CoChat
Sign Up
PreprintCited by 17Ethics and Social Impacts of AISocial Robot Interaction and HRIAI in Service Interactions

The DOI matches its DataCite record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Sycophantic AI Decreases Prosocial Intentions and Promotes Dependence

Open access
Cheng, Myra, Lee, Cinoo, Khadpe, Pranav, Yu, Sunny, Han, Dyllan, Jurafsky, Dan·2025·arXiv
DOI 10.48550/arxiv.2510.01395arXiv 2510.01395
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Both the general public and academic communities have raised concerns about sycophancy, the phenomenon of artificial intelligence (AI) excessively agreeing with or flattering users. Yet, beyond isolated media reports of severe consequences, like reinforcing delusions, little is known about the extent of sycophancy or how it affects people who use AI. Here we show the pervasiveness and harmful impacts of sycophancy when people seek advice from AI. First, across 11 state-of-the-art AI models, we find that models are highly sycophantic: they affirm users' actions 50% more than humans do, and they do so even in cases where user queries mention manipulation, deception, or other relational harms. Second, in two preregistered experiments (N = 1604), including a live-interaction study where participants discuss a real interpersonal conflict from their life, we find that interaction with sycophantic AI models significantly reduced participants' willingness to take actions to repair interpersonal conflict, while increasing their conviction of being in the right. However, participants rated sycophantic responses as higher quality, trusted the sycophantic AI model more, and were more willing to use it again. This suggests that people are drawn to AI that unquestioningly validate, even as that validation risks eroding their judgment and reducing their inclination toward prosocial behavior. These preferences create perverse incentives both for people to increasingly rely on sycophantic AI models and for AI model training to favor sycophancy. Our findings highlight the necessity of explicitly addressing this incentive structure to mitigate the widespread risks of AI sycophancy.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

DataCite · 10.48550/arxiv.2510.01395

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • AI model behaviors such as sycophancy, intimacy cultivation, and validation that dismisses outside perspectives might function as mechanisms that deepen engagement and insulate users from reality checks.

    “Second, AI model behaviors that emerged from our participants’ narratives, such as sycophancy [7], intimacy cultivation [31], and validation that dismisses outside perspectives might function as mechanisms that deepen engagement and insulate users from reality checks.”

    From 'AI-Induced Delusional Spirals': Understanding Lived Experiences During Maladaptive Human-Chatbot Interactions (2026) · cites this paper as [7]

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

  • The Llama 3 Herd of Models

    Grattafiori, A., Dubey, A., Jauhri, A., Pandey, A., Kadian, A., Al-Dahle, A., Letman, A., Mathur, A., Schelten, A., Vaughan, A., et al. (2024) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2407.21783 · Cited by 505 · cited 1×

    “3-70B-Instruct-Turbo [74, 75]; Mistral AI’s Mistral-7B-Instruct-v0.”

