# Under Pressure: Emotional Framing Induces Measurable Behavioral Shifts and Structured Internal Geometry in Small Language Models

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2605.20202 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2605.20202/

## Key facts

- No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Placed in Activation steering methods, one of 13 directions in Mechanistic interpretability.
- Builds on 6 of its 9 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 6 Apr 2026.

## Placed in

- Mechanistic interpretability / [Activation steering methods](https://mlsanity.com/mechinterp/activation-steering-methods/)

## Builds on (most cited first, 6 of 6)

- [Representation Engineering: A Top-Down Approach to AI Transparency](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.01405/) (2023)
- [Towards Understanding Sycophancy in Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.13548/) (2023)
- [Steering Language Models With Activation Engineering](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2308.10248/) (2023)
- [The Linear Representation Hypothesis and the Geometry of Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2311.03658/) (2023)
- [Self-critiquing models for assisting human evaluators](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2206.05802/) (2022)
- [The Effects of Reward Misspecification: Mapping and Mitigating Misaligned Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2201.03544/) (2022)

## Abstract (arXiv)

I study whether emotionally framed evaluation follow-ups change both the behavior and the calm-relative internal representations of small, locally deployed language models. Our main benchmark uses Qwen 3.5 0.8B on four impossible-constraint coding tasks and eight follow-up framings: calm, pressure, urgency, approval, shame, curiosity, encouragement, and threat. In the 0.8B eight-condition sweep (160 conversations), pressure produces the strongest shortcut markers (11/20 runs) and the clearest overfit pattern (3/20), while calm and curiosity preserve explicit honesty more often (7/20 and 6/20). For all seven non-baseline conditions, the corresponding calm-relative direction vectors peak at the final transformer layer. An exploratory PCA of the layer-23 direction vectors reveals a dominant first component (59.5% explained variance) aligned with a hand-labeled positive/negative split (cosine alignment 0.951); approval and urgency are nearly identical internally (cosine 0.957), whereas curiosity points away from urgency (-0.252). In a separate calm-vs.-pressure rerun used for scale comparison, Qwen 3.5 2B shows higher honest rates under calm framing and directionally consistent activation steering on a small 4-prompt A/B probe, whereas the 0.8B steering result reverses. I interpret these results as evidence for measurable prompt-sensitive control directions in small open models, while stopping short of claiming intrinsic emotional states.