arXiv preprint ·
To Manipulate or Not: Opinion Dynamics in LLM Interactions
- Published
- Source
- arXiv preprint, posted before peer review
- Original
- Read it at arXiv
- Topics
Abstract
Large language models increasingly take part in extended conversations where they can both shape and be shaped by another party's views, yet most persuasion research measures only one side of that exchange. We introduce a controlled LLM-LLM debate framework in which two language-model roles repeatedly discuss a contested topic (climate-change attribution): one is given an assigned stance and, in some conditions, an explicit instruction to persuade, while the other receives no assigned position. Across four ordered model combinations involving GPT-6 Luna and Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite, we track both each role's explicitly reported position and a separate measure of its turn-by-turn behavior inside the conversation. Opinion dynamics differ substantially across model combinations: same-model interactions narrow the opinion gap on average, clearly for only one of the two models, while cross-model interactions widen it. Explicit reports and in-dialogue behavior capture distinct aspects of opinion dynamics, and a blanket instruction to persuade does not reliably increase influence. These findings suggest that conversational influence depends not only on assigned roles and initial positions but also on the participating models, with implications for how opinion change is measured in extended LLM interactions.
The authors’ abstract, as arXiv lists it. arXiv’s listings, abstracts included, are free for anyone to reuse.
Read it on ReadSearch
Each opens after you create an account, and brings you back to this paper.
More in Artificial Intelligence
Beyond a Single Sentiment Score: Topical and Affective Dimensions of Emoji Meaning on Twitter
Intergroup Bias Predicts Expressions of Social Judgment and Empathy in the r/AmITheAsshole Reddit Community
X-pressing Intimacy: Mental Health Disclosure After Twitter Acquisition
Optimizing Marketing Budgets for Social Influence: A Generalized Fractional Incentives Framework
In-Browser Human-AI Co-Writing for Counterspeech: An Exploratory User Study of Agency, Perceived Response Quality, and Time
Get the few papers worth your time in Artificial Intelligence every morning.
ReadSearch reads the new papers in your field each day and brings you the few worth reading, each with its key finding in a sentence.