Reading Between the Lines: A Study of Thematic Bias in Book Recommender Systems

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2508.15643v1
• Date: Thu, 21 Aug 2025 15:20:39 GMT
• Title: Reading Between the Lines: A Study of Thematic Bias in Book Recommender Systems
• Authors: Nityaa Kalra, Savvina Daniil,
• Abstract summary: This paper introduces and investigates thematic bias in book recommendations, defined as a disproportionate favouring or neglect of certain book themes.<n>We adopt a multi-stage bias evaluation framework to evaluate thematic bias in recommendations and its impact on different user groups.<n>Our findings show that thematic bias originates from content imbalances and is amplified by user engagement patterns.
• Score: 0.0
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Recommender systems help users discover new content, but can also reinforce existing biases, leading to unfair exposure and reduced diversity. This paper introduces and investigates thematic bias in book recommendations, defined as a disproportionate favouring or neglect of certain book themes. We adopt a multi-stage bias evaluation framework using the Book-Crossing dataset to evaluate thematic bias in recommendations and its impact on different user groups. Our findings show that thematic bias originates from content imbalances and is amplified by user engagement patterns. By segmenting users based on their thematic preferences, we find that users with niche and long-tail interests receive less personalised recommendations, whereas users with diverse interests receive more consistent recommendations. These findings suggest that recommender systems should be carefully designed to accommodate a broader range of user interests. By contributing to the broader goal of responsible AI, this work also lays the groundwork for extending thematic bias analysis to other domains.

Related papers

• Tree of Preferences for Diversified Recommendation [54.183647833064136]
  We study diversified recommendation from a data-bias perspective.<n>Inspired by the outstanding performance of large language models (LLMs) in zero-shot inference leveraging world knowledge, we propose a novel approach.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-12-24T04:13:17Z)
• Addressing Personalized Bias for Unbiased Learning to Rank [56.663619153713434]
  Unbiased learning to rank (ULTR) aims to learn unbiased ranking models from biased user behavior logs.<n>We propose a novel user-aware inverse-propensity-score estimator for learning-to-rank objectives.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-08-28T14:01:31Z)
• Unveiling and Mitigating Bias in Large Language Model Recommendations: A Path to Fairness [3.5297361401370044]
  This study explores the interplay between bias and LLM-based recommendation systems.<n>It focuses on music, song, and book recommendations across diverse demographic and cultural groups.<n>Our findings reveal that bias in these systems is deeply ingrained, yet even simple interventions like prompt engineering can significantly reduce it.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-09-17T01:37:57Z)
• Exploring the Escalation of Source Bias in User, Data, and Recommender System Feedback Loop [65.23044868332693]
  We explore how AI-generated content (AIGC) affects the performance and dynamics of recommender systems.<n>In the short term, bias toward AIGC encourages LLM-based content creation, increasing AIGC content, and causing unfair traffic distribution.<n>We propose a debiasing method based on L1-loss optimization to maintain long-term content ecosystem balance.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-28T09:34:50Z)
• Review-based Recommender Systems: A Survey of Approaches, Challenges and Future Perspectives [11.835903510784735]
  Review-based recommender systems have emerged as a significant sub-field in this domain.<n>We present a categorization of these systems and summarize the state-of-the-art methods, analyzing their unique features, effectiveness, and limitations.<n>We propose potential directions for future research, including the integration of multimodal data, multi-criteria rating information, and ethical considerations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-09T05:45:18Z)
• A First Look at Selection Bias in Preference Elicitation for Recommendation [64.44255178199846]
  We study the effect of selection bias in preference elicitation on the resulting recommendations. A big hurdle is the lack of any publicly available dataset that has preference elicitation interactions. We propose a simulation of a topic-based preference elicitation process.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-01T14:56:56Z)
• Impression-Aware Recommender Systems [53.48892326556546]
  We present a systematic literature review on recommender systems using impressions.<n>We define a theoretical framework to delimit recommender systems using impressions and a novel paradigm for personalized recommendations, called impression-aware recommender systems.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-08-15T16:16:02Z)
• Managing multi-facet bias in collaborative filtering recommender systems [0.0]
  Biased recommendations across groups of items can endanger the interests of item providers along with causing user dissatisfaction with the system. This study aims to manage a new type of intersectional bias regarding the geographical origin and popularity of items in the output of state-of-the-art collaborative filtering recommender algorithms. Extensive experiments on two real-world datasets of movies and books, enriched with the items' continents of production, show that the proposed algorithm strikes a reasonable balance between accuracy and both types of the mentioned biases.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-02-21T10:06:01Z)
• Joint Multisided Exposure Fairness for Recommendation [76.75990595228666]
  This paper formalizes a family of exposure fairness metrics that model the problem jointly from the perspective of both the consumers and producers. Specifically, we consider group attributes for both types of stakeholders to identify and mitigate fairness concerns that go beyond individual users and items towards more systemic biases in recommendation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-04-29T19:13:23Z)
• Correcting the User Feedback-Loop Bias for Recommendation Systems [34.44834423714441]
  We propose a systematic and dynamic way to correct user feedback-loop bias in recommendation systems. Our method includes a deep-learning component to learn each user's dynamic rating history embedding. We empirically validated the existence of such user feedback-loop bias in real world recommendation systems.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-09-13T15:02:55Z)
• PURS: Personalized Unexpected Recommender System for Improving User Satisfaction [76.98616102965023]
  We describe a novel Personalized Unexpected Recommender System (PURS) model that incorporates unexpectedness into the recommendation process. Extensive offline experiments on three real-world datasets illustrate that the proposed PURS model significantly outperforms the state-of-the-art baseline approaches.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-06-05T01:33:21Z)
• Fairness-Aware Explainable Recommendation over Knowledge Graphs [73.81994676695346]
  We analyze different groups of users according to their level of activity, and find that bias exists in recommendation performance between different groups. We show that inactive users may be more susceptible to receiving unsatisfactory recommendations, due to insufficient training data for the inactive users. We propose a fairness constrained approach via re-ranking to mitigate this problem in the context of explainable recommendation over knowledge graphs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-06-03T05:04:38Z)

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.