Does "Reasoning" with Large Language Models Improve Recognizing, Generating, and Reframing Unhelpful Thoughts?

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2504.00163v1
• Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2025 19:19:34 GMT
• Title: Does "Reasoning" with Large Language Models Improve Recognizing, Generating, and Reframing Unhelpful Thoughts?
• Authors: Yilin Qi, Dong Won Lee, Cynthia Breazeal, Hae Won Park,
• Abstract summary: Cognitive Reframing helps individuals reinterpret negative experiences by finding positive meaning.<n>Recent advances in Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated improved performance through reasoning-based strategies.<n>This inspires a promising direction of leveraging the reasoning capabilities of LLMs to improve CBT and mental reframing.
• Score: 22.202600416432386
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: Cognitive Reframing, a core element of Cognitive Behavioral Therapy (CBT), helps individuals reinterpret negative experiences by finding positive meaning. Recent advances in Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated improved performance through reasoning-based strategies. This inspires a promising direction of leveraging the reasoning capabilities of LLMs to improve CBT and mental reframing by simulating the process of critical thinking, potentially enabling more effective recognition, generation, and reframing of cognitive distortions. In this work, we investigate the role of various reasoning methods, including pre-trained reasoning LLMs and augmented reasoning strategies such as CoT and self-consistency in enhancing LLMs' ability to perform cognitive reframing tasks. We find that augmented reasoning methods, even when applied to "outdated" LLMs like GPT-3.5, consistently outperform state-of-the-art pretrained reasoning models on recognizing, generating and reframing unhelpful thoughts.

Related papers

• ReMA: Learning to Meta-think for LLMs with Multi-Agent Reinforcement Learning [54.787341008881036]
  We introduce Reinforced Meta-thinking Agents (ReMA), a novel framework that leverages Multi-Agent Reinforcement Learning (MARL) to elicit meta-thinking behaviors. ReMA decouples the reasoning process into two hierarchical agents: a high-level meta-thinking agent responsible for generating strategic oversight and plans, and a low-level reasoning agent for detailed executions. Experimental results demonstrate that ReMA outperforms single-agent RL baselines on complex reasoning tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-03-12T16:05:31Z)
• ReVISE: Learning to Refine at Test-Time via Intrinsic Self-Verification [53.80183105328448]
  Refine via Intrinsic Self-Verification (ReVISE) is an efficient framework that enables LLMs to self-correct their outputs through self-verification. Our experiments on various reasoning tasks demonstrate that ReVISE achieves efficient self-correction and significantly improves reasoning performance.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-20T13:50:02Z)
• Advancing Reasoning in Large Language Models: Promising Methods and Approaches [0.0]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have succeeded remarkably in various natural language processing (NLP) tasks. Their ability to perform complex reasoning-spanning logical deduction, mathematical problem-solving, commonsense inference, and multi-step reasoning-often falls short of human expectations. This survey provides a comprehensive review of emerging techniques enhancing reasoning in LLMs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-05T23:31:39Z)
• Is your LLM trapped in a Mental Set? Investigative study on how mental sets affect the reasoning capabilities of LLMs [8.920202114368843]
  We present an investigative study on how Mental Sets influence the reasoning capabilities of LLMs.<n>Mental Sets refers to the tendency to persist with previously successful strategies, even when they become inefficient.<n>We compare the performance of LLM models like Llama-3.1-8B-Instruct, Llama-3.1-70B-Instruct and GPT-4o in the presence of mental sets.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-01-21T02:29:15Z)
• CBEval: A framework for evaluating and interpreting cognitive biases in LLMs [1.4633779950109127]
  Large Language models exhibit notable gaps in their cognitive processes.<n>As reflections of human-generated data, these models have the potential to inherit cognitive biases.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-12-04T05:53:28Z)
• Unlocking Structured Thinking in Language Models with Cognitive Prompting [0.0]
  We propose cognitive prompting as a novel approach to guide problem-solving in large language models (LLMs)<n>We introduce three variants: a deterministic sequence of cognitive operations, a self-adaptive variant, and a hybrid variant.<n>Experiments with LLaMA, Gemma2, and Qwen models in each two sizes on the arithmetic reasoning benchmark GSM8K demonstrate that cognitive prompting significantly improves performance compared to standard question answering.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-03T19:53:47Z)
• Cognitive LLMs: Towards Integrating Cognitive Architectures and Large Language Models for Manufacturing Decision-making [51.737762570776006]
  LLM-ACTR is a novel neuro-symbolic architecture that provides human-aligned and versatile decision-making. Our framework extracts and embeds knowledge of ACT-R's internal decision-making process as latent neural representations. Our experiments on novel Design for Manufacturing tasks show both improved task performance as well as improved grounded decision-making capability.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-08-17T11:49:53Z)
• HealMe: Harnessing Cognitive Reframing in Large Language Models for Psychotherapy [25.908522131646258]
  We unveil the Helping and Empowering through Adaptive Language in Mental Enhancement (HealMe) model. This novel cognitive reframing therapy method effectively addresses deep-rooted negative thoughts and fosters rational, balanced perspectives. We adopt the first comprehensive and expertly crafted psychological evaluation metrics, specifically designed to rigorously assess the performance of cognitive reframing.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-26T09:10:34Z)
• Metacognitive Retrieval-Augmented Large Language Models [43.57020180706832]
  This paper introduces MetaRAG, an approach that combines the retrieval-augmented generation process with metacognition. By integrating this, MetaRAG enables the model to monitor, evaluate, and plan its response strategies. Empirical evaluations show that MetaRAG significantly outperforms existing methods.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-18T15:41:31Z)
• MR-GSM8K: A Meta-Reasoning Benchmark for Large Language Model Evaluation [60.65820977963331]
  We introduce a novel evaluation paradigm for Large Language Models (LLMs) This paradigm shifts the emphasis from result-oriented assessments, which often neglect the reasoning process, to a more comprehensive evaluation. By applying this paradigm in the GSM8K dataset, we have developed the MR-GSM8K benchmark.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-12-28T15:49:43Z)
• A Closer Look at the Self-Verification Abilities of Large Language Models in Logical Reasoning [73.77088902676306]
  We take a closer look at the self-verification abilities of large language models (LLMs) in the context of logical reasoning. Our main findings suggest that existing LLMs could struggle to identify fallacious reasoning steps accurately and may fall short of guaranteeing the validity of self-verification methods.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-14T07:13:10Z)
• From Heuristic to Analytic: Cognitively Motivated Strategies for Coherent Physical Commonsense Reasoning [66.98861219674039]
  Heuristic-Analytic Reasoning (HAR) strategies drastically improve the coherence of rationalizations for model decisions. Our findings suggest that human-like reasoning strategies can effectively improve the coherence and reliability of PLM reasoning.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-24T19:46:04Z)
• Can Pretrained Language Models (Yet) Reason Deductively? [72.9103833294272]
  We conduct a comprehensive evaluation of the learnable deductive (also known as explicit) reasoning capability of PLMs. Our main results suggest that PLMs cannot yet perform reliable deductive reasoning. We reach beyond (misleading) task performance, revealing that PLMs are still far from human-level reasoning capabilities.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-10-12T17:44:15Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.