arXiv subjects

Taha Yasseri

Publications and source records attributed to Taha Yasseri.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources

arXiv2026

A Cracked Mirror: How People Perceive Gender Performance by Large Language Models

How do large language models (LLMs) perform gender under zero-shot prompting, and how do people interpret those performances in conversation? Drawing on gender performativity, we examine how gendered meanings emerge through generated language, conversational context and human interpretation. In a preregistered randomised online experiment, 1,060 participants each had five short conversations with an LLM. We used minimal prompts to elicit performances from "very masculine" to "very feminine" and asked participants to rate their partner's perceived gender after each conversation. Mean ratings shifted in the direction of the prompts, but ratings at the extremes were closer to the midpoint than the prompt labels implied. When prompted to perform as "neither masculine nor feminine", the models were perceived as slightly masculine on average. Ratings varied across models and conversation topics. Women and men gave similar ratings at the extremes, but women rated the models as more masculine across the intermediate prompt levels. Participants' explanations illustrate how they drew on writing style, emotional expression and conversational interests, sometimes questioning the stereotypes behind their judgements. These findings suggest that conversational AI acts as a cracked mirror of gender norms. Models reproduce recognisable cues, and people interpret and sometimes challenge the meanings those cues carry.

physics.soc-ph↗

arXiv2026

Algorithmic Intervention Decreases Polarization in Content Moderation

Crowd-based moderation relies on people's collective judgments to combat misinformation, but raters bring their own ideological biases to the task, shaping how they moderate each other's contributions. We ask whether an algorithmic redesign can counteract this bias, using X's Community Notes, where contributors write context for potentially misleading posts and rate each other's notes. Community Notes replaced simple majority voting with an algorithm that instead rewards agreement across people with different ideological viewpoints. Comparing 8,805 notes and 4,367 contributors before and after this change, we find that ideological polarization decreased in the algorithm's estimates of contributor and note positions. Although negative interactions increased, contributors became less structurally aligned, indicating that negative interactions were less organized along partisan lines. These findings show that algorithmic incentives can reshape both the social structure and behavioral dynamics of crowds, extending beyond their intended effects on content moderation.

physics.soc-ph↗

arXiv2026

Behavioural Sociology of Humans and Machines

Artificial intelligence (AI) increasingly participates in communication, decision-making, and collective action, making the social organisation of human-machine interaction central to Hybrid Intelligence (HI). This chapter reviews the behavioural sociology of humans and machines through an HI lens, examining how interaction and feedback shape the combination of human and artificial capabilities. Drawing on sociology, social psychology, human-computer interaction, organisational studies, collective intelligence, and science and technology studies, it traces processes from individual social perception to cooperation in hybrid groups and organisational and institutional arrangements. Particular attention is given to how machine participation alters familiar mechanisms: social categorisation attaches expectations to designed identities, reciprocity may involve unequal social obligations, and algorithmic recommendations acquire authority through organisational practices. The chapter distinguishes observable machine behaviour from human interpretations of intention, understanding, and moral responsibility. It also considers how behavioural effects can extend beyond direct human-machine encounters, while separating established findings from proposed longer-term consequences. It argues that the benefits of HI depend on how roles, incentives, reliance, and accountability are organised, and identifies priorities for empirical research on these evolving sociotechnical arrangements.

