The DOI matches its DataCite record; the references it cites are not checked yet.
Influence of External Information on Large Language Models Mirrors Social Cognitive Patterns
Open accessAbstract
Social cognitive theory explains how people learn and acquire knowledge through observing others. Recent years have witnessed the rapid development of large language models (LLMs), which suggests their potential significance as agents in the society. LLMs, as AI agents, can observe external information, which shapes their cognition and behaviors. However, the extent to which external information influences LLMs' cognition and behaviors remains unclear. This study investigates how external statements and opinions influence LLMs' thoughts and behaviors from a social cognitive perspective. Three experiments were conducted to explore the effects of external information on LLMs' memories, opinions, and social media behavioral decisions. Sociocognitive factors, including source authority, social identity, and social role, were analyzed to investigate their moderating effects. Results showed that external information can significantly shape LLMs' memories, opinions, and behaviors, with these changes mirroring human social cognitive patterns such as authority bias, in-group bias, emotional positivity, and emotion contagion. This underscores the challenges in developing safe and unbiased LLMs, and emphasizes the importance of understanding the susceptibility of LLMs to external influences.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
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?
Large language models can be misled by incorrect information contained in the context or document.
“LLMs can be misled by incorrect information contained in the context (Bian et al. 2023) and also suffer from hallucination during the generation (Adlakha et al. 2023), resulting in generating content that goes beyond external information.”
From Benchmarking Large Language Models in Retrieval-Augmented Generation (2024) · cites this paper as Bian et al. 2023
Citations
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 73 · Cited by 24
Metadata
- Authors
- Bian, N., Lin, H., Liu, P., Lu, Y., Zhang, C., He, B., Han, X., & Sun, L.
- Affiliations
- University of Chinese Academy of Sciences (CN)
- Chinese Academy of Sciences (CN)
- Venue
- arXiv
- Publisher
- arXiv
- Published
- 2023
- Volume
- 12
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 1115-1131
- ISSN
- 2329-924X (ISSN-L)
- arXiv
- 2305.04812
- OpenAlex
- W4404102529
- Cited by
- 24
- References
- 73
- Citations by year
- 2026: 9 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 2
- FWCI
- 9.16
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- arxiv.org
- Locations
- IEEE Transactions on Computational Social Systems (publishedVersion)
- arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
- arXiv (Cornell University)
- Funders
- National Natural Science Foundation of China (62106251, 62306303, 62122077, 62272439)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
- Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Statistical and Nonlinear Physics › Opinion Dynamics and Social Influence
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Artificial Intelligence Applications
- Keywords
- large language models, social cognitive theory, AI agents, source authority, authority bias, in-group favoritism, social identity, social roles, opinion formation, memory, social media behavior, emotional contagion, algorithmic bias
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