Large Reasoning Models (LRMs) achieve strong performance through explicit chain-of-thought reasoning but suffer from \textit{overthinking}: generating excessive reasoning tokens even for trivial queries. {Beyond inflating cost, overthinking can be self-defeating: models enter recursive self-doubt loops that exhaust token budgets without producing an answer, causing API timeouts that directly hurt accuracy.} We present an empirical study showing that \textbf{batch prompting}, originally introduced for throughput optimization, effectively suppresses overthinking at inference time. Across 13 diverse benchmarks with DeepSeek-R1 and OpenAI-o1, batch prompting {reduces reasoning tokens by 76\% (2{,}950$\mapsto$710), on average, while preserving or improving accuracy}. Through behavioral analysis, we find that batching induces three beneficial effects: (1) it reduces per-query reasoning effort when multiple queries share a context; (2) it enables pattern induction, where models generalize from earlier examples to solve later ones; and (3) it suppresses hedging behavior (e.g., ``\texttt{wait,}'' ``\texttt{let me double-check}'') that signals metacognitive loops. We also show that explicit prompt constraints (``\texttt{Use no more than 100 tokens in thinking.}'') fail to reduce overthinking; models either ignore them or sacrifice accuracy. These findings reframe batch prompting as more than a cost optimization: it is a practical inference-time technique that improves efficiency and reliability without model modification.