Language-Dependent Political Bias in AI: A Study of ChatGPT and Gemini

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2504.06436v1
• Date: Tue, 08 Apr 2025 21:13:01 GMT
• Title: Language-Dependent Political Bias in AI: A Study of ChatGPT and Gemini
• Authors: Dogus Yuksel, Mehmet Cem Catalbas, Bora Oc,
• Abstract summary: This study investigates the political tendency of large language models and the existence of differentiation according to the query language.<n>ChatGPT and Gemini were subjected to a political axis test using 14 different languages.<n>A comparative analysis revealed that Gemini exhibited a more pronounced liberal and left-wing tendency compared to ChatGPT.
• Score: 0.0
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: As leading examples of large language models, ChatGPT and Gemini claim to provide accurate and unbiased information, emphasizing their commitment to political neutrality and avoidance of personal bias. This research investigates the political tendency of large language models and the existence of differentiation according to the query language. For this purpose, ChatGPT and Gemini were subjected to a political axis test using 14 different languages. The findings of the study suggest that these large language models do exhibit political tendencies, with both models demonstrating liberal and leftist biases. A comparative analysis revealed that Gemini exhibited a more pronounced liberal and left-wing tendency compared to ChatGPT. The study also found that these political biases varied depending on the language used for inquiry. The study delves into the factors that constitute political tendencies and linguistic differentiation, exploring differences in the sources and scope of educational data, structural and grammatical features of languages, cultural and political contexts, and the model's response to linguistic features. From this standpoint, and an ethical perspective, it is proposed that artificial intelligence tools should refrain from asserting a lack of political tendencies and neutrality, instead striving for political neutrality and executing user queries by incorporating these tendencies.

Related papers

• Only a Little to the Left: A Theory-grounded Measure of Political Bias in Large Language Models [4.8869340671593475]
  Political bias in prompt-based language models can affect their performance.<n>We build on survey design principles to test a wide variety of input prompts, while taking into account prompt sensitivity.<n>We compute political bias profiles across different prompt variations and find that measures of political bias are often unstable.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-03-20T13:51:06Z)
• Large Language Models Reflect the Ideology of their Creators [71.65505524599888]
  Large language models (LLMs) are trained on vast amounts of data to generate natural language. This paper shows that the ideological stance of an LLM appears to reflect the worldview of its creators.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-24T04:02:30Z)
• On the Relationship between Truth and Political Bias in Language Models [22.57096615768638]
  We focus on analyzing the relationship between two concepts essential in both language model alignment and political science. We train reward models on various popular truthfulness datasets and evaluate their political bias. Our findings reveal that optimizing reward models for truthfulness on these datasets tends to result in a left-leaning political bias.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-09-09T02:28:53Z)
• Spoken Stereoset: On Evaluating Social Bias Toward Speaker in Speech Large Language Models [50.40276881893513]
  This study introduces Spoken Stereoset, a dataset specifically designed to evaluate social biases in Speech Large Language Models (SLLMs) By examining how different models respond to speech from diverse demographic groups, we aim to identify these biases. The findings indicate that while most models show minimal bias, some still exhibit slightly stereotypical or anti-stereotypical tendencies.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-08-14T16:55:06Z)
• High Risk of Political Bias in Black Box Emotion Inference Models [0.0]
  This paper investigates the presence of political bias in machine learning models used for sentiment analysis (SA) in social science research. We conducted a bias audit on a Polish sentiment analysis model developed in our lab. Our findings indicate that annotations by human raters propagate political biases into the model's predictions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-18T20:31:07Z)
• Representation Bias in Political Sample Simulations with Large Language Models [54.48283690603358]
  This study seeks to identify and quantify biases in simulating political samples with Large Language Models. Using the GPT-3.5-Turbo model, we leverage data from the American National Election Studies, German Longitudinal Election Study, Zuobiao dataset, and China Family Panel Studies.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-16T05:52:26Z)
• Whose Side Are You On? Investigating the Political Stance of Large Language Models [56.883423489203786]
  We investigate the political orientation of Large Language Models (LLMs) across a spectrum of eight polarizing topics. Our investigation delves into the political alignment of LLMs across a spectrum of eight polarizing topics, spanning from abortion to LGBTQ issues. The findings suggest that users should be mindful when crafting queries, and exercise caution in selecting neutral prompt language.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-03-15T04:02:24Z)
• Inducing Political Bias Allows Language Models Anticipate Partisan Reactions to Controversies [5.958974943807783]
  This study addresses the challenge of understanding political bias in digitized discourse using Large Language Models (LLMs) We present a comprehensive analytical framework, consisting of Partisan Bias Divergence Assessment and Partisan Class Tendency Prediction. Our findings reveal the model's effectiveness in capturing emotional and moral nuances, albeit with some challenges in stance detection.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-16T08:57:53Z)
• Exploring the Jungle of Bias: Political Bias Attribution in Language Models via Dependency Analysis [86.49858739347412]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have sparked intense debate regarding the prevalence of bias in these models and its mitigation. We propose a prompt-based method for the extraction of confounding and mediating attributes which contribute to the decision process. We find that the observed disparate treatment can at least in part be attributed to confounding and mitigating attributes and model misalignment.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-15T00:02:25Z)
• Comparing Biases and the Impact of Multilingual Training across Multiple Languages [70.84047257764405]
  We present a bias analysis across Italian, Chinese, English, Hebrew, and Spanish on the downstream sentiment analysis task. We adapt existing sentiment bias templates in English to Italian, Chinese, Hebrew, and Spanish for four attributes: race, religion, nationality, and gender. Our results reveal similarities in bias expression such as favoritism of groups that are dominant in each language's culture.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-18T18:15:07Z)
• Quantifying Gender Bias Towards Politicians in Cross-Lingual Language Models [104.41668491794974]
  We quantify the usage of adjectives and verbs generated by language models surrounding the names of politicians as a function of their gender. We find that while some words such as dead, and designated are associated with both male and female politicians, a few specific words such as beautiful and divorced are predominantly associated with female politicians.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-04-15T15:03:26Z)

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.