Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 cited by

Conversational AI Powered by Large Language Models Amplifies False Memories in Witness Interviews

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

arxiv 2408.04681 v1 pith:G2JBSZ5T submitted 2024-08-08 cs.CL cs.AIcs.CYcs.HC

classification cs.CLcs.AIcs.CYcs.HC
keywords falsememorieswerechatbotgenerativecontrolcrimeinterviews
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

This study examines the impact of AI on human false memories -- recollections of events that did not occur or deviate from actual occurrences. It explores false memory induction through suggestive questioning in Human-AI interactions, simulating crime witness interviews. Four conditions were tested: control, survey-based, pre-scripted chatbot, and generative chatbot using a large language model (LLM). Participants (N=200) watched a crime video, then interacted with their assigned AI interviewer or survey, answering questions including five misleading ones. False memories were assessed immediately and after one week. Results show the generative chatbot condition significantly increased false memory formation, inducing over 3 times more immediate false memories than the control and 1.7 times more than the survey method. 36.4% of users' responses to the generative chatbot were misled through the interaction. After one week, the number of false memories induced by generative chatbots remained constant. However, confidence in these false memories remained higher than the control after one week. Moderating factors were explored: users who were less familiar with chatbots but more familiar with AI technology, and more interested in crime investigations, were more susceptible to false memories. These findings highlight the potential risks of using advanced AI in sensitive contexts, like police interviews, emphasizing the need for ethical considerations.

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 3 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Generative Voice Bursts during Phone Call

    cs.SD 2025-06 reject novelty 5.0 of 10

    A proposed system that would generate and deliver 3 to 5 second AI voice bursts during an active phone call to convey emergency information, but it is not backed by any implementation or test.

  2. Human Authenticity and Flourishing in an AI-Driven World: Edmund's Journey and the Call for Mindfulness

    cs.HC 2025-05 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    An HCI position paper argues for a Human Flourishing Benchmark that scores AI systems on cognitive preservation, autonomy, skill development, and relational authenticity.

  3. SCOPE: Stochastic and Counterbiased Option Placement for Evaluating Large Language Models

    cs.CL 2025-07 reject novelty 4.0 of 10

    SCOPE estimates a model's position bias with nonsense prompts, puts correct answers in disliked slots, and spreads similar distractors apart to cap lucky guessing.

Pith tools