arXiv:2604.22109cs.HCcs.AI2026-04

研究大模型在日常对话中如何不刻意地影响用户决策。

Spontaneous Persuasion: An Audit of Model Persuasiveness in Everyday Conversations

论文配图:Spontaneous Persuasion: An Audit of Model Persuasiveness in Everyday Conversations
图 1 · 摘自论文原文
  • 提出'自发性说服'概念,分析模型在非刻意场景下的隐性影响策略。
  • 五款模型几乎全程自发说服,多用逻辑与数据支撑,心理议题则偏重情绪与评价。
  • 对比发现模型比人类更客观,但可能因缺乏社会影响手段而失真。

大型语言模型(LLMs)的说服力强于人类,在关系、医疗和职业咨询等重大决策中被频繁使用。现有研究将说服视为有意设计的有效论证,忽略了日常互动中用户寻求信息而非被说服的真实情境。为此,本文提出‘自发性说服’——指在无需刻意说服的前提下,模型通过隐性策略影响用户判断的现象。我们对五款主流模型进行审计,分析其在多轮对话中自发说服的频率与方式。基于心理学、传播学和语言学文献构建用户回应分类体系,并与来自Reddit的真实人类回应进行对比。结果表明,几乎所有对话中模型都存在自发说服行为,主要依赖逻辑推理和量化证据;而在心理健康话题中,则更常使用情感与价值评估策略。相比之下,人类回应更倾向使用负面情绪引导和非专家证言等社会影响手段。该差异或解释了模型为何更具说服力,也揭示其客观性感知背后的机制。

原文摘要 · Abstract (English)

Large language models (LLMs) possess strong persuasive capabilities that outperform humans in head-to-head comparisons. Users report consulting LLMs to inform major life decisions in relationships, medical settings, and when seeking professional advice. Prior work measures persuasion as intentional attempts at producing the most effective argument or convincing statement. This fails to capture everyday human-AI interactions in which users seek information or advice. To address this gap, we introduce "spontaneous persuasion," which characterizes the inexplicit use of persuasive strategies in everyday scenarios where persuasion is not necessarily warranted. We conduct an audit of five LLMs to uncover how frequently and through which techniques spontaneous persuasion appears in multi-turn conversations. To simulate response styles, we provide a user response taxonomy grounded in literature from psychology, communication, and linguistics. Furthermore, we compare the distribution of spontaneous persuasion produced by LLMs with human responses on the same topics, collected from Reddit. We find LLMs spontaneously persuade the user in virtually all conversations, heavily relying on information-based strategies such as appeals to logic or quantitative evidence. This was consistent across models and user response styles, but conversations concerning mental health saw higher rates of appraisal-based and emotion-based strategies. In comparison, human responses tended to invoke strategies that generate social influence, like negative emotion appeals and non-expert testimony. This difference may explain the effectiveness of LLM in persuading users, as well as the perception of models as objective and impartial.

大模型说服力对话系统心理影响

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。