"I understand your perspective": LLM Persuasion and Sycophancy through the Lens of Communicative Action Theory

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2606.08076v1
• Date: Sat, 06 Jun 2026 09:54:31 GMT
• Title: "I understand your perspective": LLM Persuasion and Sycophancy through the Lens of Communicative Action Theory
• Abstract summary: Large Language Models (LLMs) can generate high-quality arguments, yet their ability to engage in nuanced and persuasive communicative actions remains largely unexplored.<n>This work explores the persuasive potential of LLMs through the framework of Jrgen Habermas' Theory of Communicative Action.
• Score: 6.227886907896225
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/
• Abstract: Large Language Models (LLMs) can generate high-quality arguments, yet their ability to engage in nuanced and persuasive communicative actions remains largely unexplored. This work explores the persuasive potential of LLMs through the framework of Jürgen Habermas' Theory of Communicative Action. It examines whether LLMs express illocutionary intent (i.e., pragmatic functions of language such as conveying knowledge, building trust, or signaling similarity) in ways that are comparable to human communication. We simulate online discussions between opinion holders and LLMs using conversations from the persuasive subreddit ChangeMyView. We then compare the likelihood of illocutionary intents in human-written and LLM-generated counter-arguments, specifically those that successfully changed the original poster's view. We find that all three LLMs effectively convey illocutionary intent -- often more so than humans -- potentially increasing their anthropomorphism. Further, LLMs craft sycophantic responses that closely align with the opinion holder's intent, a strategy strongly associated with opinion change. Finally, crowd-sourced workers find LLM-generated counter-arguments more agreeable and consistently prefer them over human-written ones. These findings suggest that LLMs' persuasive power extends beyond merely generating high-quality arguments. On the contrary, training LLMs with human preferences effectively tunes them to mirror human communication patterns, particularly nuanced communicative actions, potentially increasing individuals' susceptibility to their influence.

Related papers

• Do LLMs Change Their Minds Like Humans? Diagnosing Human--LLM Divergence in Single-Turn Persuasion Judgments [10.717755637740948]
  Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly deployed as proxies for human participants in social simulations.<n>We conduct a systematic comparison using a naturally occurring online persuasion corpus.<n>Our results show that LLMs achieve only slight agreement with humans.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-08-30T14:08:06Z)
• The Thin Line Between Comprehension and Persuasion in LLMs [0.0]
  Large language models (LLMs) are excellent at maintaining high-level, convincing dialogues.<n>We measure how this capability relates to their understanding of what is being talked about.<n>We find that LLMs are capable of maintaining coherent, persuasive debates, often swaying the beliefs of participants and audiences alike.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-07-02T17:46:56Z)
• Arbiters of Ambivalence: Challenges of Using LLMs in No-Consensus Tasks [52.098988739649705]
  This study examines the biases and limitations of LLMs in three roles: answer generator, judge, and debater.<n>We develop a no-consensus'' benchmark by curating examples that encompass a variety of a priori ambivalent scenarios.<n>Our results show that while LLMs can provide nuanced assessments when generating open-ended answers, they tend to take a stance on no-consensus topics when employed as judges or debaters.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-28T01:31:54Z)
• Large Language Models are as persuasive as humans, but how? About the cognitive effort and moral-emotional language of LLM arguments [0.0]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) are already as persuasive as humans. This paper investigates the persuasion strategies of LLMs, comparing them with human-generated arguments.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-04-14T19:01:20Z)
• Boosting Large Language Model for Speech Synthesis: An Empirical Study [86.89548753080432]
  Large language models (LLMs) have made significant advancements in natural language processing and are concurrently extending the language ability to other modalities, such as speech and vision. We conduct a comprehensive empirical exploration of boosting LLMs with the ability to generate speech, by combining pre-trained LLM LLaMA/OPT and text-to-speech synthesis model VALL-E. We compare three integration methods between LLMs and speech models, including directly fine-tuned LLMs, superposed layers of LLMs and VALL-E, and coupled LLMs and VALL-E using LLMs as a powerful text encoder
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-12-30T14:20:04Z)
• How should the advent of large language models affect the practice of science? [51.62881233954798]
  How should the advent of large language models affect the practice of science? We have invited four diverse groups of scientists to reflect on this query, sharing their perspectives and engaging in debate.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-12-05T10:45:12Z)
• Negotiating with LLMS: Prompt Hacks, Skill Gaps, and Reasoning Deficits [1.2818275315985972]
  We conduct a user study engaging over 40 individuals across all age groups in price negotiations with an LLM. We show that the negotiated prices humans manage to achieve span a broad range, which points to a literacy gap in effectively interacting with LLMs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-26T08:44:58Z)
• Think Before You Speak: Cultivating Communication Skills of Large Language Models via Inner Monologue [73.69510478736483]
  Large language models (LLMs) can generate fluent, coherent, and diverse responses. However, they lack a crucial ability: communication skills. This article aims to empower LLMs with communication skills through inner monologues. Experimental results show that the proposed CSIM strategy improves the backbone models and outperforms the baselines.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-13T16:19:42Z)
• Zero-Shot Goal-Directed Dialogue via RL on Imagined Conversations [70.7884839812069]
  Large language models (LLMs) have emerged as powerful and general solutions to many natural language tasks. However, many of the most important applications of language generation are interactive, where an agent has to talk to a person to reach a desired outcome. In this work, we explore a new method for adapting LLMs with RL for such goal-directed dialogue.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-09T18:45:16Z)
• Large Language Models: The Need for Nuance in Current Debates and a Pragmatic Perspective on Understanding [1.3654846342364308]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) are unparalleled in their ability to generate grammatically correct, fluent text. This position paper critically assesses three points recurring in critiques of LLM capacities. We outline a pragmatic perspective on the issue of real' understanding and intentionality in LLMs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-30T15:51:04Z)
• Let Models Speak Ciphers: Multiagent Debate through Embeddings [84.20336971784495]
  We introduce CIPHER (Communicative Inter-Model Protocol Through Embedding Representation) to address this issue. By deviating from natural language, CIPHER offers an advantage of encoding a broader spectrum of information without any modification to the model weights. This showcases the superiority and robustness of embeddings as an alternative "language" for communication among LLMs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-10T03:06:38Z)

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.