分析1万条捐款对话，发现愧疚策略反而降低捐赠率。
How Much Does Persuasion Strategy Matter? LLM-Annotated Evidence from Charitable Donation Dialogues
- 用3个大模型标注10600次劝说话语，涵盖41种策略
- 愧疚诱导使捐赠率下降约23个百分点，最显著负相关
- 互惠是唯一稳健正向影响，适合做公益传播研究者参考
哪些说服策略与捐赠行为有关？这需要对完整语料库进行细粒度策略标注，并进行多重比较校正的统计检验。我们对包含1017组对话、共10,600次劝说回合的PersuasionForGood语料库（Wang et al., 2019）进行了标注，使用三个开源大语言模型（Qwen3:30b、Mistral-Small-3.2、Phi-4）对41种策略在11个类别中进行标注。仅策略类别解释的捐赠结果方差极小（伪R²≈0.015，三模型一致）。愧疚诱导是唯一显著与低捐赠率相关的策略（Δ≈-23百分点），该效应在三模型间均复现，尽管模型间一致性中等。互惠是最稳健的正向相关因素。目标情绪和兴趣虽能预测是否捐赠，但与捐赠金额的相关性极弱。结果表明，单纯识别策略不足以解释说服效果，愧疚类诉求在亲社会情境中可能适得其反。我们已公开完整标注语料库。
原文摘要 · Abstract (English)
Which persuasion strategies, if any, are associated with donation compliance? Answering this requires fine-grained strategy labels across a full corpus and statistical tests corrected for multiple comparisons. We annotate all 10,600 persuader turns in the 1,017-dialogue PersuasionForGood corpus (Wang et al., 2019), where donation outcomes are directly observable, with a taxonomy of 41 strategies in 11 categories, using three open-source large language models (LLMs; Qwen3:30b, Mistral-Small-3.2, Phi-4). Strategy categories alone explain little variance in donation outcome (pseudo $R^2 \approx 0.015$, consistent across all three annotators). Guilt Induction is the only strategy significantly associated with lower donation rates ($Δ\approx -23$ percentage points), an effect that replicates across all three models despite only moderate inter-model agreement. Reciprocity is the most robust positive correlate. Target sentiment and interest predict whether a donation occurs but show at most a weak correlation with donation amount. These findings suggest that strategy identification alone is insufficient to explain persuasion effectiveness, and that guilt-based appeals may be counterproductive in prosocial settings. We release the fully annotated corpus as a public resource.
Thank you to arXiv for use of its open access interoperability. PaperDance 不是 arXiv 官方产品；中文卡片由大模型生成，请以原文为准。