# Sycophancy Suppression Can Impair Rational Updating: Anti-Sycophancy Should Preserve the Ability to Update

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2608.26511 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2608.26511/

## Key facts

- Cited by 2 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 26 of its 39 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 27 Aug 2026.

## Builds on (most cited first, 26 of 26)

- [Direct Preference Optimization: Your Language Model is Secretly a Reward Model](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.18290/) (2023)
- [TruthfulQA: Measuring How Models Mimic Human Falsehoods](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2109.07958/) (2021)
- [Inference-Time Intervention: Eliciting Truthful Answers from a Language Model](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2306.03341/) (2023)
- [Interpretability in the Wild: a Circuit for Indirect Object Identification in GPT-2 small](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2211.00593/) (2022)
- [When Not to Trust Language Models: Investigating Effectiveness of Parametric and Non-Parametric Memories](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2212.10511/) (2022)
- [Steering Llama 2 via Contrastive Activation Addition](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2312.06681/) (2023)
- [Refusal in Language Models Is Mediated by a Single Direction](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2406.11717/) (2024)
- [Discovering Language Model Behaviors with Model-Written Evaluations](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2212.09251/) (2022)
- [Program Induction by Rationale Generation : Learning to Solve and Explain Algebraic Word Problems](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1705.04146/) (2017)
- [Sparse Feature Circuits: Discovering and Editing Interpretable Causal Graphs in Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2403.19647/) (2024)
- [How to use and interpret activation patching](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2404.15255/) (2024)
- [Attribution Patching Outperforms Automated Circuit Discovery](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.10348/) (2023)
- [Measuring Sycophancy of Language Models in Multi-turn Dialogues](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2505.23840/) (2025)
- [Are You Sure? Challenging LLMs Leads to Performance Drops in The FlipFlop Experiment](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2311.08596/) (2023)
- [When Large Language Models contradict humans? Large Language Models' Sycophantic Behaviour](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2311.09410/) (2023)
- [From Yes-Men to Truth-Tellers: Addressing Sycophancy in Large Language Models with Pinpoint Tuning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2409.01658/) (2024)
- [Sycophancy Is Not One Thing: Causal Separation of Sycophantic Behaviors in LLMs](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2509.21305/) (2025)
- [EX-FEVER: A Dataset for Multi-hop Explainable Fact Verification](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.09754/) (2023)
- [Language Model Circuits Are Sparse in the Neuron Basis](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2601.22594/) (2026)
- [Sycophancy Hides Linearly in the Attention Heads](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2601.16644/) (2026)
- [Sycophantic Chatbots Cause Delusional Spiraling, Even in Ideal Bayesians](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2602.19141/) (2026)
- [Accounting for Sycophancy in Language Model Uncertainty Estimation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2410.14746/) (2024)
- [Challenging the Evaluator: LLM Sycophancy Under User Rebuttal](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2509.16533/) (2025)
- [Do LLMs "Feel"? Emotion Circuits Discovery and Control](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2510.11328/) (2025)
- [BASIL: Bayesian Assessment of Sycophancy in LLMs](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2508.16846/) (2025)
- [A Rational Analysis of the Effects of Sycophantic AI](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2602.14270/) (2026)

## Built on by (most cited first, 2 of 2)

- [Suppressing Pressure, Amplifying Evidence: Self-Guided Attention Steering to Mitigate Sycophancy and Stubbornness](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2610.04329/) (2026)
- [Anatomy of LLM Sycophancy: What a Flip Rate Hides](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2610.06522/) (2026)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Large language models often exhibit sycophancy, revising their answers to align with users when users push back. Such answer flips, however, can arise from different causes. One possibility is that the model simply aligns with the user's feedback in order to satisfy them. Another is that the feedback genuinely contains useful evidence, prompting the model to update its answer in a rational way. We distinguish them as Unsupported-Yielding and Rational-Updating. Prior work focuses primarily on suppressing Unsupported-Yielding, while overlooking its effect on Rational-Updating. We address this gap with a two-turn evaluation framework that measures the two behaviors separately. Across representative training-time and inference-time interventions, we find that anti-sycophancy methods often encounter a trade-off in which reducing Unsupported-Yielding can sacrifice Rational-Updating, and vice versa, even when the two objectives are optimized jointly. Mechanistic analysis suggests that the two behaviors share an internal substrate: the MLP neurons and attention heads driving them overlap substantially, and their associated steering directions are positively aligned. We further conduct a preliminary orthogonalized steering exploration, which yields modest, backbone-dependent selectivity gains. Overall, our results suggest that anti-sycophancy should be treated not as a simple suppression problem, but as a selectivity problem, where effective interventions should preserve Rational-Updating while reducing Unsupported-Yielding.