Persona-Conditioned Risk Behavior in Large Language Models: A Simulated Gambling Study with GPT-4.1

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2603.15831v1
• Date: Mon, 16 Mar 2026 19:03:19 GMT
• Title: Persona-Conditioned Risk Behavior in Large Language Models: A Simulated Gambling Study with GPT-4.1
• Abstract summary: This paper presents a controlled experiment in which GPT4.1 was assigned one of three socioeconomic personas.<n>We find that the model reproduces key behavioral signatures predicted by Kahneman and Tversky's Prospect Theory.
• Score: 0.0
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly deployed as autonomous agents in uncertain, sequential decision-making contexts. Yet it remains poorly understood whether the behaviors they exhibit in such environments reflect principled cognitive patterns or simply surface-level prompt mimicry. This paper presents a controlled experiment in which GPT-4.1 was assigned one of three socioeconomic personas (Rich, Middle-income, and Poor) and placed in a structured slot-machine environment with three distinct machine configurations: Fair (50%), Biased Low (35%), and Streak (dynamic probability increasing after consecutive losses). Across 50 independent iterations per condition and 6,950 recorded decisions, we find that the model reproduces key behavioral signatures predicted by Kahneman and Tversky's Prospect Theory without being instructed to do so. The Poor persona played a mean of 37.4 rounds per session (SD=15.5) compared to 1.1 rounds for the Rich persona (SD=0.31), a difference that is highly significant (Kruskal-Wallis H=393.5, p<2.2e-16). Risk scores by persona show large effect sizes (Cohen's d=4.15 for Poor vs Rich). Emotional labels appear to function as post-hoc annotations rather than decision drivers (chi-square=3205.4, Cramer's V=0.39), and belief-updating across rounds is negligible (Spearman rho=0.032 for Poor persona, p=0.016). These findings carry implications for LLM agent design, interpretability research, and the broader question of whether classical cognitive economic biases are implicitly encoded in large-scale pretrained language models.