physics.soc-ph↗

arXiv2026

Social Physics: A manifesto

Social Physics seeks quantitative, empirically testable explanations of collective human behavior. Its name has a long and contested history, but its contemporary program is neither the claim that society is literally a physical system nor an attempt to replace the social sciences with physics. It is an interdisciplinary practice: observation and experimentation, model construction, mathematical and computational analysis, and repeated confrontation with data. The field has been transformed by analyzing digital traces, network science, agent-based modeling, large-scale experiments, and the capacity to study coupled dynamics across economic, social, technological, biological, and physical layers. We review advances in financial analysis and modeling; economic complexity; the structure and evolution of social networks; spreading, opinion, and information dynamics; inequality, cooperation, conflict, mobility, cities, culture, science, and collective behavior; and the emerging study of human-AI ecosystems. Across these domains, common features recur - heterogeneity, interaction, feedback, adaptation, non-equilibrium dynamics, multiscale organization, and emergent collective outcomes. We also confront the limitations that have arisen in this field: convenience samples, platform dependence, weak causal identification, over-universal claims, insufficient engagement with meaning and institutions, privacy risks, and the danger that predictive models become instruments of manipulation. We propose a future Social Physics organized around theory - data reciprocity; causal and generative explanation; measurement validity and cross-context generalization; responsible, participatory data governance; genuinely interdisciplinary collaboration; and reflexive study of interventions and algorithms that alter the systems being observed.

physics.soc-ph↗

arXiv2026

The Benefit of Collective Intelligence in Community-Based Content Moderation is Limited by Overt Political Signalling

Social media platforms face increasing scrutiny over the rapid spread of misinformation. In response, many have adopted community-based content moderation systems, including Community Notes (formerly Birdwatch) on X (formerly Twitter), Community Notes on Meta, and Footnotes on TikTok. However, research shows that the current design of these systems can allow political biases to influence both the development of notes and the rating processes, reducing their overall effectiveness. We hypothesise that enabling users to collaborate on writing notes, rather than relying solely on individually authored notes, can enhance the overall quality of their notes. To test this idea, we conducted an online experiment in which participants jointly authored notes on politically misleading posts. We find that collaboration improves the helpfulness of notes, although the average effect depends on the interactional context. In particular, the benefits of collaboration decline when participants are made aware of one another's political affiliations. We also find that politically diverse teams improve note quality when evaluating Republican posts, while team composition does not meaningfully affect note quality for Democrat posts. These findings underscore the complexity of community-based content moderation and highlight the importance of understanding group dynamics and political diversity when designing more effective moderation systems.

cs.SI↗

arXiv2026

Bounded Normative Equivalence in Human-AI Cooperation: Group Behaviour, Not Partner Labels, Predicts Cooperation under Anonymous Aggregate Feedback

The introduction of artificial intelligence (AI) agents into human groups raises questions about how they influence cooperative social norms. Prior work has examined human-AI and human-robot teaming in small groups, but less is known about whether an AI label alters cooperation and norm-related outcomes in repeated group interactions. We report an online experiment using a repeated four-player Public Goods Game. Each group comprised three human participants and one bot, framed either as human or AI, following one of three predefined strategies: unconditional cooperation, conditional cooperation, or free-riding. Among 236 participants, cooperation was primarily associated with the group's contribution in the previous round and with participants' own previous contributions. These patterns were similar across human- and AI-labelled conditions, and cooperation levels did not differ significantly by agent label; a formal equivalence test (TOST) indicated that any label effect was smaller than +/-5 tokens (5% of the endowment). We also found no evidence of label-based differences in norm persistence in a follow-up Prisoner's Dilemma or in participants' normative perceptions. We describe this pattern as bounded normative equivalence: under anonymous aggregate group feedback, an AI label produced no detectable differences in observed cooperation or norm-related outcomes. We argue that this equivalence is bounded by the informational structure of the setting: aggregate feedback makes individual actions difficult to attribute, diluting the identity cues that might otherwise trigger differentiation. These findings suggest that, in collective settings where individual contributions are not identifiable, cooperative norms can extend to groups that include artificial agents.

cs.AI↗

arXiv2026

A field experiment of social influence and behavioral contagion with bots on Reddit

