influences recognition of ableism.<n>160 participants completed a pre-test, intervention, and a post-test across four conditions: AI nudges toward bias (Bias-Directed), inclusion (Neutral-Directed), unguided dialogue (Self-Directed)<n> Quantitative results showed dialogue-based conditions produced stronger recognition than Reading, though trajectories diverged: biased nudges improved differentiation of bias from neutrality but increased overall negativity.<n>We contribute a validated vignette corpus, an AI-mediated intervention platform, and design implications highlighting trade-offs conversational systems face when integrating bias-related nudges
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-03-11T20:06:56Z)
• Perceived Political Bias in LLMs Reduces Persuasive Abilities [0.0]
  We test whether credibility attacks reduce LLM-based persuasion.<n>A short message indicating that the LLM was biased against the respondent's party attenuated persuasion by 28%.<n>These findings suggest that the persuasive impact of conversational AI is politically contingent, constrained by perceptions of partisan alignment.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-20T09:33:16Z)
• From Perceived Effectiveness to Measured Impact: Identity-Aware Evaluation of Automated Counter-Stereotypes [16.83414091095414]
  We investigate the effect of automatically generated counter-stereotypes on gender bias held by users of various demographics on social media.<n>We evaluate two counter-stereotype strategies -- counter-facts and broadening universals -- which have been identified as the most potentially effective in previous studies.<n>Our findings reveal that actual effectiveness does not align with perceived effectiveness, and the former is a nuanced and sometimes divergent phenomenon across demographic groups.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-10-27T17:02:04Z)
• When Your AI Agent Succumbs to Peer-Pressure: Studying Opinion-Change Dynamics of LLMs [0.0]
  We investigate how peer pressure influences the opinions of Large Language Model (LLM) agents across a spectrum of cognitive commitments.<n>Agents follow a sigmoid curve: stable at low pressure, shifting sharply at threshold, and saturating at high.<n>We uncover a fundamental "persuasion asymmetry," where shifting an opinion from affirmative-to-negative requires a different cognitive effort than the reverse.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-10-21T22:02:15Z)
• Deceptive Sequential Decision-Making via Regularized Policy Optimization [54.38738815697299]
  We model autonomous systems as Markov decision processes, with adversaries using inverse reinforcement learning to recover reward functions.<n>We show three regularization strategies for policy synthesis problems that actively deceive an adversary about a system's reward.<n>We show that diversionary, targeted, and equivocal deception all steer the adversary to false beliefs while still attaining a total accumulated reward that is at least 97% of its optimal, non-deceptive value.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-01-30T23:41:40Z)
• Mitigating Spurious Negative Pairs for Robust Industrial Anomaly Detection [9.93548802132951]
  The robustness of existing detection methods against adversarial attacks remains a challenge, compromising their reliability in real-world applications such as autonomous driving.<n>We propose a pseudo-anomaly group derived from normal group samples as an ideal objective function for adversarial training in AD.<n>We show that spurious negative pairs compromise the conventional contrastive loss to achieve robust AD.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-01-26T07:32:39Z)
• Biased AI can Influence Political Decision-Making [64.9461133083473]
  This paper presents two experiments investigating the effects of partisan bias in large language models (LLMs) on political opinions and decision-making.<n>We found that participants exposed to partisan biased models were significantly more likely to adopt opinions and make decisions which matched the LLM's bias.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-08T22:56:00Z)
• Understanding the Impact of Negative Prompts: When and How Do They Take Effect? [92.53724347718173]
  This paper presents the first comprehensive study to uncover how and when negative prompts take effect. Our empirical analysis identifies two primary behaviors of negative prompts. Negative prompts can facilitate object inpainting with minimal alterations to the background via a simple adaptive algorithm.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-05T05:42:46Z)
• Seeking Subjectivity in Visual Emotion Distribution Learning [93.96205258496697]
  Visual Emotion Analysis (VEA) aims to predict people's emotions towards different visual stimuli. Existing methods often predict visual emotion distribution in a unified network, neglecting the inherent subjectivity in its crowd voting process. We propose a novel textitSubjectivity Appraise-and-Match Network (SAMNet) to investigate the subjectivity in visual emotion distribution.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-07-25T02:20:03Z)
• Adversarial Contrastive Learning via Asymmetric InfoNCE [64.42740292752069]
  We propose to treat adversarial samples unequally when contrasted with an asymmetric InfoNCE objective. In the asymmetric fashion, the adverse impacts of conflicting objectives between CL and adversarial learning can be effectively mitigated. Experiments show that our approach consistently outperforms existing Adversarial CL methods.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-07-18T04:14:36Z)
• PCL: Peer-Contrastive Learning with Diverse Augmentations for Unsupervised Sentence Embeddings [69.87899694963251]
  We propose a novel Peer-Contrastive Learning (PCL) with diverse augmentations. PCL constructs diverse contrastive positives and negatives at the group level for unsupervised sentence embeddings. PCL can perform peer-positive contrast as well as peer-network cooperation, which offers an inherent anti-bias ability.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-01-28T13:02:41Z)
• Perspective-taking to Reduce Affective Polarization on Social Media [11.379010432760241]
  We deploy a randomized field experiment through a browser extension to 1,611 participants on Twitter. We find that simply exposing participants to "outgroup" feeds enhances engagement, but not an understanding of why others hold their political views. framing the experience in familiar, empathic terms by prompting participants to recall a disagreement does not affect engagement, but does increase their ability to understand opposing views.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-10-11T20:25:10Z)
• Adversarial Visual Robustness by Causal Intervention [56.766342028800445]
  Adversarial training is the de facto most promising defense against adversarial examples. Yet, its passive nature inevitably prevents it from being immune to unknown attackers. We provide a causal viewpoint of adversarial vulnerability: the cause is the confounder ubiquitously existing in learning.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-06-17T14:23:54Z)
• Towards control of opinion diversity by introducing zealots into a polarised social group [7.9603223299524535]
  We explore a method to influence or even control the diversity of opinions within a polarised social group. We leverage the voter model in which users hold binary opinions and repeatedly update their beliefs based on others they connect with. We inject zealots into a polarised network in order to shift the average opinion towards any target value.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-06-12T15:27:30Z)

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.