{"title":"Biased decisions of Large Language Models (LLM): Computer control agents and the decoy effect","authors":"Kevin Bösch","doi":"10.1016/j.socec.2026.102641","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly embedded into Computer Control Agents (CCAs), enabling them to act autonomously on behalf of users. While prior research has examined behavioral biases in LLM-generated text, little is known about whether such biases and heuristics extend to automated actions. This study investigates whether CCAs exhibit the decoy effect — a well-documented bias in human decision making, where the presence of an inferior alternative shifts preferences towards a target option. Using the open-source framework browser-use, 3600 simulations across five canonical decision scenarios with six state-of-the-art LLMs are analyzed. Results show an aggregate decoy effect where CCAs select the target more often when a decoy is present (43.4%) than when it is absent (38.0%; <span><math><mrow><mi>p</mi><mo><</mo><mo>.</mo><mn>001</mn></mrow></math></span>), consistent with bounded rationality observed in humans. However, the magnitude and direction of the effect vary across models, with some displaying no significant bias. These findings extend evidence of heuristics in LLM behavior from text outputs to autonomous actions, highlighting both opportunities and risks for deploying CCAs in decision-making contexts. Implications for digital nudging, system design, and the use of LLMs as simulations in behavioral research are discussed.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":51637,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics","volume":"124 ","pages":"Article 102641"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2026-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S221480432600131X","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/8/26 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly embedded into Computer Control Agents (CCAs), enabling them to act autonomously on behalf of users. While prior research has examined behavioral biases in LLM-generated text, little is known about whether such biases and heuristics extend to automated actions. This study investigates whether CCAs exhibit the decoy effect — a well-documented bias in human decision making, where the presence of an inferior alternative shifts preferences towards a target option. Using the open-source framework browser-use, 3600 simulations across five canonical decision scenarios with six state-of-the-art LLMs are analyzed. Results show an aggregate decoy effect where CCAs select the target more often when a decoy is present (43.4%) than when it is absent (38.0%; ), consistent with bounded rationality observed in humans. However, the magnitude and direction of the effect vary across models, with some displaying no significant bias. These findings extend evidence of heuristics in LLM behavior from text outputs to autonomous actions, highlighting both opportunities and risks for deploying CCAs in decision-making contexts. Implications for digital nudging, system design, and the use of LLMs as simulations in behavioral research are discussed.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly the Journal of Socio-Economics) welcomes submissions that deal with various economic topics but also involve issues that are related to other social sciences, especially psychology, or use experimental methods of inquiry. Thus, contributions in behavioral economics, experimental economics, economic psychology, and judgment and decision making are especially welcome. The journal is open to different research methodologies, as long as they are relevant to the topic and employed rigorously. Possible methodologies include, for example, experiments, surveys, empirical work, theoretical models, meta-analyses, case studies, and simulation-based analyses. Literature reviews that integrate findings from many studies are also welcome, but they should synthesize the literature in a useful manner and provide substantial contribution beyond what the reader could get by simply reading the abstracts of the cited papers. In empirical work, it is important that the results are not only statistically significant but also economically significant. A high contribution-to-length ratio is expected from published articles and therefore papers should not be unnecessarily long, and short articles are welcome. Articles should be written in a manner that is intelligible to our generalist readership. Book reviews are generally solicited but occasionally unsolicited reviews will also be published. Contact the Book Review Editor for related inquiries.