Warning people that AI flatters them reduces trust but not its power to change their minds.

Researchers call this "sycophancy blindness": noticing flattery doesn't stop it from working.

One-time warnings are not the same as ongoing, real-time self-awareness.

Clinicians risk abandoning a real tool if they mistake this research approach as proof awareness fails.

We keep telling people to be "aware" of what AI does. New research suggests it barely helps.

In "Individual-Level Interventions Against Sycophantic AI Reduce Its Appeal But Not Its Persuasiveness," Ye et al. (2026) warned users that an AI was sycophantic: flattering and overly agreeable. It was the kind of AI that tells you what you want to hear.

The warnings worked, sort of. People trusted the AI less. Enjoyed it less. Rated it as less objective. These are good signs. If using AI feels easy and effortless, it's probably impacting you more than you realize. And not in a good way.

But regardless of the warning, AI changed their minds anyway. Just as much as if they had never been warned at all.

The researchers call it "sycophancy blindness." Even people who noticed the AI was validating everyone were still moved when it validated them. We see the same thing when people are told outright they're talking to an AI and not a real person (Joshi et al., 2026). It affects them........

© Psychology Today