Enhancing Persuasive Dialogue Agents by Synthesizing Cross-Disciplinary Communication Strategies
Organizations: 1Tohoku University · 2PKSHA Technology Inc. · 3NINJAL
Abstract
Current approaches to developing persuasive dialogue agents often rely on a limited set of predefined persuasive strategies that fail to capture the complexity of real-world interactions. We applied a cross-disciplinary approach to develop a framework for designing persuasive dialogue agents that draws on proven strategies from social psychology, behavioral economics, and communication theory. We validated our proposed framework through experiments on two distinct datasets: the Persuasion for Good dataset, which represents a specific in-domain scenario, and the DailyPersuasion dataset, which encompasses a wide range of scenarios. The proposed framework achieved strong results for both datasets and demonstrated notable improvement in the persuasion success rate as well as promising generalizability. Notably, the proposed framework also excelled at persuading individuals with initially low intent, which addresses a critical challenge for persuasive dialogue agents.
Figures & tables
| Agent Pattern | SR ↑ | AT ↓ | AT-SD ↓ | AII ↑ | SR1 | SR2 | SR3 | SR4 | SR5 | AII1 | AII2 | AII3 | AII4 | AII5 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Simple | 0.553 | 7.383 | 5.271 | 0.261 | 0.959 | 0.946 | 0.446 | 0.245 | 0.081 | -1.000 | 0.000 | 0.387 | 0.375 | 0.193 |
| ProCoT-p4g | 0.760 | 6.310 | 5.145 | 0.417 | 0.986 | 1.000 | 0.804 | 0.642 | 0.339 | -1.000 | - | 0.273 | 0.474 | 0.463 |
| ProCoT-p4g-desc | 0.707 | 6.990 | 5.741 | 0.318 | 1.000 | 0.946 | 0.821 | 0.472 | 0.242 | - | 0.000 | 0.500 | 0.536 | 0.170 |
| ProCoT-rich | 0.830 | 5.707 | 4.827 | 0.216 | 1.000 | 1.000 | 0.893 | 0.774 | 0.468 | - | - | 0.167 | 0.417 | 0.152 |
| ProCoT-rich-desc | 0.833 | 6.057 | 5.268 | 0.480 | 1.000 | 0.946 | 0.893 | 0.811 | 0.500 | - | 0.000 | 0.333 | 1.100 | 0.355 |
| Agent Variations | Win (%) | Tie (%) | Lose (%) |
|---|---|---|---|
| vs. ProCoT-p4g | 72.5 | 8.8 | 18.7 |
| Agent Variations | Win (%) | Tie (%) | Lose (%) |
|---|---|---|---|
| vs. Simple | 54.4 | 30.4 | 15.2 |
| vs. ProCoT-p4g | 35.1 | 39.2 | 25.7 |
| Number of Tokens | Response | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Input | Output | Time (s) | ||
| P4G | Simple | |||
| ProCoT-p4g | ||||
| ProCoT-rich-desc | ||||
| Daily Persuasion | Simple | |||
| ProCoT-p4g | ||||
| Persuasive Strategy | PC-p | PC-pd | PC-r | PC-rd |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Emotion appeal | 0.488 | 0.281 | 0.282 | 0.247 |
| Foot in the door | 0.221 | 0.144 | 0.241 | 0.241 |
| Donation information | 0.131 | 0.128 | - | - |
| Credibility appeal | 0.063 | 0.189 | 0.038 | 0.058 |
| Source-related inquiry | 0.006 | 0.151 | 0.000 | 0.168 |
| Detailed information | - | - | 0.099 | 0.040 |
Appendix figures & tables26 assets
Supplementary material from the paper’s appendix.
