REVIEW 3 cited by
The Earth is Flat because...: Investigating LLMs' Belief towards Misinformation via Persuasive Conversation
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) encapsulate vast amounts of knowledge but still remain vulnerable to external misinformation. Existing research mainly studied this susceptibility behavior in a single-turn setting. However, belief can change during a multi-turn conversation, especially a persuasive one. Therefore, in this study, we delve into LLMs' susceptibility to persuasive conversations, particularly on factual questions that they can answer correctly. We first curate the Farm (i.e., Fact to Misinform) dataset, which contains factual questions paired with systematically generated persuasive misinformation. Then, we develop a testing framework to track LLMs' belief changes in a persuasive dialogue. Through extensive experiments, we find that LLMs' correct beliefs on factual knowledge can be easily manipulated by various persuasive strategies.
Forward citations
Cited by 3 Pith papers
-
Information Discernment in Large Language Models
LLMs update their stated numeric beliefs almost regardless of source reliability or whether a claim moves them closer to the truth, performing near chance on both dimensions.
-
Helpful Agent Meets Deceptive Judge: Understanding Vulnerabilities in Agentic Workflows
LLM agents frequently switch correct answers after one round of misleading feedback, and the new WAFER-QA benchmark measures this with web-backed critiques.
-
Exploring Multimodal Challenges in Toxic Chinese Detection: Taxonomy, Benchmark, and Findings
A new taxonomy and dataset of 8 types of perturbed toxic Chinese show nine top LLMs often miss these obfuscated insults, and small-sample ICL or fine-tuning causes overcorrection.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.