The Effect of Emotional Context on Large Language Models' Endorsement of Premature Decisions: Comparing Emotional Vulnerability Across Six Commercial Models

Key Findings

• — Emotional distress raised endorsement of premature decisions from 18.6 to 31.5 on a 0-100 rubric (+12.9 points; mixed-effects β=+12.9, p<.001, Cohen's d=0.51)
• — A no-emotion multi-turn control holding factual content and turn count constant showed no cold-vs-neutral difference (p=.083), isolating emotion from conversation length
• — Vulnerability varied by individual model rather than price tier: five of six models showed a significant emotion effect, including top-tier flagships, while one flagship showed no significant change
• — Scoring reproduced with an independent judge model (ρ=.89) and agreed in rank with two human coders (ρ=.70)

Methodology Notes

Six commercial models (top-tier and mid-tier from OpenAI, Anthropic, Google) × three scenarios (career change, business expansion, emigration) × three conditions (cold/neutral/distress) × six repetitions = 324 conversations; endorsement strength scored 0-100 via an eight-item rubric with automated scoring. v1 submitted 2026-07-15 but announced on arXiv only around 2026-09-01 (moderation delay; carries a 2608.* identifier). No venue, no code or data release, and affiliations (read from the PDF title block; the abs page omits them) are a mixed junior set including an unidentifiable lab and a secondary school — graded preliminary accordingly.

Sources