REVIEW 1 cited by
People will agree what I think: Investigating LLM's False Consensus Effect
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
read the original abstract
Large Language Models (LLMs) have been recently adopted in interactive systems requiring communication. As the false belief in a model can harm the usability of such systems, LLMs should not have cognitive biases that humans have. Psychologists especially focus on the False Consensus Effect (FCE), a cognitive bias where individuals overestimate the extent to which others share their beliefs or behaviors, because FCE can distract smooth communication by posing false beliefs. However, previous studies have less examined FCE in LLMs thoroughly, which needs more consideration of confounding biases, general situations, and prompt changes. Therefore, in this paper, we conduct two studies to examine the FCE phenomenon in LLMs. In Study 1, we investigate whether LLMs have FCE. In Study 2, we explore how various prompting styles affect the demonstration of FCE. As a result of these studies, we identified that popular LLMs have FCE. Also, the result specifies the conditions when FCE becomes more or less prevalent compared to normal usage.
Forward citations
Cited by 1 Pith paper
-
Reasoning Strategies in Large Language Models: Can They Follow, Prefer, and Optimize?
Prompting LLMs with distinct reasoning strategies and ensembling their outputs improves accuracy on logical deduction tasks, though not as consistently as the paper claims.
Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.