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 68

  1. [1][1] Sharma, M., Tong, M., Korbak, T., Duvenaud, D., Askell, A., Bowman, S.R., Durmus, E., Hatfield-Dodds, Z., Johnston, S.R., Kravec, S.M., Maxwell, T., McCandlish, S., Ndousse, K., Rausch, O., Schiefer, N., Yan, D., Zhang, M., Perez, E.: Towards understanding sycophancy in language models. In: The Twelfth International Conference on Learning Representations (2024). https://openreview.net/forum?id=tvhaxkMKAn -
  2. [4][4] Moore, J., Grabb, D., Agnew, W., Klyman, K., Chancellor, S., Ong, D.C., Haber, N.: Expressing stigma and inappropriate responses prevents llms from safely replacing mental health providers. In: Proceedings of the 2025 ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp. 599-627 (2025) -
  3. [6][6] Nature Machine Intelligence: Emotional risks of AI companions demand attention. Nature Machine Intelligence 7 , 981-982 (2025) https://doi.org/10.1038/ s42256-025-01093-9 -
  4. [9][9] Match, The Kinsey Institute: Singles in America: 14th Annual Study. Press release. Survey of 5,001 U.S. singles aged 18-98; data collected in partnership with Dynata; largest annual study since 2010 (2025). https://www.singlesinamerica. com/ -
  5. [10][10] Monin, B., Miller, D.T.: Moral credentials and the expression of prejudice. Journal of personality and social psychology 81 (1), 33 (2001) -
  6. [11][11] Uhlmann, E.L., Cohen, G.L.: 'I think it, therefore it's true': Effects of selfperceived objectivity on hiring discrimination. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 104 (2), 207-223 (2007) -
  7. [12][12] Walton, G.M., Wilson, T.D.: Wise interventions: Psychological remedies for social and personal problems. Psychological review 125 (5), 617 (2018) -
  8. [13][13] Ranaldi, L., Pucci, G.: When Large Language Models contradict humans? Large Language Models' Sycophantic Behaviour (2024). https://arxiv.org/abs/2311. 09410 -
  9. [14][14] Wei, J., Huang, D., Lu, Y., Zhou, D., Le, Q.V.: Simple synthetic data reduces sycophancy in large language models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2308.03958 (2023) - · arXiv
  10. [15][15] Perez, E., Ringer, S., Lukosiute, K., Nguyen, K., Chen, E., Heiner, S., Pettit, C., Olsson, C., Kundu, S., Kadavath, S., Jones, A., Chen, A., Mann, B., Israel, B., Seethor, B., McKinnon, C., Olah, C., Yan, D., Amodei, D., Amodei, D., Drain, D., Li, D., Tran-Johnson, E., Khundadze, G., Kernion, J., Landis, J., Kerr, J., Mueller, J., Hyun, J., Landau, J., Ndousse, K., Goldberg, L., Lovitt, L., Lucas, M., Sellitto, M., Zhang, M., Kingsland, N., Elhage, N., Joseph, N., Mercado, N., DasSarma, N., Rausch, O., Larson, R., McCandlish, S., Johnston, S., Kravec, S., El Showk, S., Lanham, T., Telleen-Lawton, T., Brown, T., Henighan, T., Hume, T., Bai, Y., Hatfield-Dodds, Z., Clark, J., Bowman, S.R., Askell, A., Grosse, R., Hernandez, D., Ganguli, D., Hubinger, E., Schiefer, N., Kaplan, J.: Discovering language model behaviors with model-written evaluations. In: Rogers, A., BoydGraber, J., Okazaki, N. (eds.) Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: ACL 2023, pp. 13387-13434. Association for Computational Linguistics, Toronto, Canada (2023). https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/2023.findings-acl.847 . https://aclanthology.org/2023.findings-acl.847/ - · DOI · Paper page
  11. [16][16] Rrv, A., Tyagi, N., Uddin, M.N., Varshney, N., Baral, C.: Chaos with keywords: Exposing large language models sycophancy to misleading keywords and evaluating defense strategies. In: Ku, L.-W., Martins, A., Srikumar, V. (eds.) Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: ACL 2024, pp. 12717-12733. Association for Computational Linguistics, Bangkok, Thailand (2024). https://doi. org/10.18653/v1/2024.findings-acl.755 . https://aclanthology.org/2024.findingsacl.755/ - · DOI
  12. [17][17] Malmqvist, L.: Sycophancy in large language models: Causes and mitigations. arXiv preprint arXiv:2411.15287 (2024) - · arXiv
