Can LLMs Understand the Impact of Trauma? Costs and Benefits of LLMs Coding the Interviews of Firearm Violence Survivors

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.16132v1
• Date: Fri, 17 Apr 2026 15:07:27 GMT
• Title: Can LLMs Understand the Impact of Trauma? Costs and Benefits of LLMs Coding the Interviews of Firearm Violence Survivors
• Abstract summary: Firearm violence is a pressing public health issue, yet research into survivors' lived experiences remains underfunded and difficult to scale.<n>Recent advancements in large language models (LLMs) have opened the door to automating this process.<n>We assess the use of open-source LLMs to inductively code interviews with 21 Black men who have survived community firearm violence.
• Score: 1.4847140242267176
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Firearm violence is a pressing public health issue, yet research into survivors' lived experiences remains underfunded and difficult to scale. Qualitative research, including in-depth interviews, is a valuable tool for understanding the personal and societal consequences of community firearm violence and designing effective interventions. However, manually analyzing these narratives through thematic analysis and inductive coding is time-consuming and labor-intensive. Recent advancements in large language models (LLMs) have opened the door to automating this process, though concerns remain about whether these models can accurately and ethically capture the experiences of vulnerable populations. In this study, we assess the use of open-source LLMs to inductively code interviews with 21 Black men who have survived community firearm violence. Our results demonstrate that while some configurations of LLMs can identify important codes, overall relevance remains low and is highly sensitive to data processing. Furthermore, LLM guardrails lead to substantial narrative erasure. These findings highlight both the potential and limitations of LLM-assisted qualitative coding and underscore the ethical challenges of applying AI in research involving marginalized communities.

Related papers

• Evaluating Metrics for Safety with LLM-as-Judges [1.93892819796757]
  This paper argues that although we cannot get deterministic evaluations from many natural language processing tasks, by adopting a basket of weighted metrics it may be possible to lower the risk of errors within an evaluation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-12-17T17:24:49Z)
• How to Protect Yourself from 5G Radiation? Investigating LLM Responses to Implicit Misinformation [35.365004091470944]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) are widely deployed in diverse scenarios.<n>The extent to which they could tacitly spread misinformation emerges as a critical safety concern.<n>We curated EchoMist, the first benchmark for implicit misinformation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-03-12T17:59:18Z)
• Evaluation of LLM Vulnerabilities to Being Misused for Personalized Disinformation Generation [0.5070610131852027]
  Large language models (LLMs) can be effectively misused for generating disinformation news articles following predefined narratives.<n>This study fills this gap by evaluating vulnerabilities of recent open and closed LLMs, and their willingness to generate personalized disinformation news articles in English.<n>Our results demonstrate the need for stronger safety-filters and disclaimers, as those are not properly functioning in most of the evaluated LLMs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-12-18T09:48:53Z)
• Persuasion with Large Language Models: a Survey [49.86930318312291]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have created new disruptive possibilities for persuasive communication. In areas such as politics, marketing, public health, e-commerce, and charitable giving, such LLM Systems have already achieved human-level or even super-human persuasiveness. Our survey suggests that the current and future potential of LLM-based persuasion poses profound ethical and societal risks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-11-11T10:05:52Z)
• LLM-PBE: Assessing Data Privacy in Large Language Models [111.58198436835036]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have become integral to numerous domains, significantly advancing applications in data management, mining, and analysis. Despite the critical nature of this issue, there has been no existing literature to offer a comprehensive assessment of data privacy risks in LLMs. Our paper introduces LLM-PBE, a toolkit crafted specifically for the systematic evaluation of data privacy risks in LLMs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-08-23T01:37:29Z)
• Can LLMs be Fooled? Investigating Vulnerabilities in LLMs [4.927763944523323]
  The advent of Large Language Models (LLMs) has garnered significant popularity and wielded immense power across various domains within Natural Language Processing (NLP) This paper will synthesize the findings from each vulnerability section and propose new directions of research and development. By understanding the focal points of current vulnerabilities, we can better anticipate and mitigate future risks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-30T04:08:00Z)
• CLAMBER: A Benchmark of Identifying and Clarifying Ambiguous Information Needs in Large Language Models [60.59638232596912]
  We introduce CLAMBER, a benchmark for evaluating large language models (LLMs) Building upon the taxonomy, we construct 12K high-quality data to assess the strengths, weaknesses, and potential risks of various off-the-shelf LLMs. Our findings indicate the limited practical utility of current LLMs in identifying and clarifying ambiguous user queries.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-20T14:34:01Z)
• Privacy in Large Language Models: Attacks, Defenses and Future Directions [84.73301039987128]
  We analyze the current privacy attacks targeting large language models (LLMs) and categorize them according to the adversary's assumed capabilities. We present a detailed overview of prominent defense strategies that have been developed to counter these privacy attacks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-16T13:23:54Z)
• Are Large Language Models Really Robust to Word-Level Perturbations? [68.60618778027694]
  We propose a novel rational evaluation approach that leverages pre-trained reward models as diagnostic tools. Longer conversations manifest the comprehensive grasp of language models in terms of their proficiency in understanding questions. Our results demonstrate that LLMs frequently exhibit vulnerability to word-level perturbations that are commonplace in daily language usage.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-09-20T09:23:46Z)
• On the Risk of Misinformation Pollution with Large Language Models [127.1107824751703]
  We investigate the potential misuse of modern Large Language Models (LLMs) for generating credible-sounding misinformation. Our study reveals that LLMs can act as effective misinformation generators, leading to a significant degradation in the performance of Open-Domain Question Answering (ODQA) systems.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-23T04:10:26Z)
• Assessing Hidden Risks of LLMs: An Empirical Study on Robustness, Consistency, and Credibility [37.682136465784254]
  We conduct over a million queries to the mainstream large language models (LLMs) including ChatGPT, LLaMA, and OPT. We find that ChatGPT is still capable to yield the correct answer even when the input is polluted at an extreme level. We propose a novel index associated with a dataset that roughly decides the feasibility of using such data for LLM-involved evaluation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-15T15:44:51Z)

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.