"Global is Good, Local is Bad?": Understanding Brand Bias in LLMs
- URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2406.13997v2
- Date: Fri, 27 Sep 2024 05:20:37 GMT
- Title: "Global is Good, Local is Bad?": Understanding Brand Bias in LLMs
- Abstract summary: This research examines the biases exhibited by LLMs towards different brands.
We find a consistent pattern of bias in this space -- both in terms of disproportionately associating global brands with positive attributes and disproportionately recommending luxury gifts for individuals in high-income countries.
- Score: 0.0
- License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
- Abstract: Many recent studies have investigated social biases in LLMs but brand bias has received little attention. This research examines the biases exhibited by LLMs towards different brands, a significant concern given the widespread use of LLMs in affected use cases such as product recommendation and market analysis. Biased models may perpetuate societal inequalities, unfairly favoring established global brands while marginalizing local ones. Using a curated dataset across four brand categories, we probe the behavior of LLMs in this space. We find a consistent pattern of bias in this space -- both in terms of disproportionately associating global brands with positive attributes and disproportionately recommending luxury gifts for individuals in high-income countries. We also find LLMs are subject to country-of-origin effects which may boost local brand preference in LLM outputs in specific contexts.
Related papers
- Measuring Stereotype and Deviation Biases in Large Language Models [1.8311821879979955]
Large language models (LLMs) are widely applied across diverse domains, raising concerns about their limitations and potential risks.<n>This study investigates two types of bias that LLMs may display: stereotype bias and deviation bias.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-08-08T19:03:57Z) - Geopolitical biases in LLMs: what are the "good" and the "bad" countries according to contemporary language models [52.00270888041742]
We introduce a novel dataset with neutral event descriptions and contrasting viewpoints from different countries.<n>Our findings show significant geopolitical biases, with models favoring specific national narratives.<n>Simple debiasing prompts had a limited effect on reducing these biases.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-06-07T10:45:17Z) - Through the LLM Looking Glass: A Socratic Self-Assessment of Donkeys, Elephants, and Markets [42.55423041662188]
The study aims to directly measure the models' biases rather than relying on external interpretations.
Our results reveal a consistent preference of Democratic over Republican positions across all models.
biases vary among Western LLMs, while those developed in China lean more strongly toward socialism.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-03-20T19:40:40Z) - Unequal Opportunities: Examining the Bias in Geographical Recommendations by Large Language Models [11.585115320816257]
This study examines the biases present in Large Language Models (LLMs) recommendations of U.S. cities and towns.
We focus on the consistency of LLMs responses and their tendency to over-represent or under-represent specific locations.
Our findings point to consistent demographic biases in these recommendations, which could perpetuate a rich-get-richer'' effect that widens existing economic disparities.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-03-16T18:59:00Z) - 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) - Justice or Prejudice? Quantifying Biases in LLM-as-a-Judge [84.34545223897578]
Despite their excellence in many domains, potential issues are under-explored, undermining their reliability and the scope of their utility.
We identify 12 key potential biases and propose a new automated bias quantification framework-CALM- which quantifies and analyzes each type of bias in LLM-as-a-Judge.
Our work highlights the need for stakeholders to address these issues and remind users to exercise caution in LLM-as-a-Judge applications.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-10-03T17:53:30Z) - A Multi-LLM Debiasing Framework [85.17156744155915]
Large Language Models (LLMs) are powerful tools with the potential to benefit society immensely, yet, they have demonstrated biases that perpetuate societal inequalities.
Recent research has shown a growing interest in multi-LLM approaches, which have been demonstrated to be effective in improving the quality of reasoning.
We propose a novel multi-LLM debiasing framework aimed at reducing bias in LLMs.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-09-20T20:24:50Z) - Unboxing Occupational Bias: Grounded Debiasing of LLMs with U.S. Labor Data [9.90951705988724]
Large Language Models (LLM) are prone to inheriting and amplifying societal biases.
LLM bias can have far-reaching consequences, leading to unfair practices and exacerbating social inequalities.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-08-20T23:54:26Z) - Fairness in Large Language Models in Three Hours [2.443957114877221]
This tutorial provides a systematic overview of recent advances in the literature concerning large language models.
The concept of fairness in LLMs is then explored, summarizing the strategies for evaluating bias and the algorithms designed to promote fairness.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-08-02T03:44:14Z) - White Men Lead, Black Women Help? Benchmarking Language Agency Social Biases in LLMs [58.27353205269664]
Social biases can manifest in language agency.
We introduce the novel Language Agency Bias Evaluation benchmark.
We unveil language agency social biases in 3 recent Large Language Model (LLM)-generated content.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-04-16T12:27:54Z) - Pride and Prejudice: LLM Amplifies Self-Bias in Self-Refinement [75.7148545929689]
Large language models (LLMs) improve their performance through self-feedback on certain tasks while degrade on others.
We formally define LLM's self-bias - the tendency to favor its own generation.
We analyze six LLMs on translation, constrained text generation, and mathematical reasoning tasks.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-02-18T03:10:39Z) - Exploring Value Biases: How LLMs Deviate Towards the Ideal [57.99044181599786]
Large-Language-Models (LLMs) are deployed in a wide range of applications, and their response has an increasing social impact.
We show that value bias is strong in LLMs across different categories, similar to the results found in human studies.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-02-16T18:28:43Z) - Large Language Models are Geographically Biased [47.88767211956144]
We study what Large Language Models (LLMs) know about the world we live in through the lens of geography.
We show various problematic geographic biases, which we define as systemic errors in geospatial predictions.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-02-05T02:32:09Z) - Investigating Subtler Biases in LLMs: Ageism, Beauty, Institutional, and Nationality Bias in Generative Models [0.0]
This paper investigates bias along less-studied but still consequential, dimensions, such as age and beauty.
We ask whether LLMs hold wide-reaching biases of positive or negative sentiment for specific social groups similar to the "what is beautiful is good" bias found in people in experimental psychology.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-09-16T07:07:04Z) - The Unequal Opportunities of Large Language Models: Revealing
Demographic Bias through Job Recommendations [5.898806397015801]
We propose a simple method for analyzing and comparing demographic bias in Large Language Models (LLMs)
We demonstrate the effectiveness of our method by measuring intersectional biases within ChatGPT and LLaMA.
We identify distinct biases in both models toward various demographic identities, such as both models consistently suggesting low-paying jobs for Mexican workers.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-08-03T21:12:54Z)
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.