As Large Language Models (LLMs) have rapidly advanced in social reasoning tasks, their applications have expanded to domains such as healthcare and psychology. Given the direct interaction of users with these applications, it is essential to evaluate the performance of LLMs, particularly in human-like social reasoning capabilities. While previous studies have explored human-aligned social reasoning in LLMs, they have not adequately assessed whether the generated reasoning answers stem from the LLMs' memorization of training data or their natural language understanding. In this study, we aim to address this gap by assessing the impact of training data memorization on the human-aligned social reasoning capabilities of LLMs. We introduce IR+CoT (Information Retrieval (IR) + Chain of Thought (CoT)), a framework that leverages retrieved information from input questions to fine-tune prompt templates and employs CoT methods. IR+CoT mitigates the effects of memorization and enhances the LLMs' social reasoning performance. Experiments on three LLMs, using seen (present during the training of the LLMs) and unseen (introduced post-training) questions from Reddit and Lemmy, show that IR+CoT enhances social reasoning and reduces memorization effects. This research's novelty lies in using old and new questions to assess memorization's impact on social reasoning.

Theory of mind (ToM) reasoning involves understanding that others have intentions, emotions, and thoughts, which is crucial for regulating one's reasoning. Although large language models (LLMs) excel in tasks such as summarization, question answering, and translation, they still face challenges with ToM reasoning, especially in open-ended questions. Despite advancements, the extent to which LLMs truly understand ToM reasoning and how closely it aligns with human ToM reasoning remains inadequately explored in open-ended scenarios. Motivated by this gap, we assess the abilities of LLMs to perceive and integrate human intentions and emotions into their ToM reasoning processes within open-ended questions. Our study utilizes posts from Reddit's ChangeMyView platform, which demands nuanced social reasoning to craft persuasive responses. Our analysis, comparing semantic similarity and lexical overlap metrics between responses generated by humans and LLMs, reveals clear disparities in ToM reasoning capabilities in open-ended questions, with even the most advanced models showing notable limitations. To enhance LLM capabilities, we implement a prompt tuning method that incorporates human intentions and emotions, resulting in improvements in ToM reasoning performance. However, despite these improvements, the enhancement still falls short of fully achieving human-like reasoning. This research highlights the deficiencies in LLMs' social reasoning and demonstrates how integrating human intentions and emotions can boost their effectiveness.