How human is the machine? Evidence from 66,000 Conversations with Large Language Models
Fuente:
arXiv
Salvato in:
| Autori principali: | , , , , |
|---|---|
| Natura: | Preprint |
| Pubblicazione: |
2025
|
| Soggetti: | |
| Accesso online: | |
| Tags: |
Aggiungi Tag
Nessun Tag, puoi essere il primo ad aggiungerne!!
|
| _version_ | 1866908583289946112 |
|---|---|
| author | Stamatogiannakis, Antonios Ghodsinia, Arsham Etminanrad, Sepehr Gonçalves, Dilney Santos, David |
| author_facet | Stamatogiannakis, Antonios Ghodsinia, Arsham Etminanrad, Sepehr Gonçalves, Dilney Santos, David |
| contents | When Artificial Intelligence (AI) is used to replace consumers (e.g., synthetic data), it is often assumed that AI emulates established consumers, and more generally human behaviors. Ten experiments with Large Language Models (LLMs) investigate if this is true in the domain of well-documented biases and heuristics. Across studies we observe four distinct types of deviations from human-like behavior. First, in some cases, LLMs reduce or correct biases observed in humans. Second, in other cases, LLMs amplify these same biases. Third, and perhaps most intriguingly, LLMs sometimes exhibit biases opposite to those found in humans. Fourth, LLMs' responses to the same (or similar) prompts tend to be inconsistent (a) within the same model after a time delay, (b) across models, and (c) among independent research studies. Such inconsistencies can be uncharacteristic of humans and suggest that, at least at one point, LLMs' responses differed from humans. Overall, unhuman-like responses are problematic when LLMs are used to mimic or predict consumer behavior. These findings complement research on synthetic consumer data by showing that sources of bias are not necessarily human-centric. They also contribute to the debate about the tasks for which consumers, and more generally humans, can be replaced by AI. |
| format | Preprint |
| id |
arxiv_https___arxiv_org_abs_2510_07321 |
| institution | arXiv |
| publishDate | 2025 |
| record_format | arxiv |
| spellingShingle | How human is the machine? Evidence from 66,000 Conversations with Large Language Models Stamatogiannakis, Antonios Ghodsinia, Arsham Etminanrad, Sepehr Gonçalves, Dilney Santos, David Human-Computer Interaction General Economics Economics When Artificial Intelligence (AI) is used to replace consumers (e.g., synthetic data), it is often assumed that AI emulates established consumers, and more generally human behaviors. Ten experiments with Large Language Models (LLMs) investigate if this is true in the domain of well-documented biases and heuristics. Across studies we observe four distinct types of deviations from human-like behavior. First, in some cases, LLMs reduce or correct biases observed in humans. Second, in other cases, LLMs amplify these same biases. Third, and perhaps most intriguingly, LLMs sometimes exhibit biases opposite to those found in humans. Fourth, LLMs' responses to the same (or similar) prompts tend to be inconsistent (a) within the same model after a time delay, (b) across models, and (c) among independent research studies. Such inconsistencies can be uncharacteristic of humans and suggest that, at least at one point, LLMs' responses differed from humans. Overall, unhuman-like responses are problematic when LLMs are used to mimic or predict consumer behavior. These findings complement research on synthetic consumer data by showing that sources of bias are not necessarily human-centric. They also contribute to the debate about the tasks for which consumers, and more generally humans, can be replaced by AI. |
| title | How human is the machine? Evidence from 66,000 Conversations with Large Language Models |
| topic | Human-Computer Interaction General Economics Economics |
| url | https://arxiv.org/abs/2510.07321 |