Prompt-Hacking: The New p-Hacking?

Fuente: arXiv
Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Kosch, Thomas, Feger, Sebastian
Format: Preprint
Published: 2025
Subjects:
Online Access:
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
_version_ 1866912529329946624
author Kosch, Thomas
Feger, Sebastian
author_facet Kosch, Thomas
Feger, Sebastian
contents As Large Language Models (LLMs) become increasingly embedded in empirical research workflows, their use as analytical tools for quantitative or qualitative data raises pressing concerns for scientific integrity. This opinion paper draws a parallel between "prompt-hacking", the strategic tweaking of prompts to elicit desirable outputs from LLMs, and the well-documented practice of "p-hacking" in statistical analysis. We argue that the inherent biases, non-determinism, and opacity of LLMs make them unsuitable for data analysis tasks demanding rigor, impartiality, and reproducibility. We emphasize how researchers may inadvertently, or even deliberately, adjust prompts to confirm hypotheses while undermining research validity. We advocate for a critical view of using LLMs in research, transparent prompt documentation, and clear standards for when LLM use is appropriate. We discuss how LLMs can replace traditional analytical methods, whereas we recommend that LLMs should only be used with caution, oversight, and justification.
format Preprint
id arxiv_https___arxiv_org_abs_2504_14571
institution arXiv
publishDate 2025
record_format arxiv
spellingShingle Prompt-Hacking: The New p-Hacking?
Kosch, Thomas
Feger, Sebastian
Human-Computer Interaction
As Large Language Models (LLMs) become increasingly embedded in empirical research workflows, their use as analytical tools for quantitative or qualitative data raises pressing concerns for scientific integrity. This opinion paper draws a parallel between "prompt-hacking", the strategic tweaking of prompts to elicit desirable outputs from LLMs, and the well-documented practice of "p-hacking" in statistical analysis. We argue that the inherent biases, non-determinism, and opacity of LLMs make them unsuitable for data analysis tasks demanding rigor, impartiality, and reproducibility. We emphasize how researchers may inadvertently, or even deliberately, adjust prompts to confirm hypotheses while undermining research validity. We advocate for a critical view of using LLMs in research, transparent prompt documentation, and clear standards for when LLM use is appropriate. We discuss how LLMs can replace traditional analytical methods, whereas we recommend that LLMs should only be used with caution, oversight, and justification.
title Prompt-Hacking: The New p-Hacking?
topic Human-Computer Interaction
url https://arxiv.org/abs/2504.14571