top of page
Boundless Logo_Hor.png

Digital Library

Short Dialogues with AI Reduce Belief in Antisemitic Conspiracy Theories

Topic:

Antisemitism & Antizionism

Principal Investigators:

Nathaniel Rabb, Alexander M. Levontin, Adam Berinsky, Gordon Pennycook, Thomas H. Costello, David G. Rand

Study Date: 

2025

Source:

Anti-Defamation League (ADL),Center for Antisemitism Research

Key Findings:

"- Antisemitic conspiracy beliefs are common and closely linked to negative attitudes toward Jews. Participants who endorsed more antisemitic conspiracy theories consistently expressed less favorable views of Jewish people. - A brief dialogue with an AI significantly reduced belief in these conspiracies. Participants who engaged in a targeted, fact-based conversation with Claude 3.5 showed notably larger drops in belief than those who received only a label warning or who discussed an unrelated topic. - The effect was broad and reliable. Reductions in belief appeared across all antisemitic conspiracy theories tested and held up under multiple robustness checks. - Among participants who initially held unfavorable views of Jews, attitudes improved. The AI dialogue increased favorability toward Jews within this subgroup, indicating that correcting specific misconceptions can meaningfully influence broader attitudes. - The changes showed partial durability. When participants were surveyed again about a month later, roughly half of the initial reductions in belief—and about half of the improvement in attitudes among initially unfavorable participants—remained. - Bottom line: Brief, fact-focused conversations with an AI can meaningfully reduce belief in antisemitic conspiracies and, for those starting out most negative, can also soften antisemitic attitudes."

Methodology:

The study used a preregistered online experiment with U.S. adults. Participants first rated their attitudes toward various groups and assessed the truth of several conspiracy statements, including six antisemitic items. Those who endorsed at least one antisemitic conspiracy were asked to describe their belief in their own words; this description was summarized by an AI into a single statement, which participants rated for confidence. They were then randomly assigned to (1) a debunking dialogue with Claude 3.5, (2) a neutral dialogue on an unrelated topic, or (3) the neutral dialogue followed by a warning that their belief was a dangerous conspiracy. Afterward, participants reassessed their belief and attitudes toward Jews. A follow-up survey approximately one month later re-measured these outcomes to evaluate persistence of effects.
bottom of page