[DigitalToday reporter Yoonseo Lee (이윤서)] ChatGPT generally delivers confident answers, but they are not always correct, including due to concerns about hallucinations. Well-structured sentences and a decisive tone can inspire trust, but they can sometimes obscure other possibilities or opposing interpretations. On March 18, IT outlet TechRadar introduced a simple prompt technique that can help address these limits.

So what is the method? After ChatGPT answers, type "convince me otherwise" and the AI starts re-examining its existing reasoning and pointing out weaknesses or potential counterarguments. It questions what it previously presented smoothly and reveals limits and exceptions it left out.

For example, when asked whether it is worth paying for an app said to boost productivity, ChatGPT at first gives a positive answer focusing on time savings and functional advantages. But adding "convince me otherwise" changes the tone. It newly presents factors such as subscription fatigue, free apps that can serve as alternatives and the possibility that the app may not be necessary in real life.

A similar effect appears with personal questions such as changing career paths. At first, it may give an answer that seems to encourage changing jobs or making a transition by emphasizing new opportunities or change. But if asked for the opposing view, it presents factors that are easy to miss, such as financial burdens, difficulties entering a new field and the advantages of a current job. Rather than completely denying the first answer, it adds weight to perspectives missing from that initial response.

This is because ChatGPT can generate reasoning in multiple directions, but it tends to present only 1 organized position at a time. AI is basically designed to give helpful answers in line with the direction of a question, so if a user does not separately request an opposing view, other possibilities can be pushed aside. That is also why the short phrase "convince me otherwise" is effective. Without a complex prompt, it makes the AI recheck its own answer within a natural conversational flow.

This approach can be particularly useful for everyday decisions such as buying items, scheduling and career choices. In situations where users can be easily persuaded simply because the first answer is well written, the act of asking for a rebuttal helps them see drawbacks and limits as well. As a result, users can make more careful judgments by treating the AI's advice as one perspective rather than accepting it as a final answer.

Still, the method is not perfect. ChatGPT could tilt too far toward the negative while presenting opposing logic. But the key is not to treat either side as the correct answer. It is meaningful to compare two responses to the same question side by side and examine where the logic diverges and what assumptions were omitted. A single small prompt can make ChatGPT closer to a tool that checks its own reasoning, the article says.