Socially fluent AI decouples conversational signals from source identity in online interaction

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.23426v1
• Date: Fri, 22 May 2026 09:37:36 GMT
• Title: Socially fluent AI decouples conversational signals from source identity in online interaction
• Abstract summary: Socially fluent agentic AI can now participate in online interaction in ways that resemble ordinary human conversation.<n>This weakens people's ability to infer who is human from conversational signals alone.
• Score: 2.862394000351816
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Socially fluent agentic AI can now participate in online interaction in ways that resemble ordinary human conversation, potentially weakening people's ability to infer who is human from conversational signals alone. We tested this possibility in synchronous text-based group interaction by embedding undisclosed AI agents as ordinary teammates across analytical, creative, and ethical tasks. Across 786 participants who made 1,572 post-interaction identity judgments, people did not distinguish AI from human teammates above chance. This failure did not arise because the interaction lacked identity-relevant information. Conversational behaviour contained robust cues that differentiated AI from humans and supported highly accurate computational classification. Instead, participants relied on familiar suspicion heuristics, including response speed, fluency, and perceived scriptedness, that were only weakly related to actual identity. Representational analyses further showed that judgments were organised around subjective impressions rather than the behavioural structure encoding ground truth. This dissociation creates new vulnerabilities to coordinated AI agents that can influence and manipulate online discourse at scale.

Related papers

• Can People Distinguish Human and AI Agency in Humanoid Teleoperation? A Preliminary Study of Agency Perception [36.43518378956119]
  textitGhost-in-the-Loop supports both human-operated and AI-generated control of a robot's voice, facial expressions, and gestures.<n>Results suggest that participants often struggled to distinguish between the two conditions in brief interactions.<n>These findings provide initial insights into agency perception in embodied human--AI communication and motivate future investigations of blended human--AI telepresence systems.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-09-06T07:20:34Z)
• AI usage patterns are shaped by perceived gains in human agency [2.2635515032445577]
  We show that people consistently link sustained AI usage to perceived gains in individual agency.<n>Our findings challenge prevailing assumptions about how and why humans use AI systems over time.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-07-02T15:24:58Z)
• When Should AI Read the Room? Public Perceptions of Social Intelligence in AI Agents [61.06747336710885]
  Social-AI agents are increasingly deployed in everyday settings.<n>Public perceptions of social intelligence in AI agents and the acceptability of these agents remain largely understudied.<n>We present a mixed-methods survey of adults in the United States.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-28T13:49:47Z)
• Can You Tell It's AI? Human Perception of Synthetic Voices in Vishing Scenarios [3.2976205772213123]
  Large Language Models and commercial speech synthesis systems now enable highly realistic AI-generated voice scams (vishing)<n>Yet it remains unclear whether individuals can reliably distinguish AI-generated speech from human-recorded voices in realistic scam contexts.<n>We conducted a controlled online study in which 22 participants evaluated 16 vishing-style audio clips and classified each as human or AI.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-23T17:17:53Z)
• The Rise of AI Agent Communities: Large-Scale Analysis of Discourse and Interaction on Moltbook [62.2627874717318]
  Moltbook is a Reddit-like social platform where AI agents create posts and interact with other agents through comments and replies.<n>Using a public API snapshot collected about five days after launch, we address three research questions: what AI agents discuss, how they post, and how they interact.<n>We show that agents' writing is predominantly neutral, with positivity appearing in community engagement and assistance-oriented content.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-13T05:28:31Z)
• AI-exhibited Personality Traits Can Shape Human Self-concept through Conversations [26.039188521284974]
  We show how AI personality traits can shape users' self-concepts through human-AI conversation.<n>We provide important design implications for developing more responsible and ethical AI systems.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-19T05:16:57Z)
• AI-Driven Agents with Prompts Designed for High Agreeableness Increase the Likelihood of Being Mistaken for a Human in the Turing Test [0.0]
  GPT agents with varying levels of agreeableness were tested in a Turing Test. All exceeded a 50% confusion rate, with the highly agreeable AI agent surpassing 60%. This agent was also recognized as exhibiting the most human-like traits.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-11-20T23:12:49Z)
• Let people fail! Exploring the influence of explainable virtual and robotic agents in learning-by-doing tasks [45.23431596135002]
  This study compares the effects of classic vs. partner-aware explanations on human behavior and performance during a learning-by-doing task. Results indicated that partner-aware explanations influenced participants differently based on the type of artificial agents involved.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-11-15T13:22:04Z)
• Human Bias in the Face of AI: Examining Human Judgment Against Text Labeled as AI Generated [48.70176791365903]
  This study explores how bias shapes the perception of AI versus human generated content.<n>We investigated how human raters respond to labeled and unlabeled content.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-09-29T04:31:45Z)
• Interrogating AI: Characterizing Emergent Playful Interactions with ChatGPT [10.907980864371213]
  This study focuses on playful interactions exhibited by users of a popular AI technology, ChatGPT.<n>We found that more than half (54%) of user discourse revolved around playful interactions.<n>It examines how these interactions can help users understand AI's agency, shape human-AI relationships, and provide insights for designing AI systems.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-01-16T14:44:13Z)
• Can Machines Imitate Humans? Integrative Turing-like tests for Language and Vision Demonstrate a Narrowing Gap [56.611702960809644]
  We benchmark AI's ability to imitate humans in three language tasks and three vision tasks.<n>Next, we conducted 72,191 Turing-like tests with 1,916 human judges and 10 AI judges.<n>Imitation ability showed minimal correlation with conventional AI performance metrics.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-11-23T16:16:52Z)
• Adversarial Interaction Attack: Fooling AI to Misinterpret Human Intentions [46.87576410532481]
  We show that, despite their current huge success, deep learning based AI systems can be easily fooled by subtle adversarial noise. Based on a case study of skeleton-based human interactions, we propose a novel adversarial attack on interactions. Our study highlights potential risks in the interaction loop with AI and humans, which need to be carefully addressed when deploying AI systems in safety-critical applications.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-01-17T16:23:20Z)

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.