Track papers across labs, topics, and trends.
Search papers, labs, and topics across Lattice.
This study investigates the phenomenon of prompt injection in automated résumé screening using large language models (LLMs), where candidates strategically manipulate their submissions to influence evaluation outcomes. Through controlled experiments, the authors find that prompt injection can significantly enhance rankings when résumé quality is uniform and few candidates engage in manipulation; however, its effectiveness diminishes sharply as more candidates adopt this tactic. Additionally, while prompt injection is less effective in heterogeneous candidate pools, it can still enable lower-quality candidates to surpass higher-quality ones, raising critical fairness issues in algorithmic hiring practices.
Prompt injection can boost applicant rankings in LLM-based hiring systems, but its effectiveness collapses under widespread manipulation.
Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used to screen and rank job applicants, creating incentives for candidates to strategically manipulate algorithmic hiring systems. We study prompt injection in automated résumé screening, defined as subtle self-promotional text that introduces no new qualifications but is designed to influence LLM evaluations. Using controlled experiments, we show that prompt injection reliably improves applicant rankings when résumé quality is homogeneous and few candidates inject. However, its effectiveness rapidly diminishes as more candidates inject, collapsing when manipulation becomes widespread. When candidate quality is heterogeneous, prompt injection is less effective on average, but can occasionally allow lower-quality candidates to outrank higher-quality ones, raising fairness concerns. Overall, LLM-based screening is most vulnerable when manipulation is rare and candidate quality differences are small. Code and resources are publicly available at: https://github.com/preetb1199/Prompt_Injection_ACL26