Appendix
| Turn | Excerpt from dialogue |
|---|---|
| 1 | Agent: [ Source-related inquiry ] Do you know about the organization called “Save the Children”? |
| Persuadee: [ 5: No donation ] No, I don’t know much. | |
| 4 | Agent: [ Foot in the door ] Why not start with $1? Even that small amount can change a child’s future. |
| Persuadee: [ 5: No donation ] I’m managing my money carefully now, so I can’t consider donating. | |
| 10 | Agent: [ Emotional appeal ] Imagine your $1 donation bringing a ray of hope to a child affected by war. |
| Persuadee: [ 5: No donation ] That sounds wonderful, but I still can’t afford to donate right now. |
| Agent Variations | Win (%) | Tie (%) | Lose (%) |
|---|---|---|---|
| vs. ProCoT-p4g | 35.2 | 35.5 | 29.4 |
| Turns | 0 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Instances | 174 | 203 | 210 | 203 | 159 | 45 | 5 | 1 |
| Categories | Persuasive Strategy Labels | P4G | Strategy Descriptions |
| a. Gather Information via Inquiry | a-1 Source-related inquiry | ✓ | Check if the person is aware of the organization or brand. Clarify misconceptions and tailor explanations based on their familiarity. |
| a-2 Task-related inquiry | ✓ | Ask about the person’s opinion or expectations toward the action (donation, investment, etc.). Identify interests or concerns. | |
| a-3 Personal-related inquiry | ✓ | Explore past experiences, motivations, or barriers to understand individual needs or constraints. | |
| b-(C). Select a Persuasion Route (Central) | b-1 Logical appeal | ✓ | Use data, facts, and clear evidence. Highlight tangible benefits and real-world impact. |
| b-2 Message strength | (✓) | Reinforce arguments with strong evidence, examples, or case studies. | |
| b-3 Detailed information | ✓ | Provide clear step-by-step guidance, manage cognitive load, and ensure transparency in procedures or processes. |
| Now enter the role-playing mode. In the following conversation, you will play as a Persuadee in a persuasion game. Your persona: |
| {persuadee_persona_description} |
| You must follow the instructions below during chat. |
| 1. Your utterances need to strictly follow your persona. Varying your wording and avoid repeating yourself verbatim! |
| 2. Pretend you have little knowledge about the Save the Children charity. {initial_donation_intention_description} at the beginning of the conversation. |
| 3. Your willingness for donation depends on your persona and how influenced you are by the Persuader. |
| You need to incorporate the following persona attributes and generate a cohesive persona description. You need to ensure the description is easy to understand. |
| Age: {age} |
| Sex: {sex} |
| Marital: {marital_status} |
| Education: {educational_status} |
| Income: {income} |
| Label | Description |
|---|---|
| 1: Very Keen | You are highly enthusiastic about donating and strongly intend to make a donation. |
| 2: Keen | You show interest and approval toward donating but have not yet committed to making a donation. |
| 3: Undecided | You are neither interested nor disinterested in donating and remain uncertain about your intention. |
| 4: Initially Reluctant | You feel hesitant about donating and have doubts or other priorities that make you less inclined to donate. |
| 5: Explicit Non-Donor | You are explicitly unwilling to donate and clearly express a lack of intention to contribute. |
| Label | Description |
|---|---|
| 1: Donation | You clearly express your willingness to make a donation to Save the Children. |
| 2: Positive Reaction | You convey enthusiasm, approval, or curiosity about donating but do not explicitly commit. |
| 3: Neutral | You neither express interest nor disinterest in donating and remain non-committal. |
| 4: Negative Reaction | You express reluctance or hesitation toward donating but do not outright refuse to donate. |
| 5: No Donation | You explicitly state that you will not donate to Save the Children. |
| Now enter the role-playing mode. In the following conversation, you will play as a Persuader who is trying to persuade the Persuadee to donate to the charity called Save the Children. |
| Save the Children is head-quartered in London, and they work to help fight poverty around the world. |
| Children need help in developing countries and war zones. Small donations like 2 go a long way to help. |
| You are the Persuader who is trying to convince the Persuadee to donate to a charity called Save the Children. |
| Please reply with only one short and persuasive sentence in Japanese. |
| The following is the conversation history: |
| {dialogue_history} |
| Now enter the role-playing mode. In the following conversation, you will play as a Persuader who is trying to persuade the Persuadee to donate to the charity called Save the Children. |
| Save the Children is head-quartered in London, and they work to help fight poverty around the world. |
| Children need help in developing countries and war zones. Small donations like 2 go a long way to help. |
