Should We Respect LLMs? A Cross-Lingual Study on the Influence of Prompt Politeness on LLM Performance

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2402.14531v2
• Date: Mon, 14 Oct 2024 12:34:55 GMT
• Title: Should We Respect LLMs? A Cross-Lingual Study on the Influence of Prompt Politeness on LLM Performance
• Authors: Ziqi Yin, Hao Wang, Kaito Horio, Daisuke Kawahara, Satoshi Sekine,
• Abstract summary: We assess the impact of politeness in prompts on large language models (LLMs) across English, Chinese, and Japanese tasks. We observed that impolite prompts often result in poor performance, but overly polite language does not guarantee better outcomes.
• Score: 16.7036374022386
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: We investigate the impact of politeness levels in prompts on the performance of large language models (LLMs). Polite language in human communications often garners more compliance and effectiveness, while rudeness can cause aversion, impacting response quality. We consider that LLMs mirror human communication traits, suggesting they align with human cultural norms. We assess the impact of politeness in prompts on LLMs across English, Chinese, and Japanese tasks. We observed that impolite prompts often result in poor performance, but overly polite language does not guarantee better outcomes. The best politeness level is different according to the language. This phenomenon suggests that LLMs not only reflect human behavior but are also influenced by language, particularly in different cultural contexts. Our findings highlight the need to factor in politeness for cross-cultural natural language processing and LLM usage.

Related papers

• Can LLMs Express Personality Across Cultures? Introducing CulturalPersonas for Evaluating Trait Alignment [16.702098536881127]
  We introduce CulturalPersonas, the first large-scale benchmark with human validation for evaluating personality expression in behaviorally rich contexts.<n>Our dataset spans 3,000 scenario-based questions across six diverse countries, designed to elicit personality through everyday scenarios rooted in local values.<n>Our results show that CulturalPersonas improves alignment with country-specific human personality distributions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-06-06T01:33:19Z)
• An Evaluation of Cultural Value Alignment in LLM [27.437888319382893]
  We conduct the first large-scale evaluation of LLM culture assessing 20 countries' cultures and languages across ten LLMs. Our findings show that the output over all models represents a moderate cultural middle ground. Deeper investigation sheds light on the influence of model origin, prompt language, and value dimensions on cultural output.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-04-11T09:13:19Z)
• Shaping Shared Languages: Human and Large Language Models' Inductive Biases in Emergent Communication [0.09999629695552195]
  We investigate how artificial languages evolve when optimised for inductive biases in humans and large language models (LLMs) We show that referentially grounded vocabularies emerge that enable reliable communication in all conditions, even when humans and LLMs collaborate.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-03-06T12:47:54Z)
• Large Language Models Reflect the Ideology of their Creators [73.25935570218375]
  Large language models (LLMs) are trained on vast amounts of data to generate natural language. We uncover notable diversity in the ideological stance exhibited across different LLMs and languages.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-24T04:02:30Z)
• Hate Personified: Investigating the role of LLMs in content moderation [64.26243779985393]
  For subjective tasks such as hate detection, where people perceive hate differently, the Large Language Model's (LLM) ability to represent diverse groups is unclear. By including additional context in prompts, we analyze LLM's sensitivity to geographical priming, persona attributes, and numerical information to assess how well the needs of various groups are reflected.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-03T16:43:17Z)
• Do language models practice what they preach? Examining language ideologies about gendered language reform encoded in LLMs [6.06227550292852]
  We study language ideologies in text produced by LLMs through a case study on English gendered language reform. We find political bias: when asked to use language that is "correct" or "natural", LLMs use language most similarly to when asked to align with conservative (vs. progressive) values. This shows how the language ideologies expressed in text produced by LLMs can vary, which may be unexpected to users.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-09-20T18:55:48Z)
• Rel-A.I.: An Interaction-Centered Approach To Measuring Human-LM Reliance [73.19687314438133]
  We study how reliance is affected by contextual features of an interaction. We find that contextual characteristics significantly affect human reliance behavior. Our results show that calibration and language quality alone are insufficient in evaluating the risks of human-LM interactions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-10T18:00:05Z)
• Is the Pope Catholic? Yes, the Pope is Catholic. Generative Evaluation of Non-Literal Intent Resolution in LLMs [29.09074652003724]
  We evaluate large language models' (LLMs') intention understanding by examining their responses to non-literal utterances. Our findings show that LLMs struggle to generate pragmatically relevant responses to non-literal language.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-14T16:48:56Z)
• Is Translation All You Need? A Study on Solving Multilingual Tasks with Large Language Models [79.46179534911019]
  Large language models (LLMs) have demonstrated multilingual capabilities; yet, they are mostly English-centric due to imbalanced training corpora. This work extends the evaluation from NLP tasks to real user queries. For culture-related tasks that need deep language understanding, prompting in the native language tends to be more promising.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-03-15T12:47:39Z)
• How do Large Language Models Navigate Conflicts between Honesty and Helpfulness? [14.706111954807021]
  We use psychological models and experiments designed to characterize human behavior to analyze large language models. We find that reinforcement learning from human feedback improves both honesty and helpfulness. GPT-4 Turbo demonstrates human-like response patterns including sensitivity to the conversational framing and listener's decision context.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-11T19:13:26Z)
• Rephrase and Respond: Let Large Language Models Ask Better Questions for Themselves [57.974103113675795]
  We present a method named Rephrase and Respond' (RaR) which allows Large Language Models to rephrase and expand questions posed by humans. RaR serves as a simple yet effective prompting method for improving performance. We show that RaR is complementary to the popular Chain-of-Thought (CoT) methods, both theoretically and empirically.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-07T18:43:34Z)
• Do LLMs exhibit human-like response biases? A case study in survey design [66.1850490474361]
  We investigate the extent to which large language models (LLMs) reflect human response biases, if at all. We design a dataset and framework to evaluate whether LLMs exhibit human-like response biases in survey questionnaires. Our comprehensive evaluation of nine models shows that popular open and commercial LLMs generally fail to reflect human-like behavior.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-07T15:40:43Z)
• Large Language Models: The Need for Nuance in Current Debates and a Pragmatic Perspective on Understanding [1.3654846342364308]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) are unparalleled in their ability to generate grammatically correct, fluent text. This position paper critically assesses three points recurring in critiques of LLM capacities. We outline a pragmatic perspective on the issue of real' understanding and intentionality in LLMs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-30T15:51:04Z)

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.