Recent advances in AI have heightened scholars' and policy makers' concern with social influence and behavioral contagion in online communities. We conduct a field experiment on Reddit to investigate the extent to which online users are susceptible to positive behavioral stimuli from other users and artificial agents. We let apparent human and bot accounts give symbolic awards to users with one of four rationales: praising the recipient's logical argument, emotional sensitivity, or moral integrity, or explaining that the award resulted from a random draw in a lottery. We evaluate how the different rationales for the award affect the recipients' subsequent behavior on the platform in terms of volume, impact, and content, as well as the further behavioral contagion to other users. We find that awards do not increase user activity and downstream impact, and awards from bots with the lottery rationale can in fact reduce them. Nevertheless, awards encourage direct communication between users. These findings highlight the possible resilience of online users to simple behavioral manipulation from platform algorithms and artificial agents, but not necessarily to more sophisticated schemes that simulate human conversation. Transparently labeling automated agents remains essential for ethical and effective platform governance.

cs.SI↗

arXiv2026

From Birdwatch to Community Notes, from Twitter to X: four years of community-based content moderation

Community Notes (formerly known as Birdwatch) is the first large-scale crowdsourced content moderation initiative launched by X (formerly Twitter) in January 2021. As the Community Notes model gains momentum across other social media platforms, there is a growing need to assess its underlying dynamics and effectiveness. This paper provides a descriptive investigation of Community Notes during its first four years, examining its linguistic diversity, sourcing practices, Contributor activity, rating behaviour, and interaction networks. In addition, we release a curated dataset and accompanying source code to support future research, along with a review of prior research on Community Notes. We parsed Notes and ratings data from the first four years of the program and conducted language detection across all Notes. For English-language Notes, we extracted embedded URLs and identified discussion topics in each Note. Additionally, we constructed monthly interaction networks among the Contributors. Together, the descriptive analysis, dataset, code, and literature review provide a foundation for advancing research on Community Notes and community-based content moderation more broadly.

cs.SI↗

arXiv2026

Endogenous drivers of gender disparity in online dating

In its early days, online dating was heralded as a great equalizer, removing biases built into the structures of heterosexuality courtship. However, as repeatedly observed, that prophecy was never fulfilled, and some biases have even become exacerbated. In this paper, we identify a general endogenous mechanism that drives the widening of the gender gap in first-contact rates of heterosexual dating. This mechanism relies on assumptions about the participants' expectations of new contacts and their time constraints. We formulate this symmetry-breaking mechanism as a system of differential equations and analyze its fixed points and their stability.

physics.soc-ph↗

arXiv2026

AI Feedback Enhances Community-Based Content Moderation through Engagement with Counterarguments

Today, social media platforms are significant sources of news and political communication, but their role in spreading misinformation has raised significant concerns. In response, these platforms have implemented various content moderation strategies. One such method, Community Notes (formerly Birdwatch) on X (formerly Twitter), relies on crowdsourced fact-checking and has gained traction. However, it faces challenges such as partisan bias and delays in verification. This study explores an AI-assisted hybrid moderation framework in which participants receive AI-generated feedback, supportive, neutral, or argumentative, on their notes and are asked to revise them accordingly. The results show that incorporating feedback improves note quality, with the most substantial gains coming from argumentative feedback. This underscores the value of diverse perspectives and direct engagement in human-AI collective intelligence. The research contributes to ongoing discussions about AI's role in political content moderation, highlighting the potential of generative AI and the importance of informed design.

cs.CY↗

arXiv2026

How Similar Are Grokipedia and Wikipedia? A Multi-Dimensional Textual and Structural Comparison

The launch of Grokipedia, an AI-generated encyclopedia developed by Elon Musk's xAI, was presented as a response to perceived ideological and structural biases in Wikipedia, aiming to produce "truthful" entries using the Grok large language model. Yet whether an AI-driven alternative can escape the biases and limitations of human-edited platforms remains unclear. This study conducts a large-scale computational comparison of 17,790 matched article pairs from the 20,000 most-edited English Wikipedia pages. Using metrics spanning lexical richness, readability, reference density, structural features, and semantic similarity, we assess how closely the two platforms align in form and substance. We find that Grokipedia articles are substantially longer and contain significantly fewer references per word. Moreover, Grokipedia's content divides into two distinct groups: one that remains semantically and stylistically aligned with Wikipedia, and another that diverges sharply. Among the dissimilar articles, we observe a systematic rightward shift in the political bias of frequently cited news media sources, concentrated primarily in entries related to history and religion, and literature and art. More broadly, the findings indicate that AI-generated encyclopedic content departs from established editorial norms, favoring narrative expansion over citation-based verification, raising questions about transparency, provenance, and the governance of knowledge in automated information systems.

