Skip to content
aiqbench takeAI Research

aiqbench analysis

AnchorBench establishes a critical new standard for evaluating cognitive biases in large language models by distinguishing between irrelevant and plausible anchors across multiple reasoning pathways. The study reveals that high accuracy on control tasks does not guarantee robustness, as even frontier models remain susceptible to manipulation when presented with semantically relevant but misleading information. This benchmark is essential for researchers aiming to quantify decision-making vulnerabilities and improve the reliability of AI systems in real-world applications where bias mitigation is paramount.
Source coveringarXiv
What this isA model's reading of the article and related coverage, written for aiqbench. Not the publisher's words.

AnchorBench: A Multi-Pathway Benchmark for the Anchoring Effect in LLMs

arXiv2 min read

arXiv:2608.14320v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: The anchoring effect is a cognitive bias in which an initial reference value shifts a later judgment toward itself. This effect is well established in human judgment and decision-making, and recent work suggests that large language models (LLMs) exhibit similar behavior. However, existing work on anchoring in LLMs typically evaluates only a narrow set of anchor pathways and rarely distinguishes irrelevant from plausible anchors. We introduce AnchorBench, a benchmark for the anchoring effect in LLMs that evaluates multiple anchor pathways under an explicit anchor relevance axis. Across fourteen models, including ten open-weight models and four frontier API models, and a large set of controlled prompts, we find that (1) anchoring is strongly pathway-dependent, (2) plausible anchors usually induce larger shifts than irrelevant ones when introduced through stronger pathways, (3) anchor influence generally weakens as the anchor moves farther from the evidence-supported answer, most clearly on External and RAG, and (4) high task accuracy on the anchor-free control condition (Acc$_{10}$: answers within 10 points of gold) does not guarantee robustness: even frontier API models above 95% control accuracy remain susceptible to plausible anchors.

Abstract:The anchoring effect is a cognitive bias in which an initial reference value shifts a later judgment toward itself. This effect is well established in human judgment and decision-making, and recent work suggests that large language models (LLMs) exhibit similar behavior. However, existing work on anchoring in LLMs typically evaluates only a narrow set of anchor pathways and rarely distinguishes irrelevant from plausible anchors. We introduce AnchorBench, a benchmark for the anchoring effect in LLMs that evaluates multiple anchor pathways under an explicit anchor relevance axis. Across fourteen models, including ten open-weight models and four frontier API models, and a large set of controlled prompts, we find that (1) anchoring is strongly pathway-dependent, (2) plausible anchors usually induce larger shifts than irrelevant ones when introduced through stronger pathways, (3) anchor influence generally weakens as the anchor moves farther from the evidence-supported answer, most clearly on External and RAG, and (4) high task accuracy on the anchor-free control condition (Acc$_{10}$: answers within 10 points of gold) does not guarantee robustness: even frontier API models above 95% control accuracy remain susceptible to plausible anchors.

Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI); Computation and Language (cs.CL)

arXiv:2608.14320 [cs.AI]

(or arXiv:2608.14320v1 [cs.AI] for this version)

https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2608.14320 Focus to learn more arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration)

arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.

Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.

Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.

Full text under the publisher's open licence · 280 words

Related coverage