Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 cited by

A Mechanism-Based Approach to Mitigating Harms from Persuasive Generative AI

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 2404.15058 v1 pith:DI7BASMP submitted 2024-04-23 cs.CY cs.AI

classification cs.CYcs.AI
keywords persuasionharmsgenerativepersuasivedefinitionsapproachesforwardharm
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

Recent generative AI systems have demonstrated more advanced persuasive capabilities and are increasingly permeating areas of life where they can influence decision-making. Generative AI presents a new risk profile of persuasion due the opportunity for reciprocal exchange and prolonged interactions. This has led to growing concerns about harms from AI persuasion and how they can be mitigated, highlighting the need for a systematic study of AI persuasion. The current definitions of AI persuasion are unclear and related harms are insufficiently studied. Existing harm mitigation approaches prioritise harms from the outcome of persuasion over harms from the process of persuasion. In this paper, we lay the groundwork for the systematic study of AI persuasion. We first put forward definitions of persuasive generative AI. We distinguish between rationally persuasive generative AI, which relies on providing relevant facts, sound reasoning, or other forms of trustworthy evidence, and manipulative generative AI, which relies on taking advantage of cognitive biases and heuristics or misrepresenting information. We also put forward a map of harms from AI persuasion, including definitions and examples of economic, physical, environmental, psychological, sociocultural, political, privacy, and autonomy harm. We then introduce a map of mechanisms that contribute to harmful persuasion. Lastly, we provide an overview of approaches that can be used to mitigate against process harms of persuasion, including prompt engineering for manipulation classification and red teaming. Future work will operationalise these mitigations and study the interaction between different types of mechanisms of persuasion.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID 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. AI Alignment and Fiduciary Obligation

    cs.CY 2026-08 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    The paper derives AI alignment criteria from fiduciary duties developers owe to users of extended AI assistants.

  2. Analysing Differences in Persuasive Language in LLM-Generated Text: Uncovering Stereotypical Gender Patterns

    cs.CL 2026-01 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    LLMs consistently generate more emotional/communal persuasion for female targets and more direct/agentic persuasion for male targets across models and languages.

  3. Understanding Gender Bias in AI-Generated Product Descriptions

    cs.CL 2025-06 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    AI-generated product descriptions on eBay show systematic gender bias, including body-size exclusions, stereotyped feature emphasis, and differences in calls to action.

Pith tools