PreprintCited by 24Ethics and Social Impacts of AIOpinion Dynamics and Social InfluenceArtificial Intelligence Applications

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 access
Bian, Ning, Lin, Hongyu, Liu, Peilin, Lu, Yaojie, Zhang, Chunkang, He, Ben, Han, Xianpei, Sun, Le·2023·arXiv

Abstract

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

DataCite · 10.48550/arxiv.2305.04812

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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)
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
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