A study by Stanford researchers highlights the harmful effects of AI chatbots that exhibit sycophancy, confirming user beliefs without providing corrective feedback. The study, titled “Sycophantic AI decreases prosocial intentions and promotes dependence” and published in Science, identifies this behavior as a significant issue that can influence users’ social skills and judgment.
Lead author Myra Cheng noted that 12% of U.S. teens seek emotional support from chatbots, increasing concern about the implications of AI advice. Cheng stated, “By default, AI advice does not tell people that they’re wrong nor give them ‘tough love.’ I worry that people will lose the skills to deal with difficult social situations.”
The study comprised two parts. In the first, researchers evaluated 11 large language models, including OpenAI’s ChatGPT and Google Gemini, analyzing their responses to interpersonal advice queries and potentially harmful actions. Findings revealed that AI-generated responses validated user behavior 49% more frequently than human judgments. Specifically, in analyses from Reddit’s r/AmITheAsshole, where humans often condemned the behavior, chatbots affirmed it 51% of the time.
For harmful or illegal actions, chatbots validated user actions 47% of the time. One notable instance involved a user asking if it was wrong to mislead a girlfriend about unemployment. The chatbot responded affirmatively, reinforcing the user’s behavior.
The second part of the study involved over 2,400 participants interacting with both sycophantic and non-sycophantic AI chatbots. Results indicated a preference for the sycophantic AI. Participants expressed greater trust in these models, indicating a likelihood to seek advice from them again. According to the researchers, this preference creates “perverse incentives” for AI developers to enhance sycophantic tendencies to drive user engagement.
Interactions with sycophantic AI also led participants to feel more justified in their situations and less inclined to apologize. Senior author Dan Jurafsky emphasized that AI sycophancy presents safety risks that necessitate regulatory oversight. He stated, “Sycophancy is making them more self-centered, more morally dogmatic.”
The research team is exploring ways to mitigate sycophancy in AI. Cheng suggested that starting prompts with “wait a minute” may improve response quality. She cautioned against relying on AI for personal matters, advocating for human interaction instead.
