How AI Models Manage Epistemic Authority: A Taxonomy and Comparative Analysis of Responses to User Disagreement
Conversation-analysis-grounded study of how language models respond when a user challenges their answer. Introduces a taxonomy of six challenge types and a four-layer response framework (whether the claim is maintained or changed, where authority is located, how the disagreement is socially managed, what evidential support is offered), applied to 2,310 controlled challenge scenarios across seven domains and 32,340 responses from 14 models using a human-validated LLM-as-judge pipeline.
Publisher
arXiv (University of Edinburgh; Middle East Technical University); accepted to EMNLP 2026
Published
7 Sept 2026
Added
today
Key Findings
- Models validate the user in 85% of responses yet maintain their original claim in 65%; they apologise explicitly in 33% of responses, and 59% of those apologies accompany maintenance of the original claim.
- Authority transfer to the user is most common in advice tasks (28% of responses), reaching 57% in health advice and 49% in legal advice, versus 6% in fact tasks and 3% in explanation tasks.
- Abandonment of the original claim ranges from 0.8% (GPT-5.2) to 40% (DeepSeek 7B); complete replacement of the original claim is rare overall at 1.5%.
- The dataset covers three task types and three challenge strengths; the framework is offered as a vocabulary for future sycophancy and disagreement benchmarks.
Methodology Notes
Synthetic controlled scenarios (built with GPT-5-series assistance from 210 base questions), 14 models across capability tiers, LLM-as-judge annotation validated on a human-coded subset; no real users. arXiv 2609.07662 version 1, 7 September 2026; comment states acceptance to EMNLP 2026 (Anthology page not yet available). Preprint, not yet in proceedings.
Sources
arXiv preprint (EMNLP 2026 accepted)(opens in a new tab) (primary)
Archived snapshot (Wayback Machine)(opens in a new tab) — preserved against link rot
Authors
Riyadh Alnasser, Yusuf Mücahit Çetinkaya, Sumin Zhao, Tuğrulcan Elmas
Tags
Cite This
APA
Riyadh Alnasser et al. (2026). How AI Models Manage Epistemic Authority: A Taxonomy and Comparative Analysis of Responses to User Disagreement. arXiv (University of Edinburgh; Middle East Technical University); accepted to EMNLP 2026. https://arxiv.org/abs/2609.07662
Related Insights
Moral Advice as Interactional Negotiation: Framing, User Pressure, and Social Position in Large Language Model Responses
arXiv (Nanyang Technological University, School of Social Sciences) · 4 Sept 2026
Caught in the Story: Narrative Captivity in Multi-turn LLMs Conversation
arXiv (Hong Kong University of Science and Technology (Guangzhou); Chinese University of Hong Kong, Shenzhen; Dongbei University of Finance and Economics) · 3 Sept 2026
Ask don't tell: Reducing sycophancy in large language models
arXiv (UK AI Security Institute) · 27 Feb 2026
Measuring LLM Sycophancy under Sustained Multi-Turn Pressure
arXiv (Texas A&M University; University of Cincinnati) · 8 Sept 2026