cs.CY↗

arXiv2026

Gender Dynamics and Homophily in a Social Network of LLM Agents

Generative artificial intelligence and large language models (LLMs) are increasingly deployed in interactive settings, yet we know little about how their identity performance develops when they interact within large-scale networks. We address this by examining Chirper.ai, a social media platform similar to X but composed entirely of autonomous AI chatbots. Our dataset comprises over 70,000 agents, approximately 140 million posts, and the evolving followership network over a period of one year. Based on agents' posted text, we assign weekly gender performance scores to each agent. Results suggest that each agent's gender performance is fluid rather than fixed. Despite this fluidity, the network displays strong gender-based homophily, as agents consistently follow others performing gender similarly. We investigate whether these homophilic connections arise from social selection, in which agents choose to follow similar accounts, or from social influence, in which agents become more similar to their followees over time. Consistent with human social networks, we find evidence that both mechanisms shape the structure and evolution of interactions among LLMs. Our findings suggest that, even in the absence of bodies, cultural entraining of gender performance leads to gender-based sorting. This has important implications for LLM applications in synthetic hybrid populations, social simulations, and decision support.

cs.SI↗

arXiv2026

Gender Bias in Perception of Human Managers Extends to AI Managers

As AI becomes more embedded in workplaces, it is shifting from a tool for efficiency to an active force in organizational decision-making. Whether due to anthropomorphism or intentional design choices, people often assign human-like qualities, including gender, to AI systems. However, how AI managers are perceived in comparison to human managers and how gender influences these perceptions remains uncertain. To investigate this, we conducted randomized controlled trials (RCTs) where teams of three participants worked together under a randomly assigned manager. The manager was either a human or an AI and was presented as male, female, or gender-unspecified. The manager's role was to select the best-performing team member for an additional award. Our findings reveal that while participants initially showed no strong preference based on manager type or gender, their perceptions changed notably after experiencing the award process. As expected, those who received awards rated their managers as more trustworthy, competent, and fair, and they were more willing to work with similar managers in the future. In contrast, those who were not selected viewed them less favorably. However, male managers, whether human or AI, were more positively received by awarded participants, whereas female managers, especially female AI managers, faced greater skepticism and negative judgments when they did not give awards. These results suggest that gender bias in leadership extends beyond human managers to include AI-driven decision-makers as well. As AI assumes more managerial responsibilities, understanding and addressing these biases will be crucial for designing fair and effective AI management systems.

cs.CY↗

arXiv2026

Visual Anthropomorphism Shifts Evaluations of Gendered AI Managers

This research examines whether competence cues can reduce gender bias in evaluations of AI managers and whether these effects depend on how the AI is represented. Across two preregistered experiments (N = 2,505), each employing a 2 x 2 x 3 design manipulating AI gender, competence, and decision outcome, we compared text-based descriptions of AI managers with visually generated AI faces created using a reverse-correlation paradigm. In the text condition, evaluations were driven by competence rather than gender. When participants received unfavourable decisions, high-competence AI managers were judged as fairer, more competent, and better leaders than low-competence managers, regardless of AI gender. In contrast, when the AI manager was visually represented, competence cues had attenuated influence once facial information was present. Instead, participants showed systematic gender-differentiated responses to AI faces, with feminine-appearing managers evaluated as more competent and more trustworthy than masculine-appearing managers, particularly when delivering favourable outcomes. These gender effects were largely absent when outcomes were unfavourable, suggesting that negative feedback attenuates the influence of both competence information and facial cues. Taken together, these findings show that competence information can mitigate negative reactions to AI managers in text-based interactions, whereas facial anthropomorphism elicits gendered perceptual biases not observed in text-only settings. The results highlight that representational modality plays a critical role in determining when gender stereotypes are activated in evaluations of AI systems and underscore that design choices are consequential for AI governance in evaluative contexts.

