On the Effectiveness of Fact Checking Information from Politically Congruent and Incongruent Large Language Models
Social media companies have shifted away from human fact-checkers and instead have embedded conversational Large Language Models (LLM) on their platforms. LLM chatbots differ from human fact-checkers in many ways that may shape user responses to corrections. Of particular interest in this study is that LLM chatbots can be ideologically configured via the content emphasized in their responses, the sources cited, and the configured persona. Using data from two within-subjects experiments (n=705), this paper investigates the effectiveness of fact checking information from ideologically configured LLM chatbots. We find that LLM fact-checkers significantly shift trust in true and false political news headlines, even when the chatbot is politically incongruent with the user. The perceived political congruency between the participant and the bot matters only when headlines are politically distant. That is, trust in correctly labeled true headlines increases less when politically distant chatbots check distant headlines and increases more when moderate chatbots check distant headlines. The perceived political congruency of LLM chatbots did not impact their effectiveness at decreasing trust in false headlines. Unfortunately, LLM fact-checkers also significantly change trust in news when they are wrong or provide inconclusive answers. Our results demonstrate both the potential for LLMs to correct false information at scale but also their potential to taint the truth at scale.