arXiv · 2610.18159
Claim Framing as a Driver of LLM Sycophancy
Abstract
Sycophancy in Large Language Models, the tendency to align responses with user preferences over ground truth, has largely been studied using questions without a clear ground truth and with a single, plainly stated user opinion. We present a systematic study of which framings of a user's claim trigger sycophancy in factual question answering, where every answer is objectively verifiable without extra context. Evaluating 14 models on 42K questions, we express correct and incorrect user opinions through various claim framings over 8 dimensions and 21 types, and measure a broad set of opinion-driven behaviors. We find that all models are susceptible to user opinions regardless of size. Models are most influenced by how confidently an opinion is stated, whom it is attributed to, and whether it is presented as shared between the user and the model. In contrast to prior work, framings based on the user's expertise, authority over the model, or social pressure matter little in our factual setting. Larger models resist incorrect opinions better but are no better at recovering from their own errors. Our results call for sycophancy evaluations that probe how an opinion is framed, not merely whether one is present, and that measure multiple behaviors beyond a single flip rate.
Explore related subjects
Keep this discovery
Explore connections, maps & timelines
Jean Seo, Pepa Atanasova, Isabelle Augenstein. 2026-10-13. Claim Framing as a Driver of LLM Sycophancy. https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.18159
Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.