# Multi-Agent Consensus as a Cognitive Bias Trigger in Human-AI Interaction

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2604.22277 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2604.22277/

## Key facts

- No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Placed in Social simulation and multi-agent debate, one of 16 directions in LLM agents and tool use.
- Builds on 3 of its 18 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 24 Apr 2026.

## Placed in

- LLM agents and tool use / [Social simulation and multi-agent debate](https://mlsanity.com/agents/social-simulation-and-multi-agent-debate/)

## Builds on (most cited first, 3 of 3)

- [Generative Agents: Interactive Simulacra of Human Behavior](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2304.03442/) (2023)
- [Magentic-One: A Generalist Multi-Agent System for Solving Complex Tasks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2411.04468/) (2024)
- [Multi-Agents are Social Groups: Investigating Social Influence of Multiple Agents in Human-Agent Interactions](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2411.04578/) (2024)

## Abstract (arXiv)

As multi-agent AI systems become more common, users increasingly encounter not a single AI voice but a collective one. This shift introduces social dynamics, such as consensus, dissent, and gradual convergence, that can trigger cognitive biases and distort human judgment. We present findings from a controlled experiment (N = 127) comparing three multi-agent configurations: Majority, Minority, and Diffusion. Quantitative results show that majority consensus accelerates opinion change and inflates confidence, consistent with social proof and bandwagon heuristics. Minority dissent slows this process and promotes more deliberative engagement. Qualitative analysis identifies three interpretive trajectories: reinforcing, aligning, and oscillating, shaped by how users interpret agent independence and group dynamics over time. These findings suggest that agent agreement structure, independent of content, functions as a bias-relevant signal in LLM interactions. We hope this work contributes to the Bias4Trust agenda by grounding multi-agent social influence as a concrete and designable source of bias in human-AI interaction.