How Far Did They Go? The Persuasive Tactics of Covert LLM Agents in a Discontinued Field Experiment

Key Findings

• — Identity targeting or adoption appears in more than two-thirds of the covert comments; alignment moves and authority claims appear in nearly all of them
• — Cognitive-bias triggers (confirmation bias, representativeness, availability) appear in the large majority of comments and co-occur systematically
• — Against human counter-arguments in the same forum the agents inverted the typical distribution: external references in 74.8% of comments and experiential positioning in 64.7%, both far above human norms, and negative (adversarial) alignment in 93.3%
• — Machine annotation validated against two human raters (kappa up to 0.920; accuracy 94.7% and 96.0%)
• — The authors argue that disclosure mandates alone cannot address the credibility asymmetry and call for audits of how AI systems structure credibility

Methodology Notes

Corpus: 1,532 comments, 33 accounts, 1,515 threads, released by r/ChangeMyView moderators after the University of Zurich experiment was disclosed; the release does not attribute comments to the experiment's model conditions. Coding scheme applied by LLM annotation validated against two human raters; within-thread comparison with human comments. Dataset on GitHub (kokiljaidka/UnauthorizedRedditCMVPosts). The PDF states 'Accepted at PoliticalNLP 2026' (workshop). Date is the arXiv v1 (3 June 2026, cs.AI, CC BY); an OAI-PMH datestamp of 2026-09-22 indicates a pending revision that had not reached the abs page at fetch time (still v1 when the curator re-fetched it). Observation period November 2024 to March 2025 (month precision).

Sources