Persona-Conditioned Risk Behavior in Large Language Models: A Simulated Gambling Study with GPT-4.1
arXiv AIArchived Mar 18, 2026✓ Full text saved
arXiv:2603.15831v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly deployed as autonomous agents in uncertain, sequential decision-making contexts. Yet it remains poorly understood whether the behaviors they exhibit in such environments reflect principled cognitive patterns or simply surface-level prompt mimicry. This paper presents a controlled experiment in which GPT-4.1 was assigned one of three socioeconomic personas (Rich, Middle-income, and Poor) and placed in a
Full text archived locally
✦ AI Summary· Claude Sonnet
Computer Science > Artificial Intelligence
[Submitted on 16 Mar 2026]
Persona-Conditioned Risk Behavior in Large Language Models: A Simulated Gambling Study with GPT-4.1
Sankalp Dubedy
Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly deployed as autonomous agents in uncertain, sequential decision-making contexts. Yet it remains poorly understood whether the behaviors they exhibit in such environments reflect principled cognitive patterns or simply surface-level prompt mimicry. This paper presents a controlled experiment in which GPT-4.1 was assigned one of three socioeconomic personas (Rich, Middle-income, and Poor) and placed in a structured slot-machine environment with three distinct machine configurations: Fair (50%), Biased Low (35%), and Streak (dynamic probability increasing after consecutive losses). Across 50 independent iterations per condition and 6,950 recorded decisions, we find that the model reproduces key behavioral signatures predicted by Kahneman and Tversky's Prospect Theory without being instructed to do so. The Poor persona played a mean of 37.4 rounds per session (SD=15.5) compared to 1.1 rounds for the Rich persona (SD=0.31), a difference that is highly significant (Kruskal-Wallis H=393.5, p<2.2e-16). Risk scores by persona show large effect sizes (Cohen's d=4.15 for Poor vs Rich). Emotional labels appear to function as post-hoc annotations rather than decision drivers (chi-square=3205.4, Cramer's V=0.39), and belief-updating across rounds is negligible (Spearman rho=0.032 for Poor persona, p=0.016). These findings carry implications for LLM agent design, interpretability research, and the broader question of whether classical cognitive economic biases are implicitly encoded in large-scale pretrained language models.
Comments: 21 pages, 13 figures, 9 tables. Independent research. Submitted to arXiv for open dissemination
Subjects: Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI); Computation and Language (cs.CL)
Cite as: arXiv:2603.15831 [cs.AI]
(or arXiv:2603.15831v1 [cs.AI] for this version)
https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2603.15831
Focus to learn more
Submission history
From: Sankalp Dubedy [view email]
[v1] Mon, 16 Mar 2026 19:03:19 UTC (688 KB)
Access Paper:
HTML (experimental)
view license
Current browse context:
cs.AI
< prev | next >
new | recent | 2026-03
Change to browse by:
cs
cs.CL
References & Citations
NASA ADS
Google Scholar
Semantic Scholar
Export BibTeX Citation
Bookmark
Bibliographic Tools
Bibliographic and Citation Tools
Bibliographic Explorer Toggle
Bibliographic Explorer (What is the Explorer?)
Connected Papers Toggle
Connected Papers (What is Connected Papers?)
Litmaps Toggle
Litmaps (What is Litmaps?)
scite.ai Toggle
scite Smart Citations (What are Smart Citations?)
Code, Data, Media
Demos
Related Papers
About arXivLabs
Which authors of this paper are endorsers? | Disable MathJax (What is MathJax?)