# Assessing Large Language Models' ability to predict how humans balance self-interest and the interest of others

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2307.12776 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2307.12776/

## Key facts

- Cited by 4 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- First posted on arXiv 21 Jul 2023.

## Built on by (most cited first, 4 of 4)

- [How Far Are We on the Decision-Making of LLMs? Evaluating LLMs' Gaming Ability in Multi-Agent Environments](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2403.11807/) (2024)
- [Nicer Than Humans: How do Large Language Models Behave in the Prisoner's Dilemma?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2406.13605/) (2024)
- [Large Model Strategic Thinking, Small Model Efficiency: Transferring Theory of Mind in Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2408.05241/) (2024)
- [Discovering Differences in Strategic Behavior Between Humans and LLMs](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2602.10324/) (2026)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Generative artificial intelligence (AI) holds enormous potential to revolutionize decision-making processes, from everyday to high-stake scenarios. By leveraging generative AI, humans can benefit from data-driven insights and predictions, enhancing their ability to make informed decisions that consider a wide array of factors and potential outcomes. However, as many decisions carry social implications, for AI to be a reliable assistant for decision-making it is crucial that it is able to capture the balance between self-interest and the interest of others. We investigate the ability of three of the most advanced chatbots to predict dictator game decisions across 108 experiments with human participants from 12 countries. We find that only GPT-4 (not Bard nor Bing) correctly captures qualitative behavioral patterns, identifying three major classes of behavior: self-interested, inequity-averse, and fully altruistic. Nonetheless, GPT-4 consistently underestimates self-interest and inequity-aversion, while overestimating altruistic behavior. This bias has significant implications for AI developers and users, as overly optimistic expectations about human altruism may lead to disappointment, frustration, suboptimal decisions in public policy or business contexts, and even social conflict.