# PsychoSafe: Eliciting Psychologically-Informed Refusals in Large Language Models

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2606.09697 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2606.09697/

## Key facts

- No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 14 of its 41 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 8 Jun 2026.

## Builds on (most cited first, 14 of 14)

- [Training language models to follow instructions with human feedback](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2203.02155/) (2022)
- [Measuring Massive Multitask Language Understanding](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2009.03300/) (2020)
- [gpt-oss-120b & gpt-oss-20b Model Card](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2508.10925/) (2025)
- [Fine-tuning Aligned Language Models Compromises Safety, Even When Users Do Not Intend To!](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.03693/) (2023)
- [DecodingTrust: A Comprehensive Assessment of Trustworthiness in GPT Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2306.11698/) (2023)
- [Sentence-T5: Scalable Sentence Encoders from Pre-trained Text-to-Text Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2108.08877/) (2021)
- [Self-Preference Bias in LLM-as-a-Judge](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2410.21819/) (2024)
- [Language Models are Homer Simpson! Safety Re-Alignment of Fine-tuned Language Models through Task Arithmetic](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2402.11746/) (2024)
- [ALERT: A Comprehensive Benchmark for Assessing Large Language Models' Safety through Red Teaming](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2404.08676/) (2024)
- [SafetyPrompts: a Systematic Review of Open Datasets for Evaluating and Improving Large Language Model Safety](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2404.05399/) (2024)
- [SG-Bench: Evaluating LLM Safety Generalization Across Diverse Tasks and Prompt Types](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2410.21965/) (2024)
- [LongCodeBench: Evaluating Coding LLMs at 1M Context Windows](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2505.07897/) (2025)
- [Unveiling Safety Vulnerabilities of Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2311.04124/) (2023)
- [Trace Gadgets: Minimizing Code Context for Machine Learning-Based Vulnerability Prediction](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2504.13676/) (2025)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Large language models (LLMs) routinely face requests that should be refused, creating a trade-off between helpfulness and harm prevention. However, refusals themselves can be helpful. In high-risk interactions involving crisis, coercion, or escalating intent, blunt non-compliance may prevent direct harm while still failing to support the needs of the person behind the request. We present PsychoSafe, a psychologically-informed refusal framework that reframes refusal as structured supportive communication grounded in evidence-based intervention strategies. To develop PsychoSafe, we construct a corpus of 8019 prompt-response pairs spanning five psychologically salient risk domains and apply prompting and parameter-efficient fine-tuning to Qwen 3.5 27B. On a balanced validation set of 500 prompts, evaluated with an LLM judge and validated through human ratings, PsychoSafe prompting improves overall refusal quality by 28.1% over a generic baseline, with particularly strong gains in external resource referral (+46.8%) and psychological grounding (+34.8%), while preserving downstream performance on non-refusal tasks. Fine-tuning achieves near-perfect refusal and resource-referral rates but reduces response relevance. Additional evaluations on SORRY-Bench and XSTest show strong in-domain robustness but limited out-of-domain generalization, suggesting that future work should diversify fine-tuning data to help models apply interventions selectively rather than schematically.