# Quantifying the Impact of Large Language Models on Collective Opinion Dynamics

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2308.03313 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2308.03313/

## Key facts

- Cited by 22 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- First posted on arXiv 7 Aug 2023.

## Built on by (most cited first, 22 of 22)

- [A Survey on Large Language Model based Autonomous Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2308.11432/) (2023)
- [The Rise and Potential of Large Language Model Based Agents: A Survey](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2309.07864/) (2023)
- [Large Language Model based Multi-Agents: A Survey of Progress and Challenges](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2402.01680/) (2024)
- [Large Language Models Empowered Agent-based Modeling and Simulation: A Survey and Perspectives](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2312.11970/) (2023)
- [Simulating Opinion Dynamics with Networks of LLM-based Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2311.09618/) (2023)
- [From Individual to Society: A Survey on Social Simulation Driven by Large Language Model-based Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2412.03563/) (2024)
- [From Skepticism to Acceptance: Simulating the Attitude Dynamics Toward Fake News](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2403.09498/) (2024)
- [Do LLM Agents Have Regret? A Case Study in Online Learning and Games](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2403.16843/) (2024)
- [Decoding Echo Chambers: LLM-Powered Simulations Revealing Polarization in Social Networks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2409.19338/) (2024)
- [Persuasion with Large Language Models: A Survey of Empirical Evidence, Study Methodologies, and Ethical Implications](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2411.06837/) (2024)
- [The Wisdom of Partisan Crowds: Comparing Collective Intelligence in Humans and LLM-based Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2311.09665/) (2023)
- [The Truth Becomes Clearer Through Debate! Multi-Agent Systems with Large Language Models Unmask Fake News](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2505.08532/) (2025)
- [LLM-based multi-agent poetry generation in non-cooperative environments](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2409.03659/) (2024)
- [Does Socialization Emerge in AI Agent Society? A Case Study of Moltbook](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2602.14299/) (2026)
- [Computational Experiments Meet Large Language Model Based Agents: A Survey and Perspective](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2402.00262/) (2024)
- [Towards a Psychological Generalist AI: A Survey of Current Applications of Large Language Models and Future Prospects](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2312.04578/) (2023)
- [Stop Reducing Responsibility in LLM-Powered Multi-Agent Systems to Local Alignment](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2510.14008/) (2025)
- [Towards Simulating Social Influence Dynamics with LLM-based Multi-agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2507.22467/) (2025)
- [Merging Triggers, Breaking Backdoors: Defensive Poisoning for Instruction-Tuned Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2601.04448/) (2026)
- [Belief-Calibrated Multi-Agent Consensus Seeking for Complex NLP Tasks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2510.06307/) (2025)
- [Generalized Multi-agent Social Simulation Framework](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2510.06225/) (2025)
- [LLMs for Social Network Modeling: From Network Generation to Dynamic Processes](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2609.08049/) (2026)

## Abstract (arXiv)

The process of opinion expression and exchange is a critical component of democratic societies. As people interact with large language models (LLMs) in the opinion shaping process different from traditional media, the impacts of LLMs are increasingly recognized and being concerned. However, the knowledge about how LLMs affect the process of opinion expression and exchange of social opinion networks is very limited. Here, we create an opinion network dynamics model to encode the opinions of LLMs, cognitive acceptability and usage strategies of individuals, and simulate the impact of LLMs on opinion dynamics in a variety of scenarios. The outcomes of the simulations inform about effective demand-oriented opinion network interventions. The results from this study suggested that the output opinion of LLMs has a unique and positive effect on the collective opinion difference. The marginal effect of cognitive acceptability on collective opinion formation is nonlinear and shows a decreasing trend. When people partially rely on LLMs, the exchange process of opinion becomes more intense and the diversity of opinion becomes more favorable. In fact, there is 38.6% more opinion diversity when people all partially rely on LLMs, compared to prohibiting the use of LLMs entirely. The optimal diversity of opinion was found when the fractions of people who do not use, partially rely on, and fully rely on LLMs reached roughly 4:12:1. Our experiments also find that introducing extra agents with opposite/neutral/random opinions, we can effectively mitigate the impact of biased/toxic output from LLMs. Our findings provide valuable insights into opinion dynamics in the age of LLMs, highlighting the need for customized interventions tailored to specific scenarios to address the drawbacks of improper output and use of LLMs.