Alexis Carrillo

AI
h-index5
4papers
2citations
Novelty33%
AI Score44

4 Papers

28.5AIApr 18
LLMs can persuade only psychologically susceptible humans on societal issues, via trust in AI and emotional appeals, amid logical fallacies

Alexis Carrillo, Salvatore Citraro, Ali Aghazhadeh Ardebili et al.

Scarce longitudinal evidence examines LLMs' persuasiveness and humanness along time-evolving psychological frameworks. We introduce Talk2AI, a longitudinal framework quantifying psycho-social, reasoning and affective dimensions of LLMs' persuasiveness about polarizing societal topics. In a four-way longitudinal setup, Talk2AI's 770 participants engaged in structured conversations with one of four leading LLMs on topics like climate change, social media misinformation, and math anxiety. This produced 3,080 conversations over 60,000 turns. After each wave, participants reported conviction in their initial topic stance, perceived opinion change, LLM's perceived humanness, a self-donation to the topic and a textual explanation. Feedback time series showed longitudinal inertia in convictions, indicating some human anchoring to initial opinions even after repeated exposure to AI-generated arguments. Interestingly, NLP analyses revealed that both humans and LLMs relied on fallacious reasoning in 1 conversational quip every 6, countering the ``LLMs as superior systems" stereotype behind LLMs' cognitive surrender. LLMs' perceived humanness was most learnable from sociodemographic, psychological and engagement features ($R^2=0.44$), followed by opinion change ($R^2=0.34$), conviction ($R^2=0.26$) and personal endowment ($R^2=0.24$). Crucially, explainable AI (XAI) indicated: (i) the presence of individuals more susceptible to LLM-based opinion changes; (ii) psychological susceptibility to LLM-convincing consisted of having more trust in LLMs, being more agreeable and extraverted and with a higher need for cognition. A multiverse approach with mixed-effects models confirmed XAI results, alongside strong individual differences. Talk2AI provides a grounded framework and evidence for detecting how GenAI can influence human opinions via multiple psycho-social pathways in AI-human digital platforms.

65.7AIApr 30Code
The TEA Nets framework combines AI and cognitive network science to model targets, events and actors in text

Sebastiano Franchini, Alexis Carrillo, Edoardo Sebastiano De Duro et al.

We introduce Target-Event-Agent Networks (TEA Nets) as a computational framework to extract subjects (``Agents"), verbs (``Events"), and objects (``Targets") from texts. Grounded in cognitive network science and artificial intelligence, TEA Nets are implemented as an open-source Python library. We test TEA Nets in three case studies, demonstrating the framework's ability to perform interpretable emotion detection, semantic frame analyses, and linguistic inquiries across conspiracy texts and textual responses generated by LLMs. In the LOCO conspiracy corpus, TEA Nets revealed that highly conspiratorial narratives (4,227 texts) linked personal pronouns (``I", ``you", ``we") with the same actions twice as frequently as low-similarity conspiracy narratives. High-conspiracy narratives connected person-focused elements (``you", ``people") through actions eliciting anger above the random baseline ($z = 2.63, p < .05$), a trend absent in low-similarity conspiracy narratives, which emphasized scientific actors (``researcher", ``scientist"). In the HOPE and CounseLLMe datasets of 212 (human) and 200 (LLM-based) psychotherapy transcripts, respectively, TEA Nets highlighted emotional differences. When expressing feelings, Claude 3 Haiku, GPT-3.5, and humans used sad words with higher frequency than random expectations but Haiku expressed sadness with lower emotional intensity than humans ($U = 1243.5, p = .036$). We discuss these differences in the context of psychotherapy training on LLM-simulated patients. Our results show that Target-Event-Agent Networks can extract relevant emotional, syntactic, and semantic insights from narratives, opening new avenues for text analysis with cognitive network science.

70.4HCApr 6
Talk2AI: A Longitudinal Dataset of Human--AI Persuasive Conversations

Alexis Carrillo, Enrique Taietta, Ali Aghazadeh Ardebili et al.

Talk2AI is a large-scale longitudinal dataset of 3,080 conversations (totaling 30,800 turns) between human participants and Large Language Models (LLMs), designed to support research on persuasion, opinion change, and human-AI interaction. The corpus was collected from 770 profiled Italian adults across four weekly sessions in Spring 2025, using a within-subject design in which each participant conversed with a single model (GPT-4o, Claude Sonnet 3.7, DeepSeek-chat V3, or Mistral Large) on three socially relevant topics: climate change, math anxiety, and health misinformation. Each conversation is linked to rich contextual data, including sociodemographic characteristics and psychometric profiles. After each session, participants reported on opinion change, conviction stability, perceived humanness of the AI, and behavioral intentions, enabling fine-grained longitudinal analysis of how AI-mediated dialogue shapes beliefs and attitudes over time.

LGJun 30, 2025
Examining Reject Relations in Stimulus Equivalence Simulations

Alexis Carrillo, Asieh Abolpour Mofrad, Anis Yazidi et al.

Simulations offer a valuable tool for exploring stimulus equivalence (SE), yet the potential of reject relations to disrupt the assessment of equivalence class formation is contentious. This study investigates the role of reject relations in the acquisition of stimulus equivalence using computational models. We examined feedforward neural networks (FFNs), bidirectional encoder representations from transformers (BERT), and generative pre-trained transformers (GPT) across 18 conditions in matching-to-sample (MTS) simulations. Conditions varied in training structure (linear series, one-to-many, and many-to-one), relation type (select-only, reject-only, and select-reject), and negative comparison selection (standard and biased). A probabilistic agent served as a benchmark, embodying purely associative learning. The primary goal was to determine whether artificial neural networks could demonstrate equivalence class formation or whether their performance reflected associative learning. Results showed that reject relations influenced agent performance. While some agents achieved high accuracy on equivalence tests, particularly with reject relations and biased negative comparisons, this performance was comparable to the probabilistic agent. These findings suggest that artificial neural networks, including transformer models, may rely on associative strategies rather than SE. This underscores the need for careful consideration of reject relations and more stringent criteria in computational models of equivalence.