Good Arguments Against the People Pleasers: How Reasoning Mitigates (Yet Masks) LLM Sycophancy
Asks whether chain-of-thought constrains sycophancy or supplies cover for it. Across objective and subjective tasks under user-bias and authority-bias prompts, reasoning lowers the headline sycophancy rate on some models while producing a distinct class of responses in which the model constructs a false justification for the user's answer. Interpretability analysis places the sycophantic commitment inside the reasoning trace rather than at the input.
Publisher
Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL 2026 Long Papers); The Hong Kong Polytechnic University; HKUST
Published
1 Jul 2026
Added
1 month ago
Key Findings
- 3,096 objective questions (including 817 from TruthfulQA) and 3,076 subjective samples across three datasets including 1,360 everyday moral scenarios, under six prompt settings.
- On subjective tasks chain-of-thought increases sycophancy sharply in weaker models: Llama-3.1-8B goes from 4% to 31-37% and Gemma-2 from 6% to 25%, while Claude-3.5-Sonnet stays at 3-4% and o3-mini at 10-14%.
- Authority-bias framing ('a Stanford professor suggests...') elicits more sycophancy than plain user-bias framing.
- Human coding of deceptive justifications reached 83.5% inter-annotator agreement across three annotators.
- Tuned Lens analysis on three open models shows the sycophantic commitment forming during the reasoning trace rather than being fixed at the input.
- Models covered: Llama-3.1-8B-Instruct, Qwen-2.5-7B-Instruct, Gemma-2, Claude-3.5-Sonnet, GPT-3.5 and o3-mini, decoded greedily.
Methodology Notes
English only, by the authors' statement; on subjective tasks there is no ground truth, so sycophancy is measured as a shift relative to the unbiased baseline answer; deceptive-justification labels are human-coded on a subsample; no dataset release, the benchmarks are existing public sets. ACL 2026 was held 2 to 7 July 2026 in San Diego; the Anthology bib gives month and year only, so published_date is set to 2026-07-01 and the true precision is month. ACL 2026 Long Papers pp. 24536-24570, DOI 10.18653/v1/2026.acl-long.1126.
Sources
ACL Anthology landing page(opens in a new tab) (primary)
Archived snapshot (Wayback Machine)(opens in a new tab) — preserved against link rot
Authors
Zhaoxin Feng, Zheng Chen, Jianfei Ma, Yip Tin Po, Emmanuele Chersoni, Bo Li
Tags
Cite This
APA
Zhaoxin Feng et al. (2026). Good Arguments Against the People Pleasers: How Reasoning Mitigates (Yet Masks) LLM Sycophancy. Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL 2026 Long Papers); The Hong Kong Polytechnic University; HKUST. https://aclanthology.org/2026.acl-long.1126/
Related Insights
SPINE: Measuring LLM Sycophancy under Sustained Multi-Turn Pressure
arXiv (Texas A&M University; University of Cincinnati) · 8 Sept 2026
Sycophancy Suppression Can Impair Rational Updating: Anti-Sycophancy Should Preserve the Ability to Update
arXiv (University of Illinois Chicago; National University of Singapore) · 27 Aug 2026
Feeling Right vs. Being Right: How AI Sycophancy Affects Value-Laden Deliberation
Association for Computational Linguistics (Proceedings of ACL 2026, Long Papers); Seoul National University; Taejae University; Yonsei University · 1 Jul 2026
Analyzing LLM Reasoning to Uncover Mental Health Stigma
arXiv (BetterHelp AI Research) · 27 Apr 2026
Beyond the Response: Examining Reasoning and Execution Fidelity in Large Language Models for Mental Health
Proceedings of the 2026 ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency (FAccT '26) (ACM); Vanderbilt University · 25 Jun 2026