Research Article

The influence of AI-powered investment recommendations on individual investors: A mixed-methods study from the perspective of persuasive communication

Volume: 23 Number: 2026 October 3, 2026
EN TR

The influence of AI-powered investment recommendations on individual investors: A mixed-methods study from the perspective of persuasive communication

Abstract

This study examines how individual retail investors receive AI-generated investment advice from the perspective of persuasive communication. Arguing that large language models (LLMs) create a persuasion dynamic different from that of traditional media, it combines in-depth interviews with a content analysis of AI outputs in a mixed-methods design. Interviews with 18 investors who use AI for investment decisions were analyzed through Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis, and the responses of four models to six standardized scenarios were coded with the AI Investment Advice Evaluation Scale (AIIAES), a researcher-developed instrument of eight dimensions and 24 items. The findings show how framing, the machine heuristic and sycophancy shape user decisions, and they indicate that financial literacy differentiates responses without protecting users evenly. No model produced a complete disclaimer in any scenario, and Gemini displayed a scenario-dependent sycophancy pattern. On the theoretical side, the study describes a deliberate form of user-induced sycophancy, in which users steer a model over repeated interactions toward confirming their own preferences. On the methodological side, it offers an instrument that turns the suitability and disclosure standards of investment regulation into criteria for conversational AI outputs. The study concludes with policy recommendations for user protection.

Keywords

Artificial intelligence, persuasive communication, machine heuristic, sycophancy, algorithmic accountability

References

  1. Asch, S. E. (1951). Effects of group pressure upon the modification and distortion of judgments. In H. Guetzkow (Ed.), Groups, leadership and men: Research in human relations (pp. 177–190). Carnegie Press.
  2. Bandura, A. (1999). Moral disengagement in the perpetration of inhumanities. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 3(3), 193–209. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327957pspr0303_3
  3. Bickmore, T. W., & Picard, R. W. (2005). Establishing and maintaining long-term human-computer relationships. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction, 12(2), 293–327. https://doi.org/10.1145/1067860.1067867
  4. Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2021). To saturate or not to saturate? Questioning data saturation as a useful concept for thematic analysis and sample-size rationales. Qualitative Research in Sport, Exercise and Health, 13(2), 201–216. https://doi.org/10.1080/2159676X.2019.1704846
  5. Chaiken, S. (1980). Heuristic versus systematic information processing and the use of source versus message cues in persuasion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 39(5), 752–766. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.39.5.752
  6. Chen, Y., Liu, T. X., Shan, Y., & Zhong, S. (2023). The emergence of economic rationality of GPT. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 120(51), Article e2316205120. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2316205120
  7. Cialdini, R. B. (1984). Influence: How and why people agree to things. William Morrow.
  8. Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2018). Designing and conducting mixed methods research (3rd ed.). SAGE.
  9. Deutsch, M., & Gerard, H. B. (1955). A study of normative and informational social influences upon individual judgment. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 51(3), 629–636. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0046408
  10. Diakopoulos, N. (2016). Accountability in algorithmic decision making. Communications of the ACM, 59(2), 56–62. https://doi.org/10.1145/2844110
APA
Türk, G. D. (2026). The influence of AI-powered investment recommendations on individual investors: A mixed-methods study from the perspective of persuasive communication. OPUS Journal of Society Research, 23(2026), 1-16. https://doi.org/10.26466/opusjsr.1959141
AMA
1.Türk GD. The influence of AI-powered investment recommendations on individual investors: A mixed-methods study from the perspective of persuasive communication. OPUS JSR. 2026;23(2026):1-16. doi:10.26466/opusjsr.1959141
Chicago
Türk, Gül Dilek. 2026. “The Influence of AI-Powered Investment Recommendations on Individual Investors: A Mixed-Methods Study from the Perspective of Persuasive Communication”. OPUS Journal of Society Research 23 (2026): 1-16. https://doi.org/10.26466/opusjsr.1959141.
EndNote
Türk GD (October 1, 2026) The influence of AI-powered investment recommendations on individual investors: A mixed-methods study from the perspective of persuasive communication. OPUS Journal of Society Research 23 2026 1–16.
IEEE
[1]G. D. Türk, “The influence of AI-powered investment recommendations on individual investors: A mixed-methods study from the perspective of persuasive communication”, OPUS JSR, vol. 23, no. 2026, pp. 1–16, Oct. 2026, doi: 10.26466/opusjsr.1959141.
ISNAD
Türk, Gül Dilek. “The Influence of AI-Powered Investment Recommendations on Individual Investors: A Mixed-Methods Study from the Perspective of Persuasive Communication”. OPUS Journal of Society Research 23/2026 (October 1, 2026): 1-16. https://doi.org/10.26466/opusjsr.1959141.
JAMA
1.Türk GD. The influence of AI-powered investment recommendations on individual investors: A mixed-methods study from the perspective of persuasive communication. OPUS JSR. 2026;23:1–16.
MLA
Türk, Gül Dilek. “The Influence of AI-Powered Investment Recommendations on Individual Investors: A Mixed-Methods Study from the Perspective of Persuasive Communication”. OPUS Journal of Society Research, vol. 23, no. 2026, Oct. 2026, pp. 1-16, doi:10.26466/opusjsr.1959141.
Vancouver
1.Gül Dilek Türk. The influence of AI-powered investment recommendations on individual investors: A mixed-methods study from the perspective of persuasive communication. OPUS JSR. 2026 Oct. 1;23(2026):1-16. doi:10.26466/opusjsr.1959141