Invisible Filters: Cultural Bias in Hiring Evaluations Using Large Language Models

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2508.16673v1
• Date: Thu, 21 Aug 2025 07:45:00 GMT
• Title: Invisible Filters: Cultural Bias in Hiring Evaluations Using Large Language Models
• Abstract summary: Artificial Intelligence (AI) is increasingly used in hiring, with large language models (LLMs) having the potential to influence or even make hiring decisions.<n>This raises pressing concerns about bias, fairness, and trust, particularly across diverse cultural contexts.<n>We conduct a systematic analysis of how LLMs assess job interviews across cultural and identity dimensions.
• Score: 2.48490797934472
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Artificial Intelligence (AI) is increasingly used in hiring, with large language models (LLMs) having the potential to influence or even make hiring decisions. However, this raises pressing concerns about bias, fairness, and trust, particularly across diverse cultural contexts. Despite their growing role, few studies have systematically examined the potential biases in AI-driven hiring evaluation across cultures. In this study, we conduct a systematic analysis of how LLMs assess job interviews across cultural and identity dimensions. Using two datasets of interview transcripts, 100 from UK and 100 from Indian job seekers, we first examine cross-cultural differences in LLM-generated scores for hirability and related traits. Indian transcripts receive consistently lower scores than UK transcripts, even when they were anonymized, with disparities linked to linguistic features such as sentence complexity and lexical diversity. We then perform controlled identity substitutions (varying names by gender, caste, and region) within the Indian dataset to test for name-based bias. These substitutions do not yield statistically significant effects, indicating that names alone, when isolated from other contextual signals, may not influence LLM evaluations. Our findings underscore the importance of evaluating both linguistic and social dimensions in LLM-driven evaluations and highlight the need for culturally sensitive design and accountability in AI-assisted hiring.

Related papers

• Beyond Surface Cues: Disentangling Sociocultural Signals in Multilingual LLMs [28.912535376913436]
  The study analyzes 89,253 outputs from 12 Multilingual LLMs in English, French, and Chinese.<n>Removing direct identity cues reduces identity-label prediction in English and Chinese, but has a much smaller effect in French.<n>The ability to identify the source language drops substantially after translation and again after masking names.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-08-24T09:32:16Z)
• Language, Caste, and Context: Demographic Disparities in AI-Generated Explanations Across Indian and American STEM Educational Systems [2.0722928522838693]
  This paper asks how do LLMs perceive the intellectual capabilities of student profiles from intersecting marginalized identities across different cultural contexts?<n>We construct profiles combining caste, medium of instruction, and school boards in India, and race, HBCU attendance, and school type in America, alongside universal factors like income and college tier.<n>We observe biases providing lower-quality outputs to profiles with marginalized backgrounds in both contexts.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-20T21:58:45Z)
• LLMs and Cultural Values: the Impact of Prompt Language and Explicit Cultural Framing [0.21485350418225244]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) are rapidly being adopted by users across the globe, who interact with them in a diverse range of languages.<n>We examine how prompt language and cultural framing influence model responses and their alignment with human values in different countries.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-11-06T02:09:29Z)
• Addressing Bias in LLMs: Strategies and Application to Fair AI-based Recruitment [49.81946749379338]
  This work seeks to analyze the capacity of Transformers-based systems to learn demographic biases present in the data.<n>We propose a privacy-enhancing framework to reduce gender information from the learning pipeline as a way to mitigate biased behaviors in the final tools.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-06-13T15:29:43Z)
• Measuring South Asian Biases in Large Language Models [1.5903891569492878]
  This work addresses gaps by conducting a multilingual and intersectional analysis of Large Language Models (LLMs)<n>We construct a culturally grounded bias lexicon capturing previously unexplored intersectional dimensions including gender, religion, marital status, and number of children.<n>We evaluate two self-debiasing strategies to measure their effectiveness in reducing culturally specific bias in Indo-Aryan and Dravidian languages.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-24T02:18:17Z)
• From Surveys to Narratives: Rethinking Cultural Value Adaptation in LLMs [57.43233760384488]
  Adapting cultural values in Large Language Models (LLMs) presents significant challenges.<n>Prior work primarily aligns LLMs with different cultural values using World Values Survey (WVS) data.<n>In this paper, we investigate WVS-based training for cultural value adaptation and find that relying solely on survey data cane cultural norms and interfere with factual knowledge.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-22T09:00:01Z)
• BRIGHTER: BRIdging the Gap in Human-Annotated Textual Emotion Recognition Datasets for 28 Languages [93.92804151830744]
  We present BRIGHTER, a collection of multi-labeled, emotion-annotated datasets in 28 different languages.<n>We highlight the challenges related to the data collection and annotation processes.<n>We show that the BRIGHTER datasets represent a meaningful step towards addressing the gap in text-based emotion recognition.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-17T15:39:50Z)
• 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)
• LLM-as-a-Judge & Reward Model: What They Can and Cannot Do [2.2469442203227863]
  We conduct a comprehensive analysis of automated evaluators, reporting several key findings on their behavior. We discover that English evaluation capabilities significantly influence language-specific evaluation capabilities, enabling evaluators trained in English to easily transfer their skills to other languages. We find that state-of-the-art evaluators struggle with challenging prompts, in either English or Korean, underscoring their limitations in assessing or generating complex reasoning questions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-09-17T14:40:02Z)
• Language Model Alignment in Multilingual Trolley Problems [138.5684081822807]
  Building on the Moral Machine experiment, we develop a cross-lingual corpus of moral dilemma vignettes in over 100 languages called MultiTP.<n>Our analysis explores the alignment of 19 different LLMs with human judgments, capturing preferences across six moral dimensions.<n>We discover significant variance in alignment across languages, challenging the assumption of uniform moral reasoning in AI systems.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-02T14:02:53Z)
• CIVICS: Building a Dataset for Examining Culturally-Informed Values in Large Language Models [59.22460740026037]
  "CIVICS: Culturally-Informed & Values-Inclusive Corpus for Societal impacts" dataset is designed to evaluate the social and cultural variation of Large Language Models (LLMs) We create a hand-crafted, multilingual dataset of value-laden prompts which address specific socially sensitive topics, including LGBTQI rights, social welfare, immigration, disability rights, and surrogacy.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-22T20:19:10Z)
• Sociodemographic Prompting is Not Yet an Effective Approach for Simulating Subjective Judgments with LLMs [13.744746481528711]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) are widely used to simulate human responses across diverse contexts.<n>We evaluate nine popular LLMs on their ability to understand demographic differences in two subjective judgment tasks: politeness and offensiveness.<n>We find that in zero-shot settings, most models' predictions for both tasks align more closely with labels from White participants than those from Asian or Black participants.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-16T10:02:24Z)
• Quantifying the Dialect Gap and its Correlates Across Languages [69.18461982439031]
  This work will lay the foundation for furthering the field of dialectal NLP by laying out evident disparities and identifying possible pathways for addressing them through mindful data collection.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-23T17:42:01Z)
• 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)

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.