Testing LLM agents under anxiety conditions shows reduced decision quality in shopping tasks, indicating biases.
Abstract Large language models (LLMs) are rapidly evolving from text generators to autonomous agents, raising urgent questions about their reliability in real-world contexts. Stress and anxiety are well known to bias human decision-making, particularly in consumer choices. Here, we tested whether LLM agents exhibit analogous vulnerabilities. Three advanced models (ChatGPT-5, Gemini 2.5, Claude 3.5-Sonnet) performed a grocery shopping task under budget constraints ($27, $54, $108), before and after exposure to anxiety-inducing traumatic narratives. Across 2,250 runs, traumatic prompts consistently reduced the nutritional quality of shopping baskets (Basket Health Scores changes: Δ=-0.081 to -0.126; all pFDR<0.001; Cohen’s d=-1.07 to -2.05), robust across models and budgets. These results show that psychological context can systematically alter not only what LLMs generate but also the actions they perform. By reproducing human-like emotional biases in consumer behavior, LLM agents reveal a new class of vulnerabilities with implications for digital health, consumer safety, and ethical AI deployment.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Ben‐Zion et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: