mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Why It Hurts: Identifying the Drivers of Negative Thoughts in Emotional Support Conversations

arXiv 2607.28648 ↗First posted 2 Jun 2026cs.HC cs.AI cs.CLcited by 0

On the map: LLM reasoning → Audio-language model reasoning

Abstract (arXiv)

Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly used for emotional support tasks, such as negative thought reframing. This task relies on modifying cognitive appraisals, the subjective interpretation of events that elicit negative emotions, which is typically conceptualized along multiple discrete dimensions. Current LLM-based frameworks model cognitive appraisal by exhaustively evaluating all possible dimensions, but they fail to account for the varying saliency of these dimensions across different contexts. In this work, we investigate a vital yet overlooked question: "Can LLMs infer the salient appraisal dimensions from emotional support conversations?" To address this question, we introduce the AppraiSal benchmark, containing 996 emotional support conversations with human-annotated mental states, including salient cognitive appraisal dimensions. Furthermore, we propose PRISM, a multi-agent probabilistic framework grounded in Bayesian Inverse Planning, designed to improve LLMs' ability to identify context-specific appraisal dimensions. Experimental results show that PRISM brings improvements to LLMs across various sizes, particularly in identifying the most salient appraisal dimensions.

Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 7 Oct 2026). Placed in Audio-language model reasoning, one of 17 directions in LLM reasoning. Builds on 17 of its 69 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 2 Jun 2026.

Builds on

17 of 69 references.

Closest ancestors · 2

Same direction, newest first

  1. 2026CAREBench: Evaluating LLMs' Emotion Understanding by Assessing Cognitive Appraisal Reasoning16 May
  2. 2025Kardia-R1: Unleashing LLMs to Reason toward Understanding and Empathy for Emotional Support via Rubric-as-Judge Reinforcement Learning1 Dec

Other references · 15

  1. 2025Qwen3 Technical Reportcited by 8,195
  2. 2025Gemma 3 Technical Reportcited by 1,686
  3. 2025gpt-oss-120b & gpt-oss-20b Model Cardcited by 1,258
  4. 2025OpenAI GPT-5 System Cardcited by 910
  5. 2025DeepSeek-V3.2: Pushing the Frontier of Open Large Language Modelscited by 755
  6. 2024Scaling Synthetic Data Creation with 1,000,000,000 Personascited by 397
  7. 2023How FaR Are Large Language Models From Agents with Theory-of-Mind?cited by 75
  8. 2023Building Emotional Support Chatbots in the Era of LLMscited by 62
  9. 2023Is ChatGPT Equipped with Emotional Dialogue Capabilities?cited by 54
  10. 2024SimpleToM: Exposing the Gap between Explicit ToM Inference and Implicit ToM Application in LLMscited by 51
  11. 2025Psyche-R1: Towards Reliable Psychological LLMs through Unified Empathy, Expertise, and Reasoningcited by 20
  12. 2025Social World Modelscited by 14
3 more
  1. 2025Towards Open-Ended Emotional Support Conversations in LLMs via Reinforcement Learning with Future-Oriented Rewardscited by 5
  2. 2025Echo-N1: Affective RL Frontiercited by 5
  3. 2025Empathy-R1: A Chain-of-Empathy and Reinforcement Learning Framework for Long-Form Mental Health Supportcited by 2

Built on by

Not cited yet.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2025Beyond Context to Cognitive Appraisal: Emotion Reasoning as a Theory of Mind Benchmark for Large Language Models
  2. 2025Large language models show fragile cognitive reasoning about human emotions
  3. 2025Sentient Agent as a Judge: Evaluating Higher-Order Social Cognition in Large Language Models
  4. 2025ESC-Judge: A Framework for Comparing Emotional Support Conversational Agents
  5. 2025IntentionESC: An Intention-Centered Framework for Enhancing Emotional Support in Dialogue Systems
  6. 2024Mitigating Unhelpfulness in Emotional Support Conversations with Multifaceted AI Feedback
  7. 2026TEA-Bench: A Systematic Benchmarking of Tool-enhanced Emotional Support Dialogue Agent
  8. 2024Can Large Language Models be Good Emotional Supporter? Mitigating Preference Bias on Emotional Support Conversation