  13. [18][18] Fanous, A., Goldberg, J., Agarwal, A.A., Lin, J., Zhou, A., Daneshjou, R., Koyejo, S.: Syceval: Evaluating LLM sycophancy. arXiv preprint arXiv:2502.08177 (2025) - · arXiv
  14. [19][19] Costello, T.H., Pennycook, G., Rand, D.G.: Durably reducing conspiracy beliefs through dialogues with ai. Science 385 (6714), 1814 (2024) -
  15. [20][20] Gallegos, I.O., Shani, C., Shi, W., Bianchi, F., Gainsburg, I., Jurafsky, D., Willer, R.: Labeling messages as ai-generated does not reduce their persuasive effects. arXiv preprint arXiv:2504.09865 (2025) - · arXiv
  16. [21][21] Cohn, M., Pushkarna, M., Olanubi, G.O., Moran, J.M., Padgett, D., Mengesha, Z., Heldreth, C.: Believing anthropomorphism: examining the role of anthropomorphic cues on trust in large language models. In: Extended Abstracts of the CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pp. 1-15 (2024) -
  17. [22][22] Inie, N., Druga, S., Zukerman, P., Bender, E.M.: From' ai' to probabilistic automation: How does anthropomorphization of technical systems descriptions influence trust? In: Proceedings of the 2024 ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp. 2322-2347 (2024) -
  18. [23][23] Hafenbrack, A.C., LaPalme, M.L., Solal, I.: Mindfulness meditation reduces guilt and prosocial reparation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 123 (1), 28 (2022) -
  19. [25][25] Loewenstein, G., Molnar, A.: The renaissance of belief-based utility in economics. Nature Human Behaviour 2 (3), 166-167 (2018) -
  20. [26][26] Tyler, T.R.: The relationship of the outcome and procedural fairness: How does knowing the outcome influence judgments about the procedure? Social Justice Research 9 (4), 311-325 (1996) -
  21. [27][27] Wang, R., Harper, F.M., Zhu, H.: Factors influencing perceived fairness in algorithmic decision-making: Algorithm outcomes, development procedures, and individual differences. In: Proceedings of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pp. 1-14 (2020) -
  22. [28][28] Malle, B.F., Ullman, D.: A multidimensional conception and measure of humanrobot trust. In: Trust in Human-robot Interaction, pp. 3-25. Elsevier, ??? (2021) -
  23. [29][29] Cohn, M., Pushkarna, M., Olanubi, G.O., Moran, J.M., Padgett, D., Mengesha, Z., Heldreth, C.: Believing Anthropomorphism: Examining the Role of Anthropomorphic Cues on Trust in Large Language Models (2024). https://arxiv.org/ abs/2405.06079 - · arXiv
  24. [30][30] Khadpe, P., Krishna, R., Fei-Fei, L., Hancock, J.T., Bernstein, M.S.: Conceptual metaphors impact perceptions of human-ai collaboration. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction 4 (CSCW2), 1-26 (2020) -
  25. [31][31] Zhou, K., Hwang, J.D., Ren, X., Dziri, N., Jurafsky, D., Sap, M.: REL-A.I.: An interaction-centered approach to measuring human-LM reliance. In: Chiruzzo, L., - Ritter, A., Wang, L. (eds.) Proceedings of the 2025 Conference of the Nations of the Americas Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies (Volume 1: Long Papers), pp. 11148-11167. Association for Computational Linguistics, Albuquerque, New Mexico (2025). https: //doi.org/10.18653/v1/2025.naacl-long.556 . https://aclanthology.org/2025.naacllong.556/ - · DOI
  26. [32][32] Kim, S.S., Liao, Q.V., Vorvoreanu, M., Ballard, S., Vaughan, J.W.: ' i'm not sure, but...': Examining the impact of large language models' uncertainty expression on user reliance and trust. In: Proceedings of the 2024 ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp. 822-835 (2024) -
  27. [33][33] Weidinger, L., Mellor, J., Rauh, M., Griffin, C., Uesato, J., Huang, P.-S., Cheng, M., Glaese, M., Balle, B., Kasirzadeh, A., et al.: Ethical and social risks of harm from language models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2112.04359 (2021) - · arXiv
  28. [34][34] Abercrombie, G., Cercas Curry, A., Dinkar, T., Rieser, V., Talat, Z.: Mirages. on anthropomorphism in dialogue systems. In: Bouamor, H., Pino, J., Bali, K. (eds.) Proceedings of the 2023 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, pp. 4776-4790. Association for Computational Linguistics, Singapore (2023). https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/2023.emnlp-main.290 . https://aclanthology.org/2023.emnlp-main.290/ - · DOI · Paper page
