PreprintCited by 8Ethics and Social Impacts of AITopic ModelingNatural Language Processing Techniques

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 14 of the 14 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Anchoring Bias in Large Language Models: An Experimental Study

Open access
Lou, Jiaxu, Sun, Yifan·2025·Qeios

Abstract

Large Language Models (LLMs) like GPT-4 and Gemini have significantly advanced artificial intelligence by enabling machines to generate and comprehend human-like text. Despite their impressive capabilities, LLMs are not free of limitations. They have shown various biases. While much research has explored demographic biases, the cognitive biases in LLMs have not been equally studied. This study delves into anchoring bias, a cognitive bias where initial information disproportionately influences judgment. Utilizing an experimental dataset, we examine how anchoring bias manifests in LLMs and verify the effectiveness of various mitigation strategies. Our findings highlight the sensitivity of LLM responses to biased hints. At the same time, our experiments show that, to mitigate anchoring bias, one needs to collect hints from comprehensive angles to prevent the LLMs from being anchored to individual pieces of information, while simple algorithms such as Chain-of-Thought, Thoughts of Principles, Ignoring Anchor Hints, and Reflection are not sufficient.

Overview

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.32388/o2n5j6

Cites

14 of 14 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 14 references

Research works printed but not linked: 6

  1. Shojaei M. "CHAT-GPT and artificial intelligence in Medical Endocrine System and interventions". _Eurasian Journal of Chemical, Medicinal and Petroleum Research_. 3 (1): 197–209, January 2024.
  2. Yeh KC, Chi JA, Lian DC, Hsieh SK. "Evaluating Interfaced LLM Bias". _The 35th Conference on Computational Linguistics and Speech Processing_, October 20-21, 2023.
  3. Schmidgall S, Harris C, Essien I, Olshvang D, Rahman T, Kim JW, Ziaei R, Eshraghian J, Abadir P, Chellappa R. Addressing cognitive bias in medical language models. _arXiv_. 2402.08113v3. 20 Feb 2024. Available from: https://arxiv.org/abs/2402.08113v3. · arXiv
  4. Pantana G, Castello M, Torre I. Examining Cognitive Biases in ChatGPT 3.5 and 4 through Human Evaluation and Linguistic Comparison. In: Proceedings of the 16th Conference of the Association for Machine Translation in the Americas; 2024 Sep 30 - Oct 2; Chicago, USA.
  5. Li R, Gao Y (2024). "Anchored Answers: Unravelling Positional Bias in GPT-2’s Multiple-Choice Questions". _arXiv_. arXiv: 2405.03205 [https://arxiv.org/abs/2405.03205]. 23 May 2024. · arXiv
  6. Wei J, Wang X, Schuurmans D, Bosma M, Chi E, Le Q, Zhou D. Chain of Thought Prompting Elicits Reasoning in Large Language Models. In: Proceedings of the 36th Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems; 2022.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 8

Metadata

Authors
Lou, J., & Sun, Y.
Venue
Qeios
Publisher
Qeios Ltd
Published
2025-01-28
ISSN
2632-3834 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4406885083
Cited by
5
References
14
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 3
Type
posted content
Language
en
Open access
Locations
Qeios (acceptedVersion, cc-by)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Topic Modeling
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Natural Language Processing Techniques
Keywords
anchoring effect, large language models, bias mitigation, chain-of-thought prompting, GPT-4, Gemini

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Anchoring Bias in Large Language Models: An Experimental Study. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.32388/o2n5j6
The paper
Lou, J., & Sun, Y. (2025). Anchoring Bias in Large Language Models: An Experimental Study. Qeios. https://doi.org/10.32388/o2n5j6