mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Benevolent Dictators? On LLM Agent Behavior in Dictator Games

arXiv 2511.08721 ↗First posted 11 Nov 2025cs.LG cs.AI cs.CLcited by 2

On the map: LLM agents and tool use → Social simulation and multi-agent debate

Abstract (arXiv)

In behavioral sciences, experiments such as the ultimatum game are conducted to assess preferences for fairness or self-interest of study participants. In the dictator game, a simplified version of the ultimatum game where only one of two players makes a single decision, the dictator unilaterally decides how to split a fixed sum of money between themselves and the other player. Although recent studies have explored behavioral patterns of AI agents based on Large Language Models (LLMs) instructed to adopt different personas, we question the robustness of these results. In particular, many of these studies overlook the role of the system prompt - the underlying instructions that shape the model's behavior - and do not account for how sensitive results can be to slight changes in prompts. However, a robust baseline is essential when studying highly complex behavioral aspects of LLMs. To overcome previous limitations, we propose the LLM agent behavior study (LLM-ABS) framework to (i) explore how different system prompts influence model behavior, (ii) get more reliable insights into agent preferences by using neutral prompt variations, and (iii) analyze linguistic features in responses to open-ended instructions by LLM agents to better understand the reasoning behind their behavior. We found that agents often exhibit a strong preference for fairness, as well as a significant impact of the system prompt on their behavior. From a linguistic perspective, we identify that models express their responses differently. Although prompt sensitivity remains a persistent challenge, our proposed framework demonstrates a robust foundation for LLM agent behavior studies. Our code artifacts are available at https://github.com/andreaseinwiller/LLM-ABS.

Key facts. Cited by 2 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Placed in Social simulation and multi-agent debate, one of 16 directions in LLM agents and tool use. Builds on 1 of its 12 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 11 Nov 2025.

Builds on

1 of 12 references.

Closest ancestors · 1

Same direction, newest first

  1. 2024Can Machines Think Like Humans? A Behavioral Evaluation of LLM Agents in Dictator Games28 Oct

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2026: 2.

2 papers.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2023Do LLM Agents Exhibit Social Behavior?
  2. 2025Computational Basis of LLM's Decision Making in Social Simulation
  3. 2025Bias-Adjusted LLM Agents for Human-Like Decision-Making via Behavioral Economics
  4. 2024Simulating Human Strategic Behavior: Comparing Single and Multi-agent LLMs
  5. 2026Do LLMs Take Care of Their Own? Similarity Signals Can Induce Cooperation
  6. 2025neuralFOMO: Can LLMs Handle Being Second Best? Measuring Envy-Like Preferences in Multi-Agent Settings
  7. 2024Reproducing and Extending Experiments in Behavioral Strategy with Large Language Models
  8. 2023Evidence of behavior consistent with self-interest and altruism in an artificially intelligent agent