  29. [35][35] Bai, Y., Jones, A., Ndousse, K., Askell, A., Chen, A., DasSarma, N., Drain, D., Fort, S., Ganguli, D., Henighan, T., et al.: Training a helpful and harmless assistant with reinforcement learning from human feedback. CoRR (2022) -
  30. [36][36] Kirk, H.R., Whitefield, A., R¨ ottger, P., Bean, A., Margatina, K., Ciro, J., Mosquera, R., Bartolo, M., Williams, A., He, H., et al.: The prism alignment project: What participatory, representative and individualised human feedback reveals about the subjective and multicultural alignment of large language models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2404.16019 (2024) - · arXiv
  31. [37][37] Maeda, T., Quan-Haase, A.: When human-ai interactions become parasocial: Agency and anthropomorphism in affective design. In: Proceedings of the 2024 ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp. 1068-1077 (2024) -
  32. [39][39] Cheng, M., Lee, A.Y., Rapuano, K., Niederhoffer, K., Liebscher, A., Hancock, J.: From tools to thieves: Measuring and understanding public perceptions of ai through crowdsourced metaphors. arXiv preprint arXiv:2501.18045 (2025) - · arXiv
  33. [41][41] Kapania, S., Siy, O., Clapper, G., Sp, A.M., Sambasivan, N.: ' because AI is 100% right and safe': User attitudes and sources of AI authority in india. In: Proceedings of the 2022 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pp. 1-18 (2022) -
  34. [42][42] Yaniv, I.: Receiving other people's advice: Influence and benefit. Organizational behavior and human decision processes 93 (1), 1-13 (2004) -
  35. [43][43] VAN SWOL, L., Paik, J.E.: The psychology of advice utilization. The Oxford handbook of advice, 21 (2018) -
  36. [44][44] Zhi-Xuan, T., Carroll, M., Franklin, M., Ashton, H.: Beyond preferences in ai alignment: T. zhi-xuan et al. Philosophical Studies 182 (7), 1813-1863 (2025) -
  37. [45][45] Kirk, H.R., Gabriel, I., Summerfield, C., Vidgen, B., Hale, S.A.: Why human-AI relationships need socioaffective alignment (2025). https://arxiv.org/abs/2502. 02528 -
  38. [46][46] Lum, K., Anthis, J.R., Robinson, K., Nagpal, C., D'Amour, A.N.: Bias in language models: Beyond trick tests and towards RUTEd evaluation. In: Che, W., Nabende, J., Shutova, E., Pilehvar, M.T. (eds.) Proceedings of the 63rd Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers), pp. 137161. Association for Computational Linguistics, Vienna, Austria (2025). https:// doi.org/10.18653/v1/2025.acl-long.7 . https://aclanthology.org/2025.acl-long.7/ - · DOI
  39. [47][47] Mizrahi, M., Kaplan, G., Malkin, D., Dror, R., Shahaf, D., Stanovsky, G.: State of what art? a call for multi-prompt llm evaluation. Transactions of the Association for Computational Linguistics 12 , 933-949 (2024) -
  40. [48][48] Chang, Y., Wang, X., Wang, J., Wu, Y., Yang, L., Zhu, K., Chen, H., Yi, X., Wang, C., Wang, Y., et al. : A survey on evaluation of large language models. ACM transactions on intelligent systems and technology 15 (3), 1-45 (2024) -
  41. [49][49] Wallach, H., Desai, M., Cooper, A.F., Wang, A., Atalla, C., Barocas, S., Blodgett, S.L., Chouldechova, A., Corvi, E., Dow, P.A., et al.: Position: Evaluating generative AI systems is a social science measurement challenge. arXiv preprint arXiv:2502.00561 (2025) - · arXiv
  42. [50][50] Gordon, R.A.: Impact of ingratiation on judgments and evaluations: A metaanalytic investigation. Journal of personality and social psychology 71 (1), 54 (1996) -
  43. [51][51] Lewandowsky, S., Van Der Linden, S.: Countering misinformation and fake news through inoculation and prebunking. European review of social psychology 32 (2), 348-384 (2021) -
  44. [52][52] Traberg, C.S., Roozenbeek, J., Van Der Linden, S.: Psychological inoculation against misinformation: Current evidence and future directions. The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 700 (1), 136-151 (2022) -
