Understanding Social Biases in Large Language Models

Background/Objectives: Large Language Models (LLMs) like ChatGPT, LLAMA, and Mistral are widely used for automating tasks such as content creation and data analysis. However, due to their training on publicly available internet data, they may inherit social biases. We aimed to investigate the social biases (i.e., ethnic, gender, and disability biases) in these models and evaluate how different model versions handle them. Methods: We instruction-tuned popular models (like Mistral, LLAMA, and Gemma), and for this we curated a dataset constructed by collecting and modifying diverse data from various public datasets. Prompts were run through a controlled pipeline, and responses were categorized (e.g., biased, confused, repeated, or accurate) and analyzed. Results: We found that models responded differently to bias prompts depending on their version. Fine-tuned models showed fewer overt biases but more confusion or censorship. Disability-related prompts triggered the most consistent biases across models. Conclusions: Bias persists in LLMs despite instruction tuning. Differences between model versions may lead to inconsistent user experiences and hidden harms in downstream applications. Greater transparency and robust fairness testing are essential.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
AI
Published
2025-05-20
DOI
https://doi.org/10.3390/ai6050106
Citations
6
Primary Topic
Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
14.19
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Understanding Social Biases in Large Language Models

Francesco Gargiulo, Stefano Marrone, Rajesh Jaiswal, Lidia Marassi et al.
6 citations
AI
Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
14.19
article

Understanding Social Biases in Large Language Models

Francesco Gargiulo, Stefano Marrone, Rajesh Jaiswal, Lidia Marassi, Ojasvi Gupta
article en
6 citations

Abstract

Background/Objectives: Large Language Models (LLMs) like ChatGPT, LLAMA, and Mistral are widely used for automating tasks such as content creation and data analysis. However, due to their training on publicly available internet data, they may inherit social biases. We aimed to investigate the social biases (i.e., ethnic, gender, and disability biases) in these models and evaluate how different model versions handle them. Methods: We instruction-tuned popular models (like Mistral, LLAMA, and Gemma), and for this we curated a dataset constructed by collecting and modifying diverse data from various public datasets. Prompts were run through a controlled pipeline, and responses were categorized (e.g., biased, confused, repeated, or accurate) and analyzed. Results: We found that models responded differently to bias prompts depending on their version. Fine-tuned models showed fewer overt biases but more confusion or censorship. Disability-related prompts triggered the most consistent biases across models. Conclusions: Bias persists in LLMs despite instruction tuning. Differences between model versions may lead to inconsistent user experiences and hidden harms in downstream applications. Greater transparency and robust fairness testing are essential.

AIVol. 6(5)
Technological University Dublin (IE), National Research Council (IT), University of Naples Federico II (IT)
Openalex Percentile: Top 1%
Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
14.19
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.