Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 cited by

Foot In The Door: Understanding Large Language Model Jailbreaking via Cognitive Psychology

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 2402.15690 v1 pith:VYZPEOJY submitted 2024-02-24 cs.CL cs.AI

Foot In The Door: Understanding Large Language Model Jailbreaking via Cognitive Psychology

classification cs.CL cs.AI
keywords jailbreakingllmscognitivejailbreakmodelpromptsdecision-makingintrinsic
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved
0 comments
Share X LinkedIn Reddit HN
read the original abstract

Large Language Models (LLMs) have gradually become the gateway for people to acquire new knowledge. However, attackers can break the model's security protection ("jail") to access restricted information, which is called "jailbreaking." Previous studies have shown the weakness of current LLMs when confronted with such jailbreaking attacks. Nevertheless, comprehension of the intrinsic decision-making mechanism within the LLMs upon receipt of jailbreak prompts is noticeably lacking. Our research provides a psychological explanation of the jailbreak prompts. Drawing on cognitive consistency theory, we argue that the key to jailbreak is guiding the LLM to achieve cognitive coordination in an erroneous direction. Further, we propose an automatic black-box jailbreaking method based on the Foot-in-the-Door (FITD) technique. This method progressively induces the model to answer harmful questions via multi-step incremental prompts. We instantiated a prototype system to evaluate the jailbreaking effectiveness on 8 advanced LLMs, yielding an average success rate of 83.9%. This study builds a psychological perspective on the explanatory insights into the intrinsic decision-making logic of LLMs.

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Forward citations

Cited by 3 Pith papers

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

  1. VoxSafeBench: Not Just What Is Said, but Who, How, and Where

    cs.SD 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 8.0

    VoxSafeBench reveals that speech language models recognize social norms from text but fail to apply them when acoustic cues like speaker or scene determine the appropriate response.

  2. MoGU V2: Toward a Higher Pareto Frontier Between Model Usability and Security

    cs.CL 2025-09 conditional novelty 5.0

    MoGUv2 embeds small routers in the deeper layers of LLMs to dynamically blend a helpful variant and a refusal variant, improving safety against jailbreak and fine-tuning attacks while preserving usability.

  3. Anchoring Refusal Direction: Mitigating Safety Risks in Tuning via Projection Constraint

    cs.CL 2025-09 conditional novelty 5.0

    ProCon anchors each sample's hidden-state projection onto the LLM's initial refusal direction during instruction fine-tuning, reducing refusal-direction drift and safety risks with limited task-performance loss.