One Persona, Many Cues, Different Results: How Sociodemographic Cues Impact LLM Personalization

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2601.18572v1
• Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2026 15:15:58 GMT
• Title: One Persona, Many Cues, Different Results: How Sociodemographic Cues Impact LLM Personalization
• Authors: Franziska Weeber, Vera Neplenbroek, Jan Batzner, Sebastian Padó,
• Abstract summary: Personalization of LLMs by sociodemographic subgroup often improves user experience, but can also introduce or amplify biases and unfair outcomes across groups.<n>Prior work has employed so-called personas, sociodemographic user attributes conveyed to a model, to study bias in LLMs.<n>We compare six commonly used persona cues across seven open and proprietary LLMs on four writing and advice tasks.<n>While cues are overall highly correlated, they produce substantial variance in responses across personas.
• Score: 6.512258839228369
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Personalization of LLMs by sociodemographic subgroup often improves user experience, but can also introduce or amplify biases and unfair outcomes across groups. Prior work has employed so-called personas, sociodemographic user attributes conveyed to a model, to study bias in LLMs by relying on a single cue to prompt a persona, such as user names or explicit attribute mentions. This disregards LLM sensitivity to prompt variations (robustness) and the rarity of some cues in real interactions (external validity). We compare six commonly used persona cues across seven open and proprietary LLMs on four writing and advice tasks. While cues are overall highly correlated, they produce substantial variance in responses across personas. We therefore caution against claims from a single persona cue and recommend future personalization research to evaluate multiple externally valid cues.

Related papers

• Towards Realistic Personalization: Evaluating Long-Horizon Preference Following in Personalized User-LLM Interactions [50.70965714314064]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly serving as personal assistants, where users share complex and diverse preferences over extended interactions.<n>This work proposes RealPref, a benchmark for evaluating realistic preference-following in personalized user-LLM interactions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-03-04T15:42:43Z)
• The Prompt Makes the Person(a): A Systematic Evaluation of Sociodemographic Persona Prompting for Large Language Models [7.819021910077221]
  We examine how different persona prompt strategies influence large language models (LLMs)<n>We find that the choice of demographic priming and role adoption strategy significantly impacts their portrayal.<n>Specifically, we find that prompting in an interview-style format and name-based priming can help reduce stereotyping.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-07-21T21:23:29Z)
• Deep Binding of Language Model Virtual Personas: a Study on Approximating Political Partisan Misperceptions [13.929713456538932]
  We propose a novel methodology for constructing virtual personas with synthetic user "backstories" generated as extended, multi-turn interview transcripts.<n>We show that virtual personas conditioned on our backstories closely replicate human response distributions and produce effect sizes that closely match those observed in the original studies of in-group/out-group biases.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-04-16T00:10:34Z)
• Aligning LLMs with Individual Preferences via Interaction [51.72200436159636]
  We train large language models (LLMs) that can ''interact to align''<n>We develop a multi-turn preference dataset containing 3K+ multi-turn conversations in tree structures.<n>For evaluation, we establish the ALOE benchmark, consisting of 100 carefully selected examples and well-designed metrics to measure the customized alignment performance during conversations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-04T17:48:29Z)
• Social Bias Evaluation for Large Language Models Requires Prompt Variations [38.91306092184724]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) exhibit considerable social biases. This paper investigates the sensitivity of LLMs when changing prompt variations. We show that LLMs have tradeoffs between performance and social bias caused by the prompts.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-03T14:12:04Z)
• Scaling Data Diversity for Fine-Tuning Language Models in Human Alignment [84.32768080422349]
  Alignment with human preference prevents large language models from generating misleading or toxic content. We propose a new formulation of prompt diversity, implying a linear correlation with the final performance of LLMs after fine-tuning.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-03-17T07:08:55Z)
• Quantifying the Persona Effect in LLM Simulations [25.367927300697424]
  Large language models (LLMs) have shown remarkable promise in simulating human language and behavior. This study investigates how integrating persona variables-demographic, social, and behavioral factors-impacts LLMs' ability to simulate diverse perspectives. We find that persona variables account for 10% variance in annotations in existing subjective NLP datasets.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-16T16:35:35Z)
• 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)
• On the steerability of large language models toward data-driven personas [98.9138902560793]
  Large language models (LLMs) are known to generate biased responses where the opinions of certain groups and populations are underrepresented. Here, we present a novel approach to achieve controllable generation of specific viewpoints using LLMs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-08T19:01:13Z)
• Bias Runs Deep: Implicit Reasoning Biases in Persona-Assigned LLMs [67.51906565969227]
  We study the unintended side-effects of persona assignment on the ability of LLMs to perform basic reasoning tasks. Our study covers 24 reasoning datasets, 4 LLMs, and 19 diverse personas (e.g. an Asian person) spanning 5 socio-demographic groups.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-08T18:52:17Z)
• Do LLMs exhibit human-like response biases? A case study in survey design [66.1850490474361]
  We investigate the extent to which large language models (LLMs) reflect human response biases, if at all. We design a dataset and framework to evaluate whether LLMs exhibit human-like response biases in survey questionnaires. Our comprehensive evaluation of nine models shows that popular open and commercial LLMs generally fail to reflect human-like behavior.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-07T15:40:43Z)
• 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.