Beyond Third-Person Audits: Situated Interaction Auditing for User-Centered LLM Bias Research

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2606.12247v1
• Date: Wed, 10 Jun 2026 15:48:40 GMT
• Title: Beyond Third-Person Audits: Situated Interaction Auditing for User-Centered LLM Bias Research
• Abstract summary: We propose a user-centered framework for studying how user profile signals are shaped in large language models.<n>We demonstrate the framework through a case study that intersects gender and socioeconomic status signals across multiple task domains.
• Score: 0.14353812560047188
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Research on bias in large language models (LLMs) has predominantly focused on third-person audits, which study how models represent or evaluate demographic groups as external subjects. However, this paradigm overlooks a structural blind spot because the user is absent from the audit. In practice, LLMs are used in open-ended, personal interactions, during which the model implicitly represents the user and adjusts its responses accordingly. When identical requests yield different responses depending on who is asking, bias manifests not in how the model describes others but in how it treats its interlocutor. We propose Situated Interaction Auditing (SIA), a user-centered framework for studying how user profile signals -- implicit sociodemographic markers, writing style, and stated identity -- systematically shape LLM response quality, content, and tone. We demonstrate the framework through a case study that intersects gender and socioeconomic status signals across multiple task domains and outline a research agenda for SIA as a new mission for natural language processing.

Related papers

• Evaluating the Hidden Costs of Personalization in Large Language Models [55.07935163900691]
  We identify three emerging risks: (1) irrelevant personalization, where models reference personal information in unnecessary contexts; (2) preference narrowing, where models reinforce informational echo chambers; and (3) sycophantic bias, where models agree excessively with user opinions.<n>We propose PRISK, a dynamic evaluation framework with automated data generation and tailored metrics that uncovers systematic limitations in current AI assistants.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-08-28T20:05:12Z)
• Auditing Support Strategies in LLMs through Grounded Multi-Turn Social Simulation [2.102846336724103]
  Support-seeking narratives from five Reddit communities are decomposed into ordered fragments.<n>Support composition shifts systematically with estimated distress.<n>Community context shapes behavior, tracking topic and discourse norms rather than demographic categories.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-04-18T17:36:15Z)
• Who are you, ChatGPT? Personality and Demographic Style in LLM-Generated Content [5.515596385935823]
  Generative large language models (LLMs) have become central to everyday life, producing human-like text across diverse domains.<n>A growing body of research investigates whether these models also exhibit personality- and demographic-like characteristics in their language.<n>We introduce a novel, data-driven methodology for assessing LLM personality without relying on self-report questionnaires.<n>Applying instead automatic personality and gender classifiers to model replies on open-ended questions collected from Reddit.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-10-13T14:06:17Z)
• Teaching Language Models To Gather Information Proactively [53.85419549904644]
  Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly expected to function as collaborative partners.<n>In this work, we introduce a new task paradigm: proactive information gathering.<n>We design a scalable framework that generates partially specified, real-world tasks, masking key information.<n>Within this setup, our core innovation is a reinforcement finetuning strategy that rewards questions that elicit genuinely new, implicit user information.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-07-28T23:50:09Z)
• Surface Fairness, Deep Bias: A Comparative Study of Bias in Language Models [45.41676783204022]
  We investigate various proxy measures of bias in large language models (LLMs)<n>We find that evaluating models with pre-prompted personae on a multi-subject benchmark (MMLU) leads to negligible and mostly random differences in scores.<n>With the recent trend for LLM assistant memory and personalization, these problems open up from a different angle.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-06-12T08:47:40Z)
• Interpreting Social Bias in LVLMs via Information Flow Analysis and Multi-Round Dialogue Evaluation [1.7997395646080083]
  Large Vision Language Models (LVLMs) have achieved remarkable progress in multimodal tasks, yet they also exhibit notable social biases.<n>We propose an explanatory framework that combines information flow analysis with multi-round dialogue evaluation.<n>Experiments reveal that LVLMs exhibit systematic disparities in information usage when processing images of different demographic groups.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-27T12:28:44Z)
• Reading Between the Prompts: How Stereotypes Shape LLM's Implicit Personalization [13.034294029448338]
  Generative Large Language Models (LLMs) infer user's demographic information from subtle cues in the conversation.<n>Our results highlight the need for greater transparency and control in how LLMs represent user identity.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-22T09:48:51Z)
• A Personalized Conversational Benchmark: Towards Simulating Personalized Conversations [112.81207927088117]
  PersonaConvBench is a benchmark for evaluating personalized reasoning and generation in multi-turn conversations with large language models (LLMs)<n>We benchmark several commercial and open-source LLMs under a unified prompting setup and observe that incorporating personalized history yields substantial performance improvements.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-20T09:13:22Z)
• Subtle Biases Need Subtler Measures: Dual Metrics for Evaluating Representative and Affinity Bias in Large Language Models [10.73340009530019]
  This study addresses two such biases within Large Language Models (LLMs): representative bias and affinity bias. We introduce two novel metrics to measure these biases: the Representative Bias Score (RBS) and the Affinity Bias Score (ABS) Our analysis uncovers marked representative biases in prominent LLMs, with a preference for identities associated with being white, straight, and men. Our investigation of affinity bias reveals distinctive evaluative patterns within each model, akin to bias fingerprints'
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-23T13:35:34Z)
• 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 and Fairness in Large Language Models: A Survey [73.87651986156006]
  We present a comprehensive survey of bias evaluation and mitigation techniques for large language models (LLMs) We first consolidate, formalize, and expand notions of social bias and fairness in natural language processing. We then unify the literature by proposing three intuitive, two for bias evaluation, and one for mitigation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-09-02T00:32:55Z)
• Investigating Fairness Disparities in Peer Review: A Language Model Enhanced Approach [77.61131357420201]
  We conduct a thorough and rigorous study on fairness disparities in peer review with the help of large language models (LMs) We collect, assemble, and maintain a comprehensive relational database for the International Conference on Learning Representations (ICLR) conference from 2017 to date. We postulate and study fairness disparities on multiple protective attributes of interest, including author gender, geography, author, and institutional prestige.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-11-07T16:19:42Z)
• Probing Task-Oriented Dialogue Representation from Language Models [106.02947285212132]
  This paper investigates pre-trained language models to find out which model intrinsically carries the most informative representation for task-oriented dialogue tasks. We fine-tune a feed-forward layer as the classifier probe on top of a fixed pre-trained language model with annotated labels in a supervised way.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-10-26T21:34:39Z)

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.