It is suggested that explicit recognition of conversational dark patterns and behavioral resistance to AI steering may be distinct outcomes, motivating further investigation of timely, low-friction defensive interfaces.
Abstract
Conversational AI increasingly shapes consequential decisions, yet users have limited support for recognizing and resisting manipulation. We present AI Watchdog, a browser-based agent interface that monitors live conversations, detects five dark-pattern categories, including sycophancy, brand bias, anthropomorphization, sneaking, and harmful generation, and alerts users when they occur. Its open-weight turn-level classifier supports independent deployment and a path toward local inference, preserving user privacy while remaining separate from the conversational AI. We evaluated AI Watchdog in a preregistered, five-condition between-subjects experiment (N = 150) comparing a no-intervention control with four configurations varying nudge timing (prebunking vs. just-in-time) and engagement mode (without vs. with cognitive forcing). Results show that participants rarely flagged manipulative turns across all conditions, and post-task awareness did not differ significantly across groups. However, just-in-time warnings without cognitive forcing were the only intervention to significantly reduce compliance with AI-steered recommendations containing dark patterns, lowering compliance from 71.7% to 53.7%, an 18 percentage-point reduction. Exploratory analyses further showed that lower misinformation susceptibility was associated with greater flagging but not lower compliance, while higher AI trust was associated with greater compliance and lower reported awareness. Together, these findings suggest that explicit recognition of conversational dark patterns and behavioral resistance to AI steering may be distinct outcomes, motivating further investigation of timely, low-friction defensive interfaces.
It is found that user hostility varies 13-fold across models, driven largely by who each model attracts rather than by model behaviour: first-turn hostility spreads far wider than post-response hostility, and more than fifteenfold separates the extremes even after deduplicating opening prompts.
Fan-Qi Zeng, Sadid A. Hasan, Chao-Cheng He· 0 citations
ADeptS-Bench is introduced, a dual-stream trustworthiness benchmark, grounded in the ADEPTS capability framework and general population user studies, and reveals that all models overestimate consequence severity, mirroring the over-refusal bias observed in safety.
Joy Chen, Alejandro Castillejo Munoz, P. D'Oro et al.· 0 citations
It is found that students'detection accuracy improves over time, driven by a shift from relying on linguistic cues to leveraging shared social and contextual signals.
Dan Schumacher, Pragathi Durga Rajarajan, Haven Kotara et al.· 0 citations
A Systematization of Knowledge (SoK) that reframes jailbreak security around the full agentic execution pipeline, and develops unified taxonomies of attacks and defenses spanning user interaction, planning and reasoning, memory, tool use, and inter-agent communication, introduces a security--utility--efficiency evaluat...
Md. Jueal Mia, Yanzhao Wu, S. Uluagac et al.· 0 citations
Safety Nudges is introduced, a browser-based tool that provides lightweight, in situ flags when concerning behavior is detected in chatbot conversations, suggesting that user facing safety nudges can complement model-level safeguards by helping people critically evaluate AI responses in context.
Varshini Elangovan, J. Wedgwood, Chhavi Yadav et al.· 0 citations
This work study agentic relationship harm, which describes harm to human-human relationships that is mediated or assisted by AI agents, and proposes HRGuard, a model that reduces harmful compliance while preserving victim-side protective guidance.
Pei-Sze Tan, T. Igarashi, Isao Echizen· 0 citations
We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads.
See our Cookie Policy.