Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly deployed in applications involving interaction between agents, where their output plays a role in collective reasoning and decision-making processes.
Despite significant research into the functioning of LLMs in such multi-agent systems, the processes of bias propagation in such systems are still a challenge.
This work studies how biased opinions are propagated in the form of textual interaction in an environment of LLMs
in which a minority of agents maintain persistent extreme opinions, while the remaining agents iteratively update their beliefs through structured textual interactions.
The findings show that even the presence of a small percentage of biased agents in such a system leads to significant shifts in the opinions of non-biased agents.
It suggests that for the same percentage of biased agents, the shifts occur more quickly for the Llama~3.2 model when compared to a classical Friedkin-Johnsen (FJ) model.
Further semantic analysis demonstrates
that rhetorical consistency in textual explanations increases systematically with biased exposure and, importantly, is partially decoupled from numerical convergence.
Importantly, neutral agents adopt the vocabulary employed by the biased agents even in configurations where their numerical opinion shifts remain moderate.
The research helps explain
how bias and language develop together in multi-agent language model ecosystems.