Large Language Models as 'Hidden Persuaders': Fake Product Reviews are Indistinguishable to Humans and Machines
Fuente:
arXiv
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Preprint |
| Published: |
2025
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| _version_ | 1866915346544328704 |
|---|---|
| author | Meng, Weiyao Harvey, John Goulding, James Carter, Chris James Lukinova, Evgeniya Smith, Andrew Frobisher, Paul Forrest, Mina Nica-Avram, Georgiana |
| author_facet | Meng, Weiyao Harvey, John Goulding, James Carter, Chris James Lukinova, Evgeniya Smith, Andrew Frobisher, Paul Forrest, Mina Nica-Avram, Georgiana |
| contents | Reading and evaluating product reviews is central to how most people decide what to buy and consume online. However, the recent emergence of Large Language Models and Generative Artificial Intelligence now means writing fraudulent or fake reviews is potentially easier than ever. Through three studies we demonstrate that (1) humans are no longer able to distinguish between real and fake product reviews generated by machines, averaging only 50.8% accuracy overall - essentially the same that would be expected by chance alone; (2) that LLMs are likewise unable to distinguish between fake and real reviews and perform equivalently bad or even worse than humans; and (3) that humans and LLMs pursue different strategies for evaluating authenticity which lead to equivalently bad accuracy, but different precision, recall and F1 scores - indicating they perform worse at different aspects of judgment. The results reveal that review systems everywhere are now susceptible to mechanised fraud if they do not depend on trustworthy purchase verification to guarantee the authenticity of reviewers. Furthermore, the results provide insight into the consumer psychology of how humans judge authenticity, demonstrating there is an inherent 'scepticism bias' towards positive reviews and a special vulnerability to misjudge the authenticity of fake negative reviews. Additionally, results provide a first insight into the 'machine psychology' of judging fake reviews, revealing that the strategies LLMs take to evaluate authenticity radically differ from humans, in ways that are equally wrong in terms of accuracy, but different in their misjudgments. |
| format | Preprint |
| id |
arxiv_https___arxiv_org_abs_2506_13313 |
| institution | arXiv |
| publishDate | 2025 |
| record_format | arxiv |
| spellingShingle | Large Language Models as 'Hidden Persuaders': Fake Product Reviews are Indistinguishable to Humans and Machines Meng, Weiyao Harvey, John Goulding, James Carter, Chris James Lukinova, Evgeniya Smith, Andrew Frobisher, Paul Forrest, Mina Nica-Avram, Georgiana Computation and Language Artificial Intelligence General Economics Economics J.4; I.2.7 Reading and evaluating product reviews is central to how most people decide what to buy and consume online. However, the recent emergence of Large Language Models and Generative Artificial Intelligence now means writing fraudulent or fake reviews is potentially easier than ever. Through three studies we demonstrate that (1) humans are no longer able to distinguish between real and fake product reviews generated by machines, averaging only 50.8% accuracy overall - essentially the same that would be expected by chance alone; (2) that LLMs are likewise unable to distinguish between fake and real reviews and perform equivalently bad or even worse than humans; and (3) that humans and LLMs pursue different strategies for evaluating authenticity which lead to equivalently bad accuracy, but different precision, recall and F1 scores - indicating they perform worse at different aspects of judgment. The results reveal that review systems everywhere are now susceptible to mechanised fraud if they do not depend on trustworthy purchase verification to guarantee the authenticity of reviewers. Furthermore, the results provide insight into the consumer psychology of how humans judge authenticity, demonstrating there is an inherent 'scepticism bias' towards positive reviews and a special vulnerability to misjudge the authenticity of fake negative reviews. Additionally, results provide a first insight into the 'machine psychology' of judging fake reviews, revealing that the strategies LLMs take to evaluate authenticity radically differ from humans, in ways that are equally wrong in terms of accuracy, but different in their misjudgments. |
| title | Large Language Models as 'Hidden Persuaders': Fake Product Reviews are Indistinguishable to Humans and Machines |
| topic | Computation and Language Artificial Intelligence General Economics Economics J.4; I.2.7 |
| url | https://arxiv.org/abs/2506.13313 |