Hasibur Rahman, Malak Sadek, Smit Desai · arXiv (Cornell University) 2026 · 2026
DOI: 10.48550/arxiv.2609.25586
Counts differ because each database indexes a different set of publications. We treat OpenAlex as the canonical count; Google Scholar is not shown (no API, and crawling it violates its ToS).
Large language models increasingly support decisions where values are in tension, yet little is known about whether interacting with them changes which values users prioritize. In a preregistered study, 200 U.S. adults interacted with ChatGPT, Claude, or Gemini as a thinking partner or read fixed AI-generated considerations. The prompt asked LLMs to support reasoning without recommending a decision and named no values. Participants advised people facing real dilemmas and completed parallel PVQ-RR forms before, immediately after, and one task later. Each LLM condition temporarily shifted value priorities toward personal focus relative to the control (d=0.37-0.51), primarily through increased Self-Enhancement. Participants' advice retained words and meaning from their exchanges. Thus, a brief LLM interaction that neither targets values nor seeks to persuade can reorient values active during judgment without detectable convergence in value directions or advice.
No comments yet — start the discussion below.