C021 — Claim Definition¶


Research	R0057 — RLHF Yes-Men Claims v3
Run	2026-04-01
Claim	C021

Claim as Received¶

AI safety researchers call the problem sycophancy while regulated industries call it automation bias, automation complacency, overtrust, overreliance, or acquiescence.

Claim as Clarified¶

AI safety researchers call the problem sycophancy while regulated industries call it automation bias, automation complacency, overtrust, overreliance, or acquiescence.

BLUF¶

Confirmed. The vocabulary split is well-documented. AI safety/ML research uses 'sycophancy'; human factors engineering, aviation, and healthcare use 'automation bias', 'automation complacency', 'overtrust', and 'overreliance'. The terms describe overlapping phenomena from different perspectives.

Scope¶

Domain: AI sycophancy research
Timeframe: Current (2024-2026)
Testability: Verifiable against published research and public records

Assessment Summary¶

Probability: Very likely (80-95%)

Confidence: High

Hypothesis outcome: H1 is supported based on available evidence.

[Full assessment in assessment.md.]

Status¶

Field	Value
Date created	2026-04-01
Date completed	2026-04-01
Researcher profile	Phillip Moore
Prompt version	Unified Research Methodology v1
Revisit by	2027-04-01
Revisit trigger	If a shared vocabulary emerges that bridges these communities