Probing the Subtle Ideological Manipulation of Large Language Models

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2504.14287v1
• Date: Sat, 19 Apr 2025 13:11:50 GMT
• Title: Probing the Subtle Ideological Manipulation of Large Language Models
• Authors: Demetris Paschalides, George Pallis, Marios D. Dikaiakos,
• Abstract summary: Large Language Models (LLMs) have transformed natural language processing, but concerns have emerged about their susceptibility to ideological manipulation.<n>We introduce a novel multi-task dataset designed to reflect diverse ideological positions through tasks such as ideological QA, statement ranking, manifesto cloze completion, and Congress bill comprehension.<n>Our findings indicate that fine-tuning significantly enhances nuanced ideological alignment, while explicit prompts provide only minor refinements.
• Score: 0.3745329282477067
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Large Language Models (LLMs) have transformed natural language processing, but concerns have emerged about their susceptibility to ideological manipulation, particularly in politically sensitive areas. Prior work has focused on binary Left-Right LLM biases, using explicit prompts and fine-tuning on political QA datasets. In this work, we move beyond this binary approach to explore the extent to which LLMs can be influenced across a spectrum of political ideologies, from Progressive-Left to Conservative-Right. We introduce a novel multi-task dataset designed to reflect diverse ideological positions through tasks such as ideological QA, statement ranking, manifesto cloze completion, and Congress bill comprehension. By fine-tuning three LLMs-Phi-2, Mistral, and Llama-3-on this dataset, we evaluate their capacity to adopt and express these nuanced ideologies. Our findings indicate that fine-tuning significantly enhances nuanced ideological alignment, while explicit prompts provide only minor refinements. This highlights the models' susceptibility to subtle ideological manipulation, suggesting a need for more robust safeguards to mitigate these risks.

Related papers

• Talking Point based Ideological Discourse Analysis in News Events [62.18747509565779]
  We propose a framework motivated by the theory of ideological discourse analysis to analyze news articles related to real-world events. Our framework represents the news articles using a relational structure - talking points, which captures the interaction between entities, their roles, and media frames along with a topic of discussion. We evaluate our framework's ability to generate these perspectives through automated tasks - ideology and partisan classification tasks, supplemented by human validation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-04-10T02:52:34Z)
• "Whose Side Are You On?" Estimating Ideology of Political and News Content Using Large Language Models and Few-shot Demonstration Selection [5.277598111323805]
  Existing approaches to classifying ideology are limited in that they require extensive human effort, the labeling of large datasets, and are not able to adapt to evolving ideological contexts. This paper explores the potential of Large Language Models for classifying the political ideology of online content in the context of the two-party US political spectrum through in-context learning.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-03-23T02:32:25Z)
• Linear Representations of Political Perspective Emerge in Large Language Models [2.2462222233189286]
  Large language models (LLMs) have demonstrated the ability to generate text that realistically reflects a range of different subjective human perspectives.<n>This paper studies how LLMs are seemingly able to reflect more liberal versus more conservative viewpoints among other political perspectives in American politics.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-03-03T21:59:01Z)
• Mapping and Influencing the Political Ideology of Large Language Models using Synthetic Personas [5.237116285113809]
  We map the political distribution of persona-based prompted large language models using the Political Compass Test (PCT)<n>Our experiments reveal that synthetic personas predominantly cluster in the left-libertarian quadrant, with models demonstrating varying degrees of responsiveness when prompted with explicit ideological descriptors.<n>While all models demonstrate significant shifts towards right-authoritarian positions, they exhibit more limited shifts towards left-libertarian positions, suggesting an asymmetric response to ideological manipulation that may reflect inherent biases in model training.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-12-19T13:36:18Z)
• Political-LLM: Large Language Models in Political Science [159.95299889946637]
  Large language models (LLMs) have been widely adopted in political science tasks.<n>Political-LLM aims to advance the comprehensive understanding of integrating LLMs into computational political science.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-12-09T08:47:50Z)
• Discriminative Fine-tuning of LVLMs [67.14293827774827]
  Contrastively-trained Vision-Language Models (VLMs) like CLIP have become the de facto approach for discriminative vision-language representation learning.<n>We propose to combine "the best of both worlds": a new training approach for discriminative fine-tuning of LVLMs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-12-05T17:54:27Z)
• 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.<n>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)
• 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)
• Let Models Speak Ciphers: Multiagent Debate through Embeddings [84.20336971784495]
  We introduce CIPHER (Communicative Inter-Model Protocol Through Embedding Representation) to address this issue. By deviating from natural language, CIPHER offers an advantage of encoding a broader spectrum of information without any modification to the model weights. This showcases the superiority and robustness of embeddings as an alternative "language" for communication among LLMs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-10T03:06:38Z)

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.