Back

Silent Manipulation of Mental Health Treatment Recommendations from a Large Language Model

Perlis, R. H.

2026-06-17 health informatics
10.64898/2026.06.16.26355686 medRxiv
Show abstract

Importance. Large language models (LLMs) increasingly inform mental health decisions by patients and clinicians. Inference-time activation steering can shift model behavior on a target dimension without altering weights or prompts and without disclosure to users, allowing treatment recommendations to be silently changed for commercial or ideological reasons. Objective. To determine whether directional activation steering can shift an open-weights LLM's depression treatment recommendations. Design, Setting, and Participants. This non-human subjects study applied directional activation steering to an open-weights LLM (DeepSeek V4 Flash) responding to 12 depression-advice scenarios (4 favoring medication, 4 favoring avoidance, 4 neutral), generated at 30 amplitudes from -1.5 to +1.5 in 0.1 increments plus an unsteered baseline. Exposures. A single steering direction contrasting antidepressant medication with self-directed approaches (diet, exercise, meditation, dietary supplements), constructed from 16 paired training prompts and applied at the attention output of every transformer block; weights and system prompt were held constant. Main Outcomes and Measures. The extent to which medication and four self-care categories were addressed, scored 0 to 3 by a human-validated LLM rater (Claude Opus 4.7), the medication-versus-self-care balance, and clinician referral, estimated per unit of amplitude using mixed-effects models with a scenario random intercept. Results. Across 372 generations, steering produced a graded, dose-dependent shift in the medication-versus-self-care balance, which declined by 0.32 per unit of amplitude (beta=-0.32; 95% CI, -0.39 to -0.25; P < .001); medication extent fell and self-care extent rose. The shift was largest for scenarios with no stated treatment preference (beta = -0.44; 95% CI, -0.54 to -0.34; P < .001). A clinician referral appeared in 322 of 372 responses (87%) and did not vary with steering amplitude (P = .63). Conclusions and Relevance. In this open-weights LLM providing depression treatment information, inference-time activation steering shifted treatment recommendations without altering weights, prompt structure, or safety outputs, with the largest effect among users expressing no treatment preference. These findings suggest a need for LLM disclosure standards and independent auditing as such models inform clinical decisions.

Matching journals

The top 7 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
npj Digital Medicine
118 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
18.9%
2
Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association
71 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
10.0%
3
PLOS ONE
5266 papers in training set
Top 28%
5.6%
4
JAMA Network Open
130 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
5.6%
5
Frontiers in Digital Health
24 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
4.9%
6
PLOS Digital Health
106 papers in training set
Top 1%
4.5%
7
JMIR Formative Research
33 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
2.4%
50% of probability mass above
8
Frontiers in Psychiatry
87 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
2.4%
9
Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews
43 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
2.4%
10
Communications Medicine
113 papers in training set
Top 1%
2.4%
11
Clinical Trials
11 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
2.4%
12
Journal of Medical Internet Research
87 papers in training set
Top 1%
2.2%
13
Psychological Medicine
88 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.8%
14
DIGITAL HEALTH
17 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
1.8%
15
eBioMedicine
183 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.5%
16
Pilot and Feasibility Studies
14 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
1.4%
17
Wellcome Open Research
67 papers in training set
Top 1.0%
1.1%
18
JMIR Research Protocols
21 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
1.1%
19
Acta Neuropsychiatrica
14 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
1.1%
20
BJPsych Open
29 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
1.1%
21
Scientific Reports
3612 papers in training set
Top 64%
1.1%
22
International Journal of Drug Policy
12 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.1%
23
International Journal of Medical Informatics
26 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.1%
24
Nature Medicine
125 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.0%
25
Computational Psychiatry
12 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
0.9%
26
Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica
10 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
0.9%
27
JAMA Psychiatry
15 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
0.9%
28
Journal of Affective Disorders
92 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.9%
29
JMIRx Med
32 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.9%
30
Frontiers in Pharmacology
111 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.9%