Search

This article explores the emergence of AI as a new frontier in behavioral science. It discusses a study that compares the decision-making of AI chatbots, specifically ChatGPT-3 and ChatGPT-4, with that of humans using classical behavioral assessments. The study reveals that AI models have distinct preferences and behaviors, leading to the development of a new research direction called "AI Behavioral Science." The article also examines the potential benefits and challenges of studying AI behavior, including its impact on human decision-making, bias correction, and policy design. It emphasizes the need for a comprehensive behavioral assessment framework and the engineering of AI behavior. Furthermore, the article discusses the potential impact of AI integration on human behavior and culture, such as algorithmic bias, cognitive decline, and the promotion of equality. The document includes references to various research papers and studies on biased programmers, biased data, AI ethics, recommender systems, social media, news consumption, and polarization, making it a valuable resource for library patrons researching these specific topics. [Extracted from the article]

We administer a Turing test to AI chatbots. We examine how chatbots behave in a suite of classic behavioral games that are designed to elicit characteristics such as trust, fairness, risk-aversion, cooperation, etc., as well as how they respond to a traditional Big-5 psychological survey that measures personality traits. ChatGPT-4 exhibits behavioral and personality traits that are statistically indistinguishable from a random human from tens of thousands of human subjects from more than 50 countries. Chatbots also modify their behavior based on previous experience and contexts "as if" they were learning from the interactions and change their behavior in response to different framings of the same strategic situation. Their behaviors are often distinct from average and modal human behaviors, in which case they tend to behave on the more altruistic and cooperative end of the distribution. We estimate that they act as if they are maximizing an average of their own and partner's payoffs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]