Biased decisions of Large Language Models (LLM): Computer control agents and the decoy effect

IF 1.5 3区 经济学 Q2 ECONOMICS
Kevin Bösch
{"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>&lt;</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%; p<.001), 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.
大语言模型(LLM)的偏差决策:计算机控制代理和诱饵效应
大型语言模型(llm)越来越多地嵌入到计算机控制代理(cca)中,使它们能够代表用户自主地行动。虽然之前的研究已经检查了法学硕士生成的文本中的行为偏差,但很少有人知道这种偏差和启发式是否会扩展到自动化操作中。本研究调查了cca是否表现出诱饵效应——在人类决策中有充分证据证明的偏见,即劣选择的存在会使人们的偏好转向目标选择。使用开源框架浏览器使用,分析了六个最先进的llm在五个规范决策场景中的3600个模拟。结果显示,当诱饵存在时,cca选择目标的频率(43.4%)高于不存在时(38.0%;p<.001),这与在人类中观察到的有限理性一致。然而,影响的大小和方向因模型而异,有些模型没有显着偏差。这些发现将法学硕士行为中的启发式证据从文本输出扩展到自主行动,突出了在决策环境中部署cca的机会和风险。讨论了数字推动、系统设计和使用法学硕士作为行为研究模拟的含义。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.60
自引率
12.50%
发文量
113
审稿时长
83 days
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.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书