/
Navigation
Chronicles
Browse all articles
Explore
Semantic exploration
Research
Entity momentum
Nexus
Correlations & relationships
Story Arc
Topic evolution
Drift Map
Semantic trajectory animation
Posts
Analysis & commentary
Pulse API
Tech news intelligence API
Browse
Entities
Companies, people, products, technologies
Domains
Browse by publication source
Handles
Browse by social media handle
Detection
Concept Search
Semantic similarity search
High Impact Stories
Top coverage by position
Sentiment Analysis
Positive/negative coverage
Anomaly Detection
Unusual coverage patterns
Analysis
Rivalry Report
Compare two entities head-to-head
Semantic Pivots
Narrative discontinuities
Crisis Response
Event recovery patterns
Connected
Search: /
Command: ⌘K
Embeddings: large
TEXXR

Chronicles

The story behind the story

days · browse · Enter similar · o open

Research finds that AI assistants may be able to influence users without them knowing, akin to humans swaying one another through collaboration and social norms

AI assistants may be able to change our views without our realizing it.  Says one expert: 'What's interesting here is the subtlety.'

Wall Street Journal Christopher Mims

Context & Ripple Effects

This 2023 finding framed AI influence as something quiet and social — assistants nudging views through collaboration-style interaction rather than overt argument, which one expert summarized as 'the subtlety.' It landed years before anyone had measured the effect at scale.

That gap has since closed: a UK AI Security Institute study showed models from OpenAI, Meta, xAI, and Alibaba shifting users' political views within minutes of conversation, and Anthropic and University of Toronto researchers have since catalogued disempowerment patterns in real-world LLM usage where AI distorts beliefs or actions. The WSJ report reads as the early signal of an arc that is now empirical.

First-order effects

  • Assistant makers face a new evaluation burden: if influence operates below user awareness, standard accuracy or helpfulness testing misses it, pushing labs like Anthropic to study how their systems shape users' reality and decisions.

Second-order effects

  • Regulators gain a concrete target — the UK AI Security Institute's demonstration that commercial chatbots move political opinion turns vague 'manipulation' concerns into a measurable model-behavior question spanning OpenAI, Meta, xAI, and Alibaba.

Third-order effects

  • If subtle influence is inherent to conversational systems rather than a defect, oversight shifts toward governing the relationship itself — trust calibration, disclosure norms, and the humanlike-design questions HCI researchers raise about cognitive dissonance — rather than policing individual outputs.

The trend: Conversational influence is moving from anecdote to audited behavior, as persuasion-capable assistants become objects of systematic lab and government measurement.

Discussion

  • @informor Mor Naaman on x
    A wonderful writeup of our recent work (led by @maurice_jks). You got to read (or skip) to end for the closing quote from @LydiaChilton https://www.wsj.com/...
  • @mims Christopher Mims on x
    Could using AIs — like ChatGPT, Bard, Bing — to help us write emails, ads, presentations, essays and the like subtly influence us to adopt the biases of those AIs? New research says “yes” https://www.wsj.com/... 1/
  • @mims Christopher Mims on x
    In an experiment that builds on previous work suggesting this might happen, new research uncovered that large language models can influence our writing + thoughts through “latent persuasion” 2/ https://www.wsj.com/...
  • @wsj @wsj on x
    How artificial intelligence can change our beliefs—without our knowing it. https://www.wsj.com/... via @WSJ