Salespeople frequently face the dynamic screening decision of whether to persist in a conversation or abandon it to pursue the next lead. Yet, little is known about how these decisions are made, whether they are efficient, or how to improve them. We study these decisions in the context of high-volume outbound sales where leads are ample, but time is scarce and failure is common. We formalize the dynamic screening decision as an optimal stopping problem and develop a generative language model-based sequential decision agent - a stopping agent - that learns whether and when to quit conversations by imitating a retrospectively-inferred optimal stopping policy. Our approach handles high-dimensional textual states, scales to large language models, and works with both open-source and proprietary language models. When applied to calls from a large European telecommunications firm, our stopping agent reduces the time spent on failed calls by 54% while preserving nearly all sales; reallocating the time saved increases expected sales by up to 37%. Upon examining the linguistic cues that drive salespeople's quitting decisions, we find that they tend to overweight a few salient expressions of consumer disinterest and mispredict call failure risk, suggesting cognitive bounds on their ability to make real-time conversational decisions. Our findings highlight the potential of artificial intelligence algorithms to correct cognitively-bounded human decisions and improve salesforce efficiency.

Generative AI (GenAI) offers new opportunities for customer support in online travel agencies, yet little is known about how its design influences user engagement, purchase behavior, and user experience. We report results from a randomized field experiment in online travel itinerary planning, comparing GenAI that expressed (A) positive enthusiasm, (B) neutral expression, and (C) no tone instructions (control). Users in group A wrote significantly longer prompts than those in groups B and C. At the same time, users in groups A and B were more likely to purchase subscriptions of the webservice. We further analyze linguistic cues across experimental groups to explore differences in user experience and explain subscription purchases and affiliate link clicks based on these cues. Our findings provide implications for the design of persuasive and engaging GenAI interfaces in consumer-facing contexts and contribute to understanding how linguistic framing shapes user behavior in AI-mediated decision support.

Can deception be detected solely from written text? Cues of deceptive communication are inherently subtle, even more so in text-only communication. Yet, prior studies have reported considerable success in automatic deception detection. We hypothesize that such findings are largely driven by artifacts introduced during data collection and do not generalize beyond specific datasets. We revisit this assumption by introducing a belief-based deception framework, which defines deception as a misalignment between an author's claims and true beliefs, irrespective of factual accuracy, allowing deception cues to be studied in isolation. Based on this framework, we construct three corpora, collectively referred to as DeFaBel, including a German-language corpus of deceptive and non-deceptive arguments and a multilingual version in German and English, each collected under varying conditions to account for belief change and enable cross-linguistic analysis. Using these corpora, we evaluate commonly reported linguistic cues of deception. Across all three DeFaBel variants, these cues show negligible, statistically insignificant correlations with deception labels, contrary to prior work that treats such cues as reliable indicators. We further benchmark against other English deception datasets following similar data collection protocols. While some show statistically significant correlations, effect sizes remain low and, critically, the set of predictive cues is inconsistent across datasets. We also evaluate deception detection using feature-based models, pretrained language models, and instruction-tuned large language models. While some models perform well on established deception datasets, they consistently perform near chance on DeFaBel. Our findings challenge the assumption that deception can be reliably inferred from linguistic cues and call for rethinking how deception is studied and modeled in NLP.

This study explored how Vision-Language Models (VLMs) process ignorance implicatures with visual and linguistic cues. Particularly, we focused on the effects of contexts (precise and approximate contexts) and modifier types (bare numerals, superlative, and comparative modifiers), which were considered pragmatic and semantic factors respectively. Methodologically, we conducted a truth-value judgment task in visually grounded settings using GPT-4o and Gemini 1.5 Pro. The results indicate that while both models exhibited sensitivity to linguistic cues (modifier), they failed to process ignorance implicatures with visual cues (context) as humans do. Specifically, the influence of context was weaker and inconsistent across models, indicating challenges in pragmatic reasoning for VLMs. On the other hand, superlative modifiers were more strongly associated with ignorance implicatures as compared to comparative modifiers, supporting the semantic view. These findings highlight the need for further advancements in VLMs to process language-vision information in a context-dependent way to achieve human-like pragmatic inference.

The statement "The earth is flat" is factually inaccurate, but if someone truly believes and argues in its favor, it is not deceptive. Research on deception detection and fact checking often conflates factual accuracy with the truthfulness of statements. This assumption makes it difficult to (a) study subtle distinctions and interactions between the two and (b) gauge their effects on downstream tasks. The belief-based deception framework disentangles these properties by defining texts as deceptive when there is a mismatch between what people say and what they truly believe. In this study, we assess if presumed patterns of deception generalize to German language texts. We test the effectiveness of computational models in detecting deception using an established corpus of belief-based argumentation. Finally, we gauge the impact of deception on the downstream task of fact checking and explore if this property confounds verification models. Surprisingly, our analysis finds no correlation with established cues of deception. Previous work claimed that computational models can outperform humans in deception detection accuracy, however, our experiments show that both traditional and state-of-the-art models struggle with the task, performing no better than random guessing. For fact checking, we find that Natural Language Inference-based verification performs worse on non-factual and deceptive content, while prompting Large Language Models for the same task is less sensitive to these properties.

