Search papers, labs, and topics across Lattice.
This paper investigates why LLMs are perceived as empathic, positing that they rely on a consistent, well-liked template. The authors created a taxonomy of 10 empathic language tactics and analyzed both human and LLM-generated responses. They found that LLMs overwhelmingly adhere to a specific sequence of these tactics, while human responses are more varied, suggesting that LLM empathy is driven by formulaic application of a learned template.
Turns out, LLMs aren't actually empathic, they're just really good at regurgitating a well-liked empathy template.
Recent research shows that greater numbers of people are turning to Large Language Models (LLMs) for emotional support, and that people rate LLM responses as more empathic than human-written responses. We suggest a reason for this success: LLMs have learned and consistently deploy a well-liked template for expressing empathy. We develop a taxonomy of 10 empathic language"tactics"that include validating someone's feelings and paraphrasing, and apply this taxonomy to characterize the language that people and LLMs produce when writing empathic responses. Across a set of 2 studies comparing a total of n = 3,265 AI-generated (by six models) and n = 1,290 human-written responses, we find that LLM responses are highly formulaic at a discourse functional level. We discovered a template -- a structured sequence of tactics -- that matches between 83--90% of LLM responses (and 60--83\% in a held out sample), and when those are matched, covers 81--92% of the response. By contrast, human-written responses are more diverse. We end with a discussion of implications for the future of AI-generated empathy.
Microsoft Research