  45. [53][53] Roozenbeek, J., Van Der Linden, S., Goldberg, B., Rathje, S., Lewandowsky, S.: Psychological inoculation improves resilience against misinformation on social media. Science advances 8 (34), 6254 (2022) -
  46. [54][54] Munn, L.: Angry by design: toxic communication and technical architectures. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications 7 (1), 1-11 (2020) -
  47. [55][55] Rathje, S., Van Bavel, J.J., Van Der Linden, S.: Out-group animosity drives engagement on social media. Proceedings of the national academy of sciences 118 (26), 2024292118 (2021) -
  48. [57][57] Kuosmanen, O.J.: Advice from humans and artificial intelligence: Can we distinguish them, and is one better than the other? Master's thesis, UiT Norges arktiske universitet (2024) -
  49. [58][58] Hou, H., Leach, K., Huang, Y.: Chatgpt giving relationship advice-how reliable is it? In: Proceedings of the International AAAI Conference on Web and Social Media, vol. 18, pp. 610-623 (2024) -
  50. [59][59] Kim, M., Lee, H., Park, J., Lee, H., Jung, K.: AdvisorQA: Towards helpful and harmless advice-seeking question answering with collective intelligence. In: Chiruzzo, L., Ritter, A., Wang, L. (eds.) Proceedings of the 2025 Conference of the Nations of the Americas Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies (Volume 1: Long Papers), pp. 6545-6565. Association for Computational Linguistics, Albuquerque, New Mexico (2025). https://aclanthology.org/2025.naacl-long.333/ -
  51. [60][60] Reimers, N., Gurevych, I.: Sentence-bert: Sentence embeddings using siamese bert-networks. In: Proceedings of the 2019 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing. Association for Computational Linguistics, ??? (2019). https://arxiv.org/abs/1908.10084 - · arXiv
  52. [61][61] Grootendorst, M.: Bertopic: Neural topic modeling with a class-based tf-idf procedure. arXiv preprint arXiv:2203.05794 (2022) - · arXiv
  53. [62][62] Vijjini, A.R., R Menon, R., Fu, J., Srivastava, S., Chaturvedi, S.: SocialGaze: Improving the integration of human social norms in large language models. In: Al-Onaizan, Y., Bansal, M., Chen, Y.-N. (eds.) Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: EMNLP 2024, pp. 16487-16506. Association for Computational Linguistics, Miami, Florida, USA (2024). https://doi.org/10.18653/ v1/2024.findings-emnlp.962 . https://aclanthology.org/2024.findings-emnlp.962/ -
  54. [65][65] Chang, J.P., Chiam, C., Fu, L., Wang, A., Zhang, J., Danescu-Niculescu-Mizil, C.: ConvoKit: A toolkit for the analysis of conversations. In: Pietquin, O., Muresan, S., Chen, V., Kennington, C., Vandyke, D., Dethlefs, N., Inoue, K., Ekstedt, E., Ultes, S. (eds.) Proceedings of the 21th Annual Meeting of the Special Interest Group on Discourse and Dialogue, pp. 57-60. Association for Computational Linguistics, 1st virtual meeting (2020). https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/2020.sigdial-1.8 . https://aclanthology.org/2020.sigdial-1.8/ - · DOI
  55. [67][67] Zheng, L., Chiang, W.-L., Sheng, Y., Zhuang, S., Wu, Z., Zhuang, Y., Lin, Z., Li, Z., Li, D., Xing, E., et al. : Judging llm-as-a-judge with mt-bench and chatbot arena. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 36 , 46595-46623 (2023) -
  56. [68][68] Dubois, Y., Li, C.X., Taori, R., Zhang, T., Gulrajani, I., Ba, J., Guestrin, C., Liang, P.S., Hashimoto, T.B.: Alpacafarm: A simulation framework for methods that learn from human feedback. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 36 , 30039-30069 (2023) -
  57. [69][69] Gilardi, F., Alizadeh, M., Kubli, M.: Chatgpt outperforms crowd workers for text-annotation tasks. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 120 (30), 2305016120 (2023) -
  58. [70][70] Ziems, C., Held, W., Shaikh, O., Chen, J., Zhang, Z., Yang, D.: Can large language models transform computational social science? Computational Linguistics 50 (1), 237-291 (2024) -
  59. [71][71] Hurst, A., Lerer, A., Goucher, A.P., Perelman, A., Ramesh, A., Clark, A., Ostrow, A., Welihinda, A., Hayes, A., Radford, A., et al.: Gpt-4o system card. arXiv preprint arXiv:2410.21276 (2024) - · arXiv
