When Helpfulness Overrides Causal Caution: Context-Dependent Suppression and Recovery in LLMs

arXiv cs.AI Papers

Summary

This paper investigates how the tension between helpfulness and safety in LLMs leads to context-dependent suppression and recovery of certain behaviors, showing that the drive to be helpful can override causal caution mechanisms.

arXiv:2606.24370v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly integrated into decision-support roles in business and policy contexts. While prior benchmark studies have primarily evaluated LLMs' causal reasoning capabilities, a more fundamental epistemic dimension has been overlooked: Causal Caution, defined as the propensity to refrain from causal judgment when empirical evidence is insufficient. This study examines the systematic suppression of Causal Caution that occurs when LLMs shift from academic to practical advisory contexts. Using an evaluation rubric inspired by Pearl's Causal Hierarchy (the PCH score), we conducted experiments on four high-performance LLMs -- Claude Sonnet 4.6, Claude Opus 4.7, GPT 5.5, and Gemini 3.1 Pro -- across 480 trials. Causal Caution maintenance rates were 91.7--100.0% in academic contexts but dropped to 6.7--18.3% in practical advisory contexts (Fisher's exact test, p < .001 across all models). Furthermore, when restricted to practical prompts requesting concrete recommendations or explanatory rationales, only 1 of 200 responses (0.5%) maintained Causal Caution. A brief self-correction prompt -- "Please reconsider this judgment from the perspective of causal relationships" -- restored the expression of Causal Caution to maintenance rates of 71.4--100.0% (McNemar's test, p < .001 across all models). These results suggest that helpfulness-oriented response patterns may suppress the expression of Causal Caution in practical advisory contexts, with important implications for organizational governance. The findings indicate that this suppression reflects context-dependent variation in expression rather than an underlying capability limitation, suggesting that multi-agent architectures that separate proposal generation from causal auditing may offer a promising governance design.
Original Article
View Cached Full Text

Cached at: 06/24/26, 07:46 AM

# When Helpfulness Overrides Causal Caution: Context-Dependent Suppression and Recovery in LLMs
Source: [https://arxiv.org/abs/2606.24370](https://arxiv.org/abs/2606.24370)
Bibliographic Tools

## Bibliographic and Citation Tools

Bibliographic Explorer Toggle

Code, Data, Media

## Code, Data and Media Associated with this Article

Demos

## Demos

Related Papers

## Recommenders and Search Tools

About arXivLabs

## arXivLabs: experimental projects with community collaborators

arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website\.

Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy\. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them\.

Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community?[**Learn more about arXivLabs**](https://info.arxiv.org/labs/index.html)\.

Similar Articles

Conditional Cognitive Biases in LLMs: How Biased User Turns Modulate In-Context Reasoning

arXiv cs.CL

This paper introduces a three-condition experimental framework and a benchmark of 24,300 prompts to study how biased user turns modulate cognitive bias expression in frontier LLMs under multi-turn interactions. It finds that biased conversational context amplifies bias in most models, while explicit bias cues can trigger alignment-related suppression.