# The Thin Line Between Comprehension and Persuasion in LLMs

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2507.01936 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2507.01936/

## Key facts

- Cited by 5 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 57 of its 108 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 2 Jul 2025.

## Builds on (most cited first, 30 of 57)

- [Judging LLM-as-a-Judge with MT-Bench and Chatbot Arena](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2306.05685/) (2023)
- [Intriguing properties of neural networks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1312.6199/) (2013)
- [G-Eval: NLG Evaluation using GPT-4 with Better Human Alignment](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2303.16634/) (2023)
- [A Survey on LLM-as-a-Judge](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2411.15594/) (2024)
- [Chatbot Arena: An Open Platform for Evaluating LLMs by Human Preference](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2403.04132/) (2024)
- [Fantastically Ordered Prompts and Where to Find Them: Overcoming Few-Shot Prompt Order Sensitivity](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2104.08786/) (2021)
- [Language Models Don't Always Say What They Think: Unfaithful Explanations in Chain-of-Thought Prompting](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.04388/) (2023)
- [Probing Classifiers: Promises, Shortcomings, and Advances](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2102.12452/) (2021)
- [Can Large Language Models Be an Alternative to Human Evaluations?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.01937/) (2023)
- [BARTScore: Evaluating Generated Text as Text Generation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2106.11520/) (2021)
- [Automatic Prompt Optimization with "Gradient Descent" and Beam Search](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.03495/) (2023)
- [Are Emergent Abilities of Large Language Models a Mirage?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2304.15004/) (2023)
- [Faith and Fate: Limits of Transformers on Compositionality](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.18654/) (2023)
- [LLMs-as-Judges: A Comprehensive Survey on LLM-based Evaluation Methods](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2412.05579/) (2024)
- [NLP Evaluation in trouble: On the Need to Measure LLM Data Contamination for each Benchmark](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.18018/) (2023)
- [Do Prompt-Based Models Really Understand the Meaning of their Prompts?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2109.01247/) (2021)
- [Humans or LLMs as the Judge? A Study on Judgement Biases](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2402.10669/) (2024)
- [Large Language Models Fail on Trivial Alterations to Theory-of-Mind Tasks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2302.08399/) (2023)
- [All That's 'Human' Is Not Gold: Evaluating Human Evaluation of Generated Text](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2107.00061/) (2021)
- [Evaluation of Text Generation: A Survey](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2006.14799/) (2020)
- [Debating with More Persuasive LLMs Leads to More Truthful Answers](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2402.06782/) (2024)
- [Reasoning with Language Model Prompting: A Survey](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2212.09597/) (2022)
- [LLMs instead of Human Judges? A Large Scale Empirical Study across 20 NLP Evaluation Tasks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2406.18403/) (2024)
- [Information-Theoretic Probing for Linguistic Structure](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2004.03061/) (2020)
- [Do LLMs exhibit human-like response biases? A case study in survey design](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2311.04076/) (2023)
- [The Unreliability of Explanations in Few-shot Prompting for Textual Reasoning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2205.03401/) (2022)
- [Repairing the Cracked Foundation: A Survey of Obstacles in Evaluation Practices for Generated Text](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2202.06935/) (2022)
- [MME-CoT: Benchmarking Chain-of-Thought in Large Multimodal Models for Reasoning Quality, Robustness, and Efficiency](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2502.09621/) (2025)
- [Learning to Deceive with Attention-Based Explanations](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1909.07913/) (2019)
- [Transformer visualization via dictionary learning: contextualized embedding as a linear superposition of transformer factors](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2103.15949/) (2021)

## Built on by (most cited first, 5 of 5)

- [Democratizing Diplomacy: A Harness for Evaluating Any Large Language Model on Full-Press Diplomacy](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2508.07485/) (2025)
- [Is In-Context Learning Learning?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2509.10414/) (2025)
- [If LLMs Have Human-Like Attributes, Then So Does Age of Empires II](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2605.31514/) (2026)
- [MA2P: A Meta-Cognitive Autonomous Intelligent Agents Framework for Complex Persuasion](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2605.18572/) (2026)
- [Evaluating the Capabilities of LLMs for Persuasive Dialogue](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2608.29738/) (2026)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Large language models (LLMs) are excellent at maintaining high-level, convincing dialogue, but it remains unclear whether their persuasive success reflects genuine understanding of the discourse. We examine this question through informal debates between humans and LLMs, first by measuring their persuasive skills, and then by relating these to their understanding of _what_ is being talked about: namely, their comprehension of argumentative structures and the pragmatic context on the same debates. We find that LLMs effectively maintain coherent, persuasive debates, and can sway the beliefs of both participants and audiences. We also note that awareness or suspicion of AI involvement encourage people to be more critical of the arguments made. However, we also find that LLMs are unable to show comprehension of deeper dialogical structures, such as argument quality or existence of supporting premises. Our results reveal a disconnect between LLM comprehension and dialogical skills, raising ethical and practical concerns on their deployment on explanation-critical contexts. From an argumentation-theoretical perspective, we experimentally question whether an agent, if it can convincingly maintain a dialogue, is required to show it knows what is talking about.