The persuasive effects of political microtargeting in the age of generative artificial intelligence
Open accessPublished version of a preprint
Abstract
The increasing availability of microtargeted advertising and the accessibility of generative artificial intelligence (AI) tools, such as ChatGPT, have raised concerns about the potential misuse of large language models in scaling microtargeting efforts for political purposes. Recent technological advancements, involving generative AI and personality inference from consumed text, can potentially create a highly scalable "manipulation machine" that targets individuals based on their unique vulnerabilities without requiring human input. This paper presents four studies examining the effectiveness of this putative "manipulation machine." The results demonstrate that personalized political ads tailored to individuals' personalities are more effective than nonpersonalized ads (studies 1a and 1b). Additionally, we showcase the feasibility of automatically generating and validating these personalized ads on a large scale (studies 2a and 2b). These findings highlight the potential risks of utilizing AI and microtargeting to craft political messages that resonate with individuals based on their personality traits. This should be an area of concern to ethicists and policy makers.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
While some people simply ignore online misinformation, this content is likely to penetrate specific groups, especially since AI may help automate the micro-targeting process in which thousands of persuasive messages can now be generated easily at scale.
“While some people simply ignore online misinformation (31), this content is likely to penetrate specific groups, especially since AI may help automate the micro-targeting process in which thousands of persuasive messages can now be generated easily at scale (24).”
From The impact of generative artificial intelligence on socioeconomic inequalities and policy making (2024) · cites this paper as [24]
GPT can automate micro-targeting in a way that makes it more persuasive than standard nonpersonalized ads.
“GPT can also automate micro-targeting in a way that makes it more persuasive than standard nonpersonalized ads (24).”
From The impact of generative artificial intelligence on socioeconomic inequalities and policy making (2024) · cites this paper as [24]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
Soto, C. J., & John, O. P. (2017) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/pspp0000096 · Cited by 2,075 · see citing works
Computer-based personality judgments are more accurate than those made by humans
Youyou, W., Kosinski, M., & Stillwell, D. (2015) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.1418680112 · Cited by 1,086 · see citing works
Psychological targeting as an effective approach to digital mass persuasion
Matz, S. C., Kosinski, M., Nave, G., & Stillwell, D. J. (2017) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.1710966114 · Cited by 892 · see citing works
Hirsh, J. B., Kang, S. K., & Bodenhausen, G. V. (2012) · Psychological Science · doi:10.1177/0956797611436349 · Cited by 506 · see citing works
The Potential of Generative AI for Personalized Persuasion at Scale
Matz, S., Teeny, J., Vaid, S. S., Peters, H., Harari, G. M., & Cerf, M. (2023) · doi:10.31234/osf.io/rn97c · Cited by 312 · see citing works
Dillard, J. P., Weber, K. M., & Vail, R. G. (2007) · Journal of Communication · doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.2007.00360.x · Cited by 276 · see citing works
Why Am I Seeing This Ad? The Effect of Ad Transparency on Ad Effectiveness
Kim, T., Barasz, K., & John, L. K. (2019) · Journal of Consumer Research · doi:10.1093/jcr/ucy039 · Cited by 274 · see citing works
Coppock, A., Hill, S. J., & Vavreck, L. (2020) · Science Advances · doi:10.1126/sciadv.abc4046 · Cited by 171 · see citing works
The Myths of Data-Driven Campaigning
Baldwin-Philippi, J. (2017) · Political Communication · doi:10.1080/10584609.2017.1372999 · Cited by 158 · see citing works
What demographic attributes do our digital footprints reveal? A systematic review
Hinds, J. M., & Joinson, A. (2018) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0207112 · Cited by 98 · see citing works
Joyal‐Desmarais, K., Scharmer, A., Madzelan, M. K., See, J. V., Rothman, A. J., & Snyder, M. (2022) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/bul0000377 · Cited by 88 · see citing works
Quantifying the potential persuasive returns to political microtargeting
Tappin, B. M., Wittenberg, C., Hewitt, L. B., Berinsky, A. J., & Rand, D. G. (2023) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.2216261120 · Cited by 83 · see citing works
Strengthening ties: The influence of microtargeting on partisan attitudes and the vote
Lavigne, M. (2020) · Party Politics · doi:10.1177/1354068820918387 · Cited by 70 · see citing works
Boosting people’s ability to detect microtargeted advertising
Lorenz-Spreen, P., Geers, M., Pachur, T., Hertwig, R., Lewandowsky, S., & Herzog, S. M. (2021) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/s41598-021-94796-z · Cited by 57 · see citing works
Self-citationThe Conditional Effects of Microtargeted Facebook Advertisements on Voter Turnout
Haenschen, K. (2023) · Political Behavior · doi:10.1007/s11109-022-09781-7 · Cited by 45 · see citing works
Technology and democracy: a paradox wrapped in a contradiction inside an irony
Lewandowsky, S., & Pomerantsev, P. (2021) · Memory Mind & Media · doi:10.1017/mem.2021.7 · Cited by 27 · see citing works
Self-citationOnline reading habits can reveal personality traits: towards detecting psychological microtargeting
Simchon, A., Sutton, A., Edwards, M., & Lewandowsky, S. (2023) · PNAS Nexus · doi:10.1093/pnasnexus/pgad191 · Cited by 16 · see citing works
Self-citation
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 1
- [1]Cadwalladr C. 2020 Jan. Fresh Cambridge analytica leak ‘shows global manipulation is out of control’. The Guardian.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
The impact of generative artificial intelligence on socioeconomic inequalities and policy making
Capraro, V., Lentsch, A., Acemoglu, D., Akgun, S., Akhmedova, A., Bilancini, E., Bonnefon, J.-F., Brañas-Garza, P., Butera, L., Douglas, K. M., et al. (2024) · PNAS Nexus · doi:10.1093/pnasnexus/pgae191 · Cited by 371 · see citing works
Testing theories of political persuasion using AI
Argyle, L. P., Busby, E. C., Gubler, J. R., Lyman, A., Olcott, J., Pond, J., & Wingate, D. (2025) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.2412815122 · Cited by 25 · see citing works
- Authors
- Simchon, A., Edwards, M., & Lewandowsky, S.
- Affiliations
- Ben-Gurion University of the Negev (IL)
- University of Bristol (GB)
- University of Potsdam (DE)
- Corresponding author
- Simchon, Almog
- Venue
- PNAS Nexus
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2024-01-29
- Volume
- 3
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- pgae035-pgae035
- ISSN
- 2752-6542 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC10849795
- OpenAlex
- W4391322710
- Cited by
- 143
- References
- 17
- Citations by year
- 2026: 50 · 2025: 59 · 2024: 30 · 2023: 3 · 2021: 1
- FWCI
- 116.10
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- PNAS Nexus (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Bristol Research (University of Bristol) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- UWA Profiles and Research Repository (UWA) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- Explore Bristol Research (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- PsyArXiv (OSF Preprints) (submittedVersion)
- PsyArXiv (OSF Preprints) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- Funders
- Humboldt Foundation in Germany
- ERC (101020961)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Communication › Social Media and Politics
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Misinformation and Its Impacts
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Media Influence and Politics
- Keywords
- political microtargeting, generative AI, large language models, ChatGPT, persuasion, personality inference, political communication, AI ethics
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
