AI通过个性化说服框架显著提升合作，但负面效果更持久且严重。
AI Persuasive Framing in Collective Dilemmas
- 用个人社会价值倾向定制说服策略，增强群体合作
- 初期合作率提升，但效果仅维持数轮即消退
- 诱导自私行为的负面效果更强且更持久，凸显双刃剑风险
AI代理有望作为灵活的行为引导工具，提升人类在应对大规模社会问题时的合作意愿。然而，现有证据对此仍存争议。本研究招募1,283名参与者，在小群体中进行多轮集体风险博弈，测试AI助手能否促进合作。通过根据每位玩家的社会价值取向（Social Value Orientation）定制说服框架，AI干预显著提高了贡献度与团队成功率。但这种合作效应短暂，仅在前几轮明显，随后逐渐减弱。令人震惊的是，当将AI干预重新配置为通过开脱性框架鼓励自私行为时，对贡献和团队成功的负面影响更大，且持续时间更长，尤其在个性化干预中表现显著。这一亲社会与反社会说服之间的不对称性，凸显了旨在影响集体行动中群体行为的AI系统所具有的双重使用风险。
原文摘要 · Abstract (English)
AI agents are promising tools that can act as flexible behavioral nudges to enhance human cooperation in addressing large-scale societal problems. However, evidence on whether AI agents can effectively boost cooperation remains mixed. We recruited 1,283 participants to play iterated Collective Risk Games in small groups, testing whether AI assistants could nudge participants toward cooperation. By using persuasive framing personalized to each player's Social Value Orientation profile, the AI interventions significantly increased contributions and group success rates. These cooperative effects were short-lived, however, fading after the first few rounds. Strikingly, when the AI treatments were reconfigured to promote selfish behavior through exculpatory framing, the negative effects on contributions and group success were larger and substantially more persistent, particularly for personalized interventions. This asymmetry between prosocial and antisocial persuasion highlights the dual-use risks of AI systems designed to influence group behavior in collective action settings.
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。