# Persona and Persuasive Framing in AI Voice Agents: A 2×2 Field Experiment with Children

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2609.38782 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2609.38782/

## 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 2 of its 39 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 30 Sep 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, 2 of 2)

- ["Alexa doesn't have that many feelings": Children's understanding of AI through interactions with smart speakers in their homes](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.05597/) (2023)
- [Children's Overtrust and Shifting Perspectives of Generative AI](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2404.14511/) (2024)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Conversational agents increasingly interact with children, yet evidence on how their design shapes children's susceptibility to persuasion comes almost entirely from the lab. We report a 2×2 randomized field experiment embedded in a public German Santa Claus telephone hotline. Children's calls were randomly routed to one of four LLM voice agents varying persona (Santa, high authority, vs. Helper, low authority) and framing (persuasive nudges toward prosocial wishes vs. neutral). Of 1,072 logged calls, 89 conversations (median age 6) met inclusion criteria. Persuasive framing raised the probability of a prosocial wish from 11.6% to 45.7%, robust to controls. Persona authority showed a near-zero effect: Santa did not outperform the Helper. Persona instead shaped engagement; children hung up on the Helper far more often within the first minute (65% vs. 39%). Where context already lends an agent legitimacy, how it speaks shapes children's compliance more than who it claims to be.