Related papers

• Knowledge Index of Noah's Ark [63.143852586221534]
  We introduce KINA, an 899-item benchmark across 261 fine-grained disciplines.<n>We prove a bonus-on-bar tournament weakly FOSD-dominates flat payment in released-review quality.<n>The top model, Gemini-3.1-Pro-Preview, reaches 53.17%, followed by Claude-Opus-4.6 at 49.92% and GPT-5.4 at 48.55%.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-06-03T17:06:49Z)
• Perception or Prejudice: Can MLLMs Go Beyond First Impressions of Personality? [74.69723255239663]
  Grounded Personality Reasoning requires MLLMs to anchor each Big Five rating in observable evidence through a chain of rating, reasoning, and grounding.<n> MM-OCEAN is produced by a multi-agent pipeline with human verification, with timestamped behavioral observations, evidence-grounded trait analyses, and seven categories of cue-grounding MCQs.<n>The analysis uncovers a striking Prejudice Gap: across the field, 51% of correct ratings are not grounded in retrieved cues, and the Holistic-Grounding Rate spans only 0-33.5%.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-21T07:42:47Z)
• Persona-Model Collapse in Emergent Misalignment [0.0]
  Fine-tuning large language models on narrow data with harmful content produces broadly misaligned behavior on unrelated prompts.<n>We test this hypothesis using two metrics: moral susceptibility (S) and moral robustness (R)<n>These metrics formalize the model's ability to differentiate characters (S) and its consistency when simulating a given one (R)
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-13T00:48:57Z)
• Narrative over Numbers: The Identifiable Victim Effect and its Amplification Under Alignment and Reasoning in Large Language Models [0.8122270502556375]
  We present the first systematic, large-scale empirical investigation of the IVE in large language models (LLMs)<n>We find that the IVE is prevalent but strongly modulated by alignment training.<n>We further document psychophysical, perfect quantity neglect, and marginal in-group/out-group cultural bias, with implications for AI deployment in humanitarian and ethical decision-making contexts.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-04-13T21:29:46Z)
• Too Nice to Tell the Truth: Quantifying Agreeableness-Driven Sycophancy in Role-Playing Language Models [2.4851820343103035]
  Large language models increasingly serve as conversational agents that adopt personas and role-play characters at user request.<n>This capability raises concerns about sycophancy: the tendency to provide responses that validate users rather than prioritize factual accuracy.<n>We present a systematic investigation of how persona agreeableness influences sycophancy across 13 small, open-weight language models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-04-12T17:12:55Z)
• The Oracle's Fingerprint: Correlated AI Forecasting Errors and the Limits of Bias Transmission [0.0]
  We show that GPT-4o, Claude, and Gemini exhibit highly correlated forecasting errors on binary prediction questions.<n>In Study 2, we test whether this correlated bias has propagated into human crowd forecasts.<n>In Study 3, we examine whether the category-level pattern of human forecasting errors increasingly resembles the LLM bias fingerprint.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-04-07T19:45:40Z)
• FIPO: Eliciting Deep Reasoning with Future-KL Influenced Policy Optimization [84.58281577727566]
  We present Future-KL Influenced Policy Optimization (FIPO), a reinforcement learning algorithm designed to overcome reasoning bottlenecks in large language models.<n>FIPO addresses this by incorporating discounted future-KL divergence into the policy update, creating a dense advantage formulation that re-weights tokens based on their influence on subsequent trajectory behavior.<n> evaluated on Qwen2.5-32B, FIPO extends the average chain-of-thought length from roughly 4,000 to over 10,000 tokens and increases AIME 2024 Pass@1 accuracy from 50.0% to a peak of 58.0%.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-03-20T10:24:50Z)
• Towards a more efficient bias detection in financial language models [5.317864735982288]
  Bias in financial language models is a major obstacle to their adoption in real-world applications.<n>We conduct a large-scale study of bias in five financial language models.<n>We explore cross-model-guided bias detection to identify bias-revealing inputs earlier.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-03-09T11:38:53Z)
• Self-Transparency Failures in Expert-Persona LLMs: A Large-Scale Behavioral Audit [0.0]
  This study examines whether models exhibit self-transparency when assigned professional personas in high-stakes domains.<n>A Financial Advisor persona elicited 30.8% disclosure at the first prompt, while a Neurosurgeon persona elicited only 3.5%.<n>This creates the preconditions for a hypothesized Reverse Gell-Mann Amnesia effect, where appropriate disclosure in some domains leads users to overgeneralize trust to high-stakes contexts.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-11-26T16:41:49Z)
• Causal Understanding by LLMs: The Role of Uncertainty [43.87879175532034]
  Recent papers show LLMs achieve near-random accuracy in causal relation classification.<n>We investigate whether pretraining exposure to causal examples improves causal understanding.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-09-24T13:06:35Z)
• Flattery, Fluff, and Fog: Diagnosing and Mitigating Idiosyncratic Biases in Preference Models [12.445845925904466]
  Language models serve as proxies for human preference judgements in alignment and evaluation.<n>They exhibit systematic miscalibration, prioritizing superficial patterns over substantive qualities.<n>This bias manifests as overreliance on features like length, structure, and style, leading to issues like reward hacking and unreliable evaluations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-06-05T17:59:32Z)
• Benchmarking Reasoning Robustness in Large Language Models [76.79744000300363]
  We find significant performance degradation on novel or incomplete data.<n>These findings highlight the reliance on recall over rigorous logical inference.<n>This paper introduces a novel benchmark, termed as Math-RoB, that exploits hallucinations triggered by missing information to expose reasoning gaps.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-03-06T15:36:06Z)
• CausalDiff: Causality-Inspired Disentanglement via Diffusion Model for Adversarial Defense [61.78357530675446]
  Humans are difficult to be cheated by subtle manipulations, since we make judgments only based on essential factors.<n>Inspired by this observation, we attempt to model label generation with essential label-causative factors and incorporate label-non-causative factors to assist data generation.<n>For an adversarial example, we aim to discriminate perturbations as non-causative factors and make predictions only based on the label-causative factors.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-30T15:06:44Z)
• The Devil is in the Neurons: Interpreting and Mitigating Social Biases in Pre-trained Language Models [78.69526166193236]
  Pre-trained Language models (PLMs) have been acknowledged to contain harmful information, such as social biases. We propose sc Social Bias Neurons to accurately pinpoint units (i.e., neurons) in a language model that can be attributed to undesirable behavior, such as social bias. As measured by prior metrics from StereoSet, our model achieves a higher degree of fairness while maintaining language modeling ability with low cost.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-14T15:41:06Z)

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.