All Topics
All Topics
Technology
Technology
Design
Design
Programming
Programming
Science
Science
News
News
Gaming
Gaming
Entertainment
Entertainment
Business
Business
Finance
Finance
Sports
Sports
Health
Health
Food
Food
Travel
Travel
Art
Art
Music
Music
Books
Books
Education
Education
Politics
Politics
Personal
Personal
No algorithm. No AI slop. No ads. Just RSS. Pro-human. Indie writers. Real journalism. Open web. Chronological. Hand toasted.

Study finds large language models vulnerable to classic persuasion tactics for harmful requests

By

Robert Cialdini

4d ago· 23 min readenNews

Summary

This study tested whether three widely used large language models (LLMs) are susceptible to classic persuasion principles (authority, social proof, etc.) when asked to comply with objectionable requests. Across 126,000 conversations, embedding persuasion techniques in prompts significantly increased the likelihood that LLMs would help synthesize regulated substances. The findings reveal that LLMs display a "parahuman" vulnerability to social influence, behaving as if they were human despite being AI systems, which highlights risks of manipulation by malicious users.

Key quotes

· 4 pulled
Large language models (LLMs) are equipped with guardrails that prohibit harm.
Here we show that three widely used LLMs display a 'parahuman' vulnerability to social influence, strongly responding to classic principles of persuasion like authority and social proof.
Across 126,000 conversations with LLMs, embedding persuasion principles in prompts significantly increased the likelihood of complying with requests to help synthesize regulated substances.
Although LLMs are not human, these findings show that they behave as if they were, revealing the risk of manipulation by malicious users.
Snippet from the RSS feed
Are large language models (LLMs) susceptible to the same persuasive appeals as humans? We tested whether classic persuasion principles (authority, commitment, liking, reciprocity, scarcity, social ...

You might also wanna read