Do Androids Dream of Unseen Puppeteers? Probing for a Conspiracy Mindset in Large Language Models

In this paper, we investigate whether Large Language Models (LLMs) exhibit conspiratorial tendencies, whether they display sociodemographic biases in this domain, and how easily they can be conditioned into adopting conspiratorial perspectives. Conspiracy beliefs play a central role in the spread of misinformation and in shaping distrust toward institutions, making them a critical testbed for evaluating the social fidelity of LLMs. LLMs are increasingly used as proxies for studying human behavior, yet little is known about whether they reproduce higher-order psychological constructs such as a conspiratorial mindset. To bridge this research gap, we administer validated psychometric surveys measuring conspiracy mindset to multiple models under different prompting and conditioning strategies. Our findings reveal that LLMs show partial agreement with elements of conspiracy belief, and conditioning with socio-demographic attributes produces uneven effects, exposing latent demographic biases. Moreover, targeted prompts can easily shift model responses toward conspiratorial directions, underscoring both the susceptibility of LLMs to manipulation and the potential risks of their deployment in sensitive contexts. These results highlight the importance of critically evaluating the psychological dimensions embedded in LLMs, both to advance computational social science and to inform possible mitigation strategies against harmful uses.

Evaluating AI capabilities in detecting conspiracy theories on YouTube

As a leading online platform with a vast global audience, YouTube's extensive reach also makes it susceptible to hosting harmful content, including disinformation and conspiracy theories. This study explores the use of open-weight Large Language Models (LLMs), both text-only and multimodal, for identifying conspiracy theory videos shared on YouTube. Leveraging a labeled dataset of thousands of videos, we evaluate a variety of LLMs in a zero-shot setting and compare their performance to a fine-tuned RoBERTa baseline. Results show that text-based LLMs achieve high recall but lower precision, leading to increased false positives. Multimodal models lag behind their text-only counterparts, indicating limited benefits from visual data integration. To assess real-world applicability, we evaluate the most accurate models on an unlabeled dataset, finding that RoBERTa achieves performance close to LLMs with a larger number of parameters. Our work highlights the strengths and limitations of current LLM-based approaches for online harmful content detection, emphasizing the need for more precise and robust systems.

Evaluating open-source Large Language Models for automated fact-checking

The increasing prevalence of online misinformation has heightened the demand for automated fact-checking solutions. Large Language Models (LLMs) have emerged as potential tools for assisting in this task, but their effectiveness remains uncertain. This study evaluates the fact-checking capabilities of various open-source LLMs, focusing on their ability to assess claims with different levels of contextual information. We conduct three key experiments: (1) evaluating whether LLMs can identify the semantic relationship between a claim and a fact-checking article, (2) assessing models' accuracy in verifying claims when given a related fact-checking article, and (3) testing LLMs' fact-checking abilities when leveraging data from external knowledge sources such as Google and Wikipedia. Our results indicate that LLMs perform well in identifying claim-article connections and verifying fact-checked stories but struggle with confirming factual news, where they are outperformed by traditional fine-tuned models such as RoBERTa. Additionally, the introduction of external knowledge does not significantly enhance LLMs' performance, calling for more tailored approaches. Our findings highlight both the potential and limitations of LLMs in automated fact-checking, emphasizing the need for further refinements before they can reliably replace human fact-checkers.