Explicit vs. Implicit: Investigating Social Bias in Large Language Models through Self-Reflection

Large Language Models (LLMs) have been shown to exhibit various biases and stereotypes in their generated content.While extensive research has investigated biases in LLMs, prior work has predominantly focused on explicit bias, with minimal attention to implicit bias and the relation between these two forms of bias.This paper presents a systematic framework grounded in social psychology theories to investigate and compare explicit and implicit biases in LLMs.We propose a novel self-reflection-based evaluation framework that operates in two phases: first measuring implicit bias through simulated psychological assessment methods, then evaluating explicit bias by prompting LLMs to analyze their own generated content.Through extensive experiments on advanced LLMs across multiple social dimensions, we demonstrate that LLMs exhibit a substantial inconsistency between explicit and implicit biases: while explicit bias manifests as mild stereotypes, implicit bias exhibits strong stereotypes.We further investigate the underlying factors contributing to this explicit-implicit bias inconsistency, examining the effects of training data scale, model size, and alignment techniques.Experimental results indicate that while explicit bias declines with increased training data and model size, implicit bias exhibits a contrasting upward trend.Moreover, contemporary alignment methods effectively suppress explicit bias but show limited efficacy in mitigating implicit bias.

Authors

Publication Details

Published
2025-01-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/2025.findings-acl.1
Citations
3
Primary Topic
Computational and Text Analysis Methods
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
16.03

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Explicit vs. Implicit: Investigating Social Bias in Large Language Models through Self-Reflection

Dongming Zhao, Yan Wang, Bo Wang, Yuexian Hou et al.
3 citations
Computational and Text Analysis Methods
16.03
article

Explicit vs. Implicit: Investigating Social Bias in Large Language Models through Self-Reflection

Dongming Zhao, Yan Wang, Bo Wang, Yuexian Hou, Yachao Zhao, Ruifang He
article en
3 citations

Abstract

Large Language Models (LLMs) have been shown to exhibit various biases and stereotypes in their generated content.While extensive research has investigated biases in LLMs, prior work has predominantly focused on explicit bias, with minimal attention to implicit bias and the relation between these two forms of bias.This paper presents a systematic framework grounded in social psychology theories to investigate and compare explicit and implicit biases in LLMs.We propose a novel self-reflection-based evaluation framework that operates in two phases: first measuring implicit bias through simulated psychological assessment methods, then evaluating explicit bias by prompting LLMs to analyze their own generated content.Through extensive experiments on advanced LLMs across multiple social dimensions, we demonstrate that LLMs exhibit a substantial inconsistency between explicit and implicit biases: while explicit bias manifests as mild stereotypes, implicit bias exhibits strong stereotypes.We further investigate the underlying factors contributing to this explicit-implicit bias inconsistency, examining the effects of training data scale, model size, and alignment techniques.Experimental results indicate that while explicit bias declines with increased training data and model size, implicit bias exhibits a contrasting upward trend.Moreover, contemporary alignment methods effectively suppress explicit bias but show limited efficacy in mitigating implicit bias.

National Natural Science Foundation of China
Reduced inequalities
Openalex Percentile: Top 1%
Computational and Text Analysis Methods
16.03
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.