Abstract
Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used for emotional support and relationship advice, where a model's tendency to preserve a user's face can inadvertently reinforce harmful interpersonal behaviors. To systematically examine this risk, we developed the Romantic Relationship Advice-Seeking Prompts (RRASP) dataset of 2,400 prompts across five relationship themes and evaluated social sycophancy using the ELEPHANT framework on two consumer-facing models, GPT-5 Mini and Gemini 3 Flash. Contrary to our initial hypothesis, grammatical mood alone did not produce systematic differences in sycophantic behavior, suggesting that what a user implies matters more than how they phrase it. Instead, perspective-driven framing had a stronger influence, with gaps between original and flipped prompts widening in follow-up responses. Consistent increases in framing and moral sycophancy across turns indicate that models become more likely to accept a user's stated premises and affirm their ethical stance as a dialogue progresses. Notably, Gemini 3 Flash exhibited substantially smaller increases in moral sycophancy than GPT-5 Mini, suggesting it is more resistant to reinforcing ethically problematic positions across turns.
Abstract (translated)
URL
https://arxiv.org/abs/2609.13841
