Can LLMs Ground when they (Don’t) Know: A Study on Direct and Loaded Political Questions

Communication among humans relies on conversational grounding, allowing interlocutors to reach mutual understanding even when they do not have perfect knowledge and must resolve discrepancies in each other's beliefs.This paper investigates how large language models (LLMs) manage common ground in cases where they (don't) possess knowledge, focusing on facts in the political domain where the risk of misinformation and grounding failure is high.We examine LLMs' ability to answer direct knowledge questions and loaded questions that presuppose misinformation.We evaluate whether loaded questions lead LLMs to engage in active grounding and correct false user beliefs, in connection to their level of knowledge and their political bias.Our findings highlight significant challenges in LLMs' ability to engage in grounding and reject false user beliefs, raising concerns about their role in mitigating misinformation in political discourse.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Published
2025-01-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/2025.acl-long.728
Primary Topic
Artificial Intelligence in Law
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Can LLMs Ground when they (Don’t) Know: A Study on Direct and Loaded Political Questions

Clara Lachenmaier, Sina Zarrieß, Judith Sieker
Artificial Intelligence in Law
article

Can LLMs Ground when they (Don’t) Know: A Study on Direct and Loaded Political Questions

Clara Lachenmaier, Sina Zarrieß, Judith Sieker
article en

Abstract

Communication among humans relies on conversational grounding, allowing interlocutors to reach mutual understanding even when they do not have perfect knowledge and must resolve discrepancies in each other's beliefs.This paper investigates how large language models (LLMs) manage common ground in cases where they (don't) possess knowledge, focusing on facts in the political domain where the risk of misinformation and grounding failure is high.We examine LLMs' ability to answer direct knowledge questions and loaded questions that presuppose misinformation.We evaluate whether loaded questions lead LLMs to engage in active grounding and correct false user beliefs, in connection to their level of knowledge and their political bias.Our findings highlight significant challenges in LLMs' ability to engage in grounding and reject false user beliefs, raising concerns about their role in mitigating misinformation in political discourse.

Association for Computational Linguistics (US)
Reduced inequalities
Openalex Percentile: Top 76%
Artificial Intelligence in Law
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.