The way and content in which users ask questions can provide insight into their current status, including their personality, emotions, and psychology. Instead of directly prompting the large language models (LLMs), we explore how chain-of-thought prompting helps in this scenario to perform reasoning and planning according to user status, aiming to provide a more personalized and engaging experience for the user query. To this end, we first construct a benchmark of 6 dialogue or question-answering datasets in both English and Chinese, covering 3 different aspects of user status (\textit{including} \textit{personality}, \textit{emotion}, and \textit{psychology}). Then we prompt the LLMs to generate the response regarding the user status as intermediate reasoning processing. We propose a novel demonstration selection strategy using the semantic similarity of intermediate reasoning instead of test queries. To evaluate the effectiveness and robustness of our approach, we conduct extensive experiments with 7 LLMs under zero-shot and one-shot settings. The experimental results show that our approach consistently outperforms standard prompting in terms of both \textit{helpfulness} and \textit{acceptness} across all datasets, regardless of the LLMs used. The code and dataset can be found at \url{https://github.com/ruleGreen/Dialogue\_CoT.git}.