ArticlePNAS nexus2026
How large language models judge and influence human cooperation.
Article in PNAS nexus, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Humans increasingly rely on large language models (LLMs) to support decisions in social settings. Previous work suggests that such tools can shape people's moral judgments. However, how LLMs evaluate decisions in social dilemmas, and the long-term implications of LLM-based assessments on human cooperation-driven by indirect reciprocity, reputations, and the capacity to judge interactions of others-remain unclear. We evaluate the social norms of 21 state-of-the-art LLMs when judging more than 40,000 fictitious decisions in social dilemmas. Through an evolutionary game-theoretical model, we study prosociality in populations adhering to these norms, theoretically studying their potential impact on long-term human cooperation. We observe a remarkable agreement in LLMs when evaluating actions against opponents perceived as
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.