Can Induced Emotion Bias LLM Behaviors in Sequential Decision Making?

While LLM agents have demonstrated remarkable task-oriented abilities such as planning, reasoning, and action, few works have treated them as complete human personalities where emotional dimensions hold equal importance. In this paper, we introduce a novel benchmark to systematically assess whether LLM agents can simulate coherent, human-like psychology. Specifically, our benchmark constructs 11 diverse human characters grounded in orthogonal Big Five personality traits, with each profile deeply integrated with 1,000 structured autobiographical-style episodic memories distributed across theory-grounded developmental life stages. To rigorously evaluate the psychological manifestations of LLMs, we designed a curated suite of 64 decision-making scenarios, guided by the DIAMONDS taxonomy, a psychological framework that characterizes situations along eight dimensions: Duty, Intellect, Adversity, Mating, pOsitivity, Negativity, Deception, and Sociality. By subjecting agents to varying scenarios, the benchmark evaluates whether they can consolidate their innate personality traits and autobiographical memories to make behavioral decisions that are consistent with their specific psychological profiles. After systematic human validation and filtering, we obtained a benchmark consisting of 673 multiple-choice questions (MCQs). We believe this benchmark provides a principled and scalable testbed for studying human-like emotions, personality consistency, and value-consistent behavioural decision-making in LLM-based agents.

We examine whether large language models (LLMs) can predict biased decision-making in conversational settings, and whether their predictions capture not only human cognitive biases but also how those effects change under cognitive load. In a pre-registered study (N = 1,648), participants completed six classic decision-making tasks via a chatbot with dialogues of varying complexity. Participants exhibited two well-documented cognitive biases: the Framing Effect and the Status Quo Bias. Increased dialogue complexity resulted in participants reporting higher mental demand. This increase in cognitive load selectively, but significantly, increased the effect of the biases, demonstrating the load-bias interaction. We then evaluated whether LLMs (GPT-4, GPT-5, and open-source models) could predict individual decisions given demographic information and prior dialogue. While results were mixed across choice problems, LLM predictions that incorporated dialogue context were significantly more accurate in several key scenarios. Importantly, their predictions reproduced the same bias patterns and load-bias interactions observed in humans. Across all models tested, the GPT-4 family consistently aligned with human behavior, outperforming GPT-5 and open-source models in both predictive accuracy and fidelity to human-like bias patterns. These findings advance our understanding of LLMs as tools for simulating human decision-making and inform the design of conversational agents that adapt to user biases.

This paper studies the behavior of language models in a multi-agent crowd simulation, focusing on how affect propagates among agents that perceive and appraise one another. Each agent perceives its neighbors through visual, auditory, and tactile channels, then appraises these perceptions in light of its prompted personality profile, memory, current affective state, and situational context. Appraisal is carried out by an LLM, which updates the agent's internal affective state and selects its outward expression. The architecture contains no hand-authored mechanism for directly transferring affective state between agents; instead, inter-agent influence arises through the perception-appraisal-expression loop. The agent representation draws on the Big Five personality model and Russell's circumplex model of affect. To limit latency, low-level steering and navigation are handled by a conventional crowd simulator operating independently of the LLM-based cognitive layer. We evaluate the architecture across five scenario environments spanning alarming, joyful, and neutral situations in different spatial layouts. The results show that the system produces emotional contagion dynamics with spatial, temporal, and personality-dependent structure in sparse, small crowds. Alarm spreads from seeded agents as a traveling front, the mean alarmed fraction settles at a nonzero plateau, and the distribution of prompted personality profiles determines whether an ambiguous alarm ignites panic and whether a provocation is interpreted as anger or fear. We further evaluate the appraisal step through controlled experiments across prompt variants, sampling temperatures, and four model backends, showing that the dynamics are backend-dependent.