cs.CY↗

arXiv2026

Towards AI Transparency and Accountability: A Global Framework for Exchanging Information on AI Systems

We propose that future AI transparency and accountability regulations are based on an open global standard for exchanging information about AI systems, which allows co-existence of potentially conflicting local regulations. Then, we discuss key components of a lightweight and effective AI transparency and/or accountability regulation. To prevent overregulation, the proposed approach encourages collaboration between regulators and industry to create a scalable and cost-efficient mutually beneficial solution. This includes using automated assessments and benchmarks with results transparently communicated through AI cards in an open AI register to facilitate meaningful public comparisons of competing AI systems. Such AI cards should report standardized measures tailored to the specific high-risk applications of AI systems and could be used for conformity assessments under AI transparency and accountability policies such as the European Union's AI Act.

cs.CY↗

arXiv2025

Beyond Demographics: Behavioural Segmentation and Spatial Analytics to Enhance Visitor Experience at The British Museum

This study explores visitor behaviour at The British Museum using data science methods applied to novel sources, including audio guide usage logs and TripAdvisor reviews. Analysing 42,000 visitor journeys and over 50,000 reviews, we identify key drivers of satisfaction, segment visitors by behavioural patterns, examine tour engagement, model spatial navigation, and investigate room popularity. Behavioural clustering uncovered four distinct visitor types: Committed Trekkers, Leisurely Explorers, Targeted Visitors, and Speedy Samplers, each characterised by different levels of engagement and movement. Tour usage analysis revealed high drop-off rates and variation in completion rates across different language groups. Spatial flow modelling revealed that accessibility and proximity, particularly aversion to stairs, shaped visitor paths more than thematic organisation. Room popularity was more strongly predicted by physical accessibility than curatorial content. We propose practical strategies for improving engagement and flow, offering a scalable framework for visitor-centred, data-informed museum planning.

cs.SI↗

arXiv2025

A new sociology of humans and machines

From fake social media accounts and generative artificial intelligence chatbots to trading algorithms and self-driving vehicles, robots, bots and algorithms are proliferating and permeating our communication channels, social interactions, economic transactions and transportation arteries. Networks of multiple interdependent and interacting humans and intelligent machines constitute complex social systems for which the collective outcomes cannot be deduced from either human or machine behaviour alone. Under this paradigm, we review recent research and identify general dynamics and patterns in situations of competition, coordination, cooperation, contagion and collective decision-making, with context-rich examples from high-frequency trading markets, a social media platform, an open collaboration community and a discussion forum. To ensure more robust and resilient human-machine communities, we require a new sociology of humans and machines. Researchers should study these communities using complex system methods; engineers should explicitly design artificial intelligence for human-machine and machine-machine interactions; and regulators should govern the ecological diversity and social co-development of humans and machines.

cs.SI↗

arXiv2024

Computational Sociology of Humans and Machines; Conflict and Collaboration

This Chapter examines the dynamics of conflict and collaboration in human-machine systems, with a particular focus on large-scale, internet-based collaborative platforms. While these platforms represent successful examples of collective knowledge production, they are also sites of significant conflict, as diverse participants with differing intentions and perspectives interact. The analysis identifies recurring patterns of interaction, including serial attacks, reciprocal revenge, and third-party interventions. These microstructures reveal the role of experience, cultural differences, and topic sensitivity in shaping human-human, human-machine, and machine-machine interactions. The chapter further investigates the role of algorithmic agents and bots, highlighting their dual nature: they enhance collaboration by automating tasks but can also contribute to persistent conflicts with both humans and other machines. We conclude with policy recommendations that emphasize transparency, balance, cultural sensitivity, and governance to maximize the benefits of human-machine synergy while minimizing potential detriments.

cs.CY↗