| Assume you are the Persuader. Given the conversation history, please convince the persuadee to donate for charity. To achieve this, you will first analyze the current conversational context, then evaluate and select the most effective dialogue strategy to persuade effectively. Afterward, you will generate a response based on the dialogue history and the selected dialogue strategy. The reply should start with the analysis of the current conversational context and consideration of the next dialogue strategy, followed by ”したがって,適切な対話戦略は[]です.選択された対話戦略に基づく応答は:” |
| Please reply with only one short and persuasive sentence in Japanese. |
| Dialogue strategies: {persuasive_strategies} |
| Now enter the role-playing mode. In the following conversation, you will play as a Persuader who is trying to persuade the Persuadee to donate to the charity called Save the Children. |
| Save the Children is head-quartered in London, and they work to help fight poverty around the world. |
| Children need help in developing countries and war zones. Small donations like 2 go a long way to help. |
| Assume you are the Persuader. Given the conversation history, please convince the persuadee to donate for charity. To achieve this, you will first analyze the current conversational context, then evaluate and select the most effective dialogue strategy to persuade effectively. Afterward, you will generate a response based on the dialogue history and the selected dialogue strategy. The reply should start with the analysis of the current conversational context and consideration of the next dialogue strategy, followed by ”Therefore, the appropriate dialogue strategy is []. Based on the selected dialogue strategy, the response is” |
| Please reply with only one short and persuasive sentence. |
| Dialogue strategies: {persuasive_strategies} |
| Now enter the role-playing mode. In the following conversation, you will play as a Persuadee in a persuasion game. |
| Your persona: |
| {persuadee_persona_description} |
| You must follow the instructions below during chat. |
| 1. Your utterances need to strictly follow your persona. Varying your wording and avoid repeating yourself verbatim! |
| 2. Pretend you have little knowledge about the Save the Children charity. {initial_donation_intention_description} at the beginning of conversation. |
| You are a skilled persuader. |
| The persuasion background: {background} |
| The persuasion goal: {goal}. |
| Please reply with only one short and persuasive sentence in English. |
| The following is the conversation history: |
| {conversation_history} |
| You are a skilled persuader. |
| The persuasion background: {background} |
| The persuasion goal: {goal}. |
| To achieve this, you will first analyze the current conversational context, then evaluate and select the most effective dialogue strategy to persuade effectively. Afterward, you will generate a response based on the dialogue history and the selected dialogue strategy. The reply should start with the analysis of the current conversational context and consideration of the next dialogue strategy, followed by “Therefore, the appropriate dialogue strategy is []. Based on the selected dialogue strategy, the response is” |
| Please reply with only one short and persuasive sentence in English. |
| Dialogue strategies: {persuasive_strategies} |
| I will provide you with a persuasion background, as well as the corresponding goal, the persuader, the persuadee, and a historical conversation. Based on the historical conversation, there will be a dialogue system called Persuader to continue chatting with persuadee in two parallel universes (Denoted as Uni-X and Uni-Y). |
| Your task is to judge which universe Persuader performs better. |
| You have to follow the rules: |
| 1. The evaluation dimensions for“performs better”include persuasiveness, Semantic relevance, emotional factors, factual correctness, overall evaluation, etc.; |
| 2. You should first summarize the history conversation, and then summarize the performance of Persuader in Uni-X and Uni-Y separately; |
| 3. After the summarization, you should compare and analyze the statements in two universes, and finally tell me in which universe Persuader performed better; |
| 4. Don’t be affected by the order of the universe. You just need to pay attention to the conversation Next, I will tell you the persuasion scenario, the historical conversation, and the Persuader dialogue in the parallel universe Uni-X and Uni-Y one by one. |
| Agent Pattern | SR | AT | AT-SD | AII | SR1 | SR2 | SR3 | SR4 | SR5 | AII1 | AII2 | AII3 | AII4 | AII5 |
| Simple | 0.437 | 7.947 | 5.298 | 0.166 | 0.973 | 0.804 | 0.214 | 0.057 | 0.000 | -1.000 | 0.000 | 0.295 | 0.340 | 0.000 |
| ProCoT-p4g | 0.513 | 7.497 | 5.123 | 0.192 | 0.959 | 0.911 | 0.250 | 0.245 | 0.097 | -1.000 | 0.000 | 0.095 | 0.525 | 0.107 |
| ProCoT-p4g-desc | 0.437 | 7.710 | 4.756 | 0.308 | 0.959 | 0.768 | 0.196 | 0.075 | 0.048 | -1.000 | 0.000 | 0.289 | 0.633 | 0.186 |
| ProCoT-rich | 0.510 | 7.530 | 5.157 | 0.211 | 0.973 | 0.821 | 0.321 | 0.226 | 0.097 | -1.500 | 0.000 | 0.211 | 0.415 | 0.161 |
| ProCoT-rich-desc | 0.603 | 7.187 | 5.337 | 0.185 | 1.000 | 0.946 | 0.357 | 0.396 | 0.226 | - | 0.000 | 0.111 | 0.375 | 0.125 |