Internet-based economies and societies are drowning in deceptive attacks. These attacks take many forms, such as fake news, phishing, and job scams, which we call ``domains of deception.'' Machine-learning and natural-language-processing researchers have been attempting to ameliorate this precarious situation by designing domain-specific detectors. Only a few recent works have considered domain-independent deception. We collect these disparate threads of research and investigate domain-independent deception. First, we provide a new computational definition of deception and break down deception into a new taxonomy. Then, we analyze the debate on linguistic cues for deception and supply guidelines for systematic reviews. Finally, we investigate common linguistic features and give evidence for knowledge transfer across different forms of deception.

Fake news on social media has large, negative implications for society. However, little is known about what linguistic cues make people fall for fake news and, hence, how to design effective countermeasures for social media. In this study, we seek to understand which linguistic cues make people fall for fake news. Linguistic cues (e.g., adverbs, personal pronouns, positive emotion words, negative emotion words) are important characteristics of any text and also affect how people process real vs. fake news. Specifically, we compare the role of linguistic cues across both cognitive processing (related to careful thinking) and affective processing (related to unconscious automatic evaluations). To this end, we performed a within-subject experiment where we collected neurophysiological measurements of 42 subjects while these read a sample of 40 real and fake news articles. During our experiment, we measured cognitive processing through eye fixations, and affective processing in situ through heart rate variability. We find that users engage more in cognitive processing for longer fake news articles, while affective processing is more pronounced for fake news written in analytic words. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first work studying the role of linguistic cues in fake news processing. Altogether, our findings have important implications for designing online platforms that encourage users to engage in careful thinking and thus prevent them from falling for fake news.

Structured chemical reaction information plays a vital role for chemists engaged in laboratory work and advanced endeavors such as computer-aided drug design. Despite the importance of extracting structured reactions from scientific literature, data annotation for this purpose is cost-prohibitive due to the significant labor required from domain experts. Consequently, the scarcity of sufficient training data poses an obstacle to the progress of related models in this domain. In this paper, we propose ReactIE, which combines two weakly supervised approaches for pre-training. Our method utilizes frequent patterns within the text as linguistic cues to identify specific characteristics of chemical reactions. Additionally, we adopt synthetic data from patent records as distant supervision to incorporate domain knowledge into the model. Experiments demonstrate that ReactIE achieves substantial improvements and outperforms all existing baselines.

In order to train children's ability to ask curiosity-driven questions, previous research has explored designing specific exercises relying on providing semantic and linguistic cues to help formulate such questions. But despite showing pedagogical efficiency, this method is still limited as it relies on generating the said cues by hand, which can be a very costly process. In this context, we propose to leverage advances in the natural language processing field (NLP) and investigate the efficiency of using a large language model (LLM) for automating the production of the pedagogical content of a curious question-asking (QA) training. We study generating the said content using the "prompt-based" method that consists of explaining the task to the LLM in natural text. We evaluate the output using human experts annotations and comparisons with hand-generated content. Results suggested indeed the relevance and usefulness of this content. We also conduct a field study in primary school (75 children aged 9-10), where we evaluate children's QA performance when having this training. We compare 3 types of content : 1) hand-generated content that proposes "closed" cues leading to predefined questions; 2) GPT-3-generated content that proposes the same type of cues; 3) GPT-3-generated content that proposes "open" cues leading to several possible questions. We see a similar QA performance between the two "closed" trainings (showing the scalability of the approach using GPT-3), and a better one for participants with the "open" training. These results suggest the efficiency of using LLMs to support children in generating more curious questions, using a natural language prompting approach that affords usability by teachers and other users not specialists of AI techniques. Furthermore, results also show that open-ended content may be more suitable for training curious question-asking skills.

Generalization in robotics is one of the most important problems. New generalization approaches use internet databases in order to solve new tasks. Modern search engines can return a large amount of information according to a query within milliseconds. However, not all of the returned information is task relevant, partly due to the problem of polysemes. Here we specifically address the problem of object generalization by using image search. We suggest a bi-modal solution, combining visual and textual information, based on the observation that humans use additional linguistic cues to demarcate intended word meaning. We evaluate the quality of our approach by comparing it to human labelled data and find that, on average, our approach leads to improved results in comparison to Google searches, and that it can treat the problem of polysemes.