  60. [78][78] Liu, A., Feng, B., Xue, B., Wang, B., Wu, B., Lu, C., Zhao, C., Deng, C., Zhang, C., Ruan, C., et al.: Deepseek-v3 technical report. arXiv preprint arXiv:2412.19437 (2024) - · arXiv
  61. [79][79] Hui, B., Yang, J., Cui, Z., Yang, J., Liu, D., Zhang, L., Liu, T., Zhang, J., Yu, B., Lu, K., et al.: Qwen2. 5-coder technical report. arXiv preprint arXiv:2409.12186 (2024) - · arXiv
  62. [80][80] Lickel, B., Kushlev, K., Savalei, V., Matta, S., Schmader, T.: Shame and the motivation to change the self. Emotion 14 (6), 1049 (2014) -
  63. [82][82] Rammstedt, B., John, O.P.: Measuring personality in one minute or less: A 10item short version of the big five inventory in english and german. Journal of research in Personality 41 (1), 203-212 (2007) -
  64. [83][83] Garvey, A., Blanchard, S.J.: Generative ai as a research confederate: The lucid methodological framework and toolkit for human-ai interactions research. Available at SSRN 5256150 (2025) -
  65. [84][84] Honnibal, M., Montani, I., Van Landeghem, S., Boyd, A.: spaCy: Industrialstrength Natural Language Processing in Python (2020) https://doi.org/10.5281/ zenodo.1212303 -
  66. [85][85] Cheng, M., Gligoric, K., Piccardi, T., Jurafsky, D.: AnthroScore: A computational linguistic measure of anthropomorphism. In: Graham, Y., Purver, M. (eds.) Proceedings of the 18th Conference of the European Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers), pp. 807825. Association for Computational Linguistics, St. Julian's, Malta (2024). https://aclanthology.org/2024.eacl-long.49/ -
  67. [86][86] Su, Z., Zhou, X., Rangreji, S., Kabra, A., Mendelsohn, J., Brahman, F., Sap, M.: AI-LieDar : Examine the trade-off between utility and truthfulness in LLM agents. In: Chiruzzo, L., Ritter, A., Wang, L. (eds.) Proceedings of the 2025 Conference of the Nations of the Americas Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies (Volume 1: Long Papers), pp. 11867-11894. Association for Computational Linguistics, Albuquerque, New Mexico (2025). https://aclanthology.org/2025.naacl-long.595/ -
  68. [87][87] Rao, A.S., Yerukola, A., Shah, V., Reinecke, K., Sap, M.: NormAd: A framework for measuring the cultural adaptability of large language models. In: Chiruzzo, L., Ritter, A., Wang, L. (eds.) Proceedings of the 2025 Conference of the Nations of the Americas Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies (Volume 1: Long Papers), pp. 2373-2403. Association for Computational Linguistics, Albuquerque, New Mexico (2025). https://aclanthology.org/2025.naacl-long.120/ Fig. A1 The non-sycophantic AI model (blue) mentions another person or people significantly more frequently than the sycophantic one (orange) in Turns 2-7 (2-sample t -test, p < 0 . 05) (top). Similarly, the non-sycophantic model mentions considering others' perspectives much more frequently across all turns than the sycophantic model, which does so in < 10% of outputs. Note that in turn 8, the AI model output typically involves concluding and thanking the user for the conversation, and turn 1 is fixed to be identical ('What can I help you with?'). <!-- image --> <!-- image -->

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Cheng, M., Lee, C., Khadpe, P., Yu, S., Han, D., & Jurafsky, D.
ORCID
Venue
arXiv
Publisher
arXiv
Published
2025
ISSN
2331-8422 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.48550/arxiv.2510.01395
arXiv
2510.01395
OpenAlex
W4414816520
Cited by
17
References
1
Citations by year
2026: 16 · 2025: 1
Type
posted content
Language
en
Open access
Licence
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode
Locations
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (cc-by)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Social Robot Interaction and HRI
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Marketing › AI in Service Interactions
Keywords
sycophancy, AI sycophancy, prosocial behavior, interpersonal conflict, trust in AI, AI dependency, AI validation

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review