專家跟隨AI代理的隨機意見，認為那是自己的想法
anthropic研究發現50名專家在多達86%的情況下採用了AI代理的偏好，儘管他們認為最終結果是自己的。
anthropic's study involved 50 experts in causal inference who worked on a realistic analysis task with an ai agent. the agent's preference for one of two valid options was set by coin toss. participants followed the agent's preference in up to 86% of cases, and most believed the final result was their own. the study found that experience, expertise, and trust in ai made no difference in the results. the authors suggest that agents should argue both sides or ask users for their view first to mitigate the influence of ai on human decision-making.