2026/04/03 by John Caffier, Olga Stavrova, Bennett Kleinberg
#cs.CY
Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly regarded as having the potential to generate persuasive content at scale. While previous studies have focused on the risks associated with LLM-generated misinformation, the role of LLMs in enabling prosocial persuasion is still underexplored. We investigate whether donation appeals authored by LLMs are as effective as those written by humans across degrees of personalization. Two preregistered online experiments (Study 1: N = 658; Study 2: N = 642) manipulated Personalization (generic vs. personalized vs. falsely personalized) and Content source (human vs. LLM) and presented participants with donation appeals for charities. We assessed how participants distributed their bonus money across the charities, how they engaged with the donation appeals, and how persuasive they found them. In both experiments, LLM-generated content yielded statistically significantly higher donation amounts than human-authored content, although the absolute differences were small; it also resulted in higher engagement and was rated as more persuasive. There was a gain associated with personalization (Study 2) and a penalty for false personalization (Study 1). Our results suggest that LLMs may be a suitable technology for generating content that can encourage prosocial behavior.