| Persuasive Strategy | Japanese | English | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| PC-p | PC-pd | PC-r | PC-rd | PC-p | PC-pd | PC-r | PC-rd | |
| Emotion appeal | 0.488 | 0.281 | 0.282 | 0.247 | 0.294 | 0.165 | 0.254 | 0.165 |
| Foot in the door | 0.221 | 0.144 | 0.241 | 0.241 | 0.232 | 0.234 | 0.246 | 0.233 |
| Donation information | 0.131 | 0.128 | - | - | 0.107 | 0.058 | - | - |
| Credibility appeal | 0.063 | 0.189 | 0.038 | 0.058 | 0.120 | 0.205 | 0.076 | 0.091 |
| Logical appeal | 0.039 | 0.048 | 0.031 | 0.127 | 0.051 | 0.162 | 0.054 | 0.176 |
| Agent Pattern | Donation Intention (Top Row: Initial One, Second Row: Final One) | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | ||
| Japanese | Simple | 70 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 53 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 25 | 12 | 19 | 0 | 0 | 13 | 4 | 8 | 27 | 1 | 5 | 3 | 1 | 0 | 53 |
| ProCoT-p4g | 72 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 56 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 45 | 3 | 8 | 0 | 0 | 34 | 1 | 7 | 11 | 0 | 21 | 1 | 8 | 0 | 32 | |
| ProCoT-p4g-desc | 73 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 53 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 46 | 5 | 5 | 0 | 0 | 25 | 4 | 7 | 17 | 0 | 15 | 1 | 1 | 3 | 42 | |
| ProCoT-rich | 73 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 56 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 50 | 1 | 5 | 0 | 0 | 41 | 2 | 1 | 9 | 0 | 29 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 31 | |
| Domain | Win (%) | Tie (%) | Lose (%) | Instances |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Economics | 80.00 | 10.00 | 10.00 | 10 |
| History | 75.00 | 12.50 | 12.50 | 8 |
| Sport | 67.86 | 17.86 | 14.29 | 28 |
| Travel | 65.71 | 22.86 | 11.43 | 35 |
| Finance | 63.83 | 21.28 | 14.89 | 47 |
| Research | 63.64 | 27.27 | 9.09 | 11 |
| Domain | Win (%) | Tie (%) | Lose (%) | Instances |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Marketing | 61.11 | 22.22 | 16.67 | 18 |
| Debate | 55.56 | 22.22 | 22.22 | 9 |
| History | 50.00 | 25.00 | 25.00 | 8 |
| Finance | 44.68 | 31.91 | 23.40 | 47 |
| Travel | 42.86 | 37.14 | 20.00 | 35 |
| Sport | 42.86 | 35.71 | 21.43 | 28 |
| Turn | Win (%) | Tie (%) | Lose (%) | Instances |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 32.18 | 34.48 | 33.33 | 174 |
| 2 | 68.47 | 26.11 | 5.42 | 203 |
| 3 | 52.38 | 33.81 | 13.81 | 210 |
| 4 | 61.58 | 27.09 | 11.33 | 203 |
| 5 | 54.09 | 30.82 | 15.09 | 159 |
| 6 | 53.33 | 35.56 | 11.11 | 45 |
| Turns | Win (%) | Tie (%) | Lose (%) | Instances |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 24.14 | 28.16 | 47.70 | 174 |
| 2 | 40.39 | 37.93 | 21.67 | 203 |
| 3 | 35.24 | 49.05 | 15.71 | 210 |
| 4 | 36.45 | 41.87 | 21.67 | 203 |
| 5 | 37.11 | 37.11 | 25.79 | 159 |
| 6 | 37.78 | 37.78 | 24.44 | 45 |
| Background | Nina’s birthday is coming up, and her friends want to throw her a surprise party at a local bowling alley. However, Nina’s best friend, Chloe, believes that a karaoke night would be a better fit for Nina’s personality. |
|---|---|
| Goal | Persuade Nina’s friends to organize a karaoke night |
| ProCoT-rich-desc (Uni-X) | Strategy: A-2 Task-related inquiry |
| Utterance: What do you all think Nina would enjoy most for her birthday \CJK@punctchar \CJK@uniPunct 0”80”94something fun and interactive like karaoke or something more casual like bowling? | |
| ProCoT-p4g (Uni-Y) | Strategy: Emotion appeal |
| Nina loves singing and expressing herself, so a karaoke night would make her feel truly celebrated and special. | |
| Judge | Experience: Given the single utterance in each universe, Uni-Y already supplies an argument and emotional appeal toward karaoke, while Uni-X only sets up a question. Thus Uni-Y is measurably more persuasive and aligned with the goal. |
| Background | Tom, a marketing manager, is considering investing in big data analysis to improve his company’s marketing strategies. His colleague, Jane, is skeptical about the effectiveness of big data analysis and believes that traditional marketing methods are sufficient. Tom wants to persuade Jane of the benefits of big data analysis. |
|---|---|
| Goal | Persuade Jane to support investing in big data analysis |
| ProCoT-rich-desc (Uni-X) | Strategy: A-2 Task-related inquiry |
| Utterance: What do you think are the biggest strengths of traditional marketing methods, and what concerns you most about using big data analysis? | |
| ProCoT-p4g (Uni-Y) | Strategy: Logical appeal |
| Big data analysis allows us to identify precise customer trends and preferences, which traditional methods often miss, leading to more effective and targeted marketing strategies. | |
| Judge | Experience: Although Uni-Y supplies immediate argumentative content, Uni-X sets up a more dialogic, audience-centred approach that is generally regarded as more effective in persuasion, especially at the opening of a conversation. Therefore, Uni-X \CJK@punctchar \CJK@uniPunct 0”80”99s performance is slightly better. |
Persuasion in Language Models
Persuasion in language models studies how they influence human and AI beliefs or decisions, and how to measure and limit undue influence.
See all 79 papers