To Compare, or Not to Compare: On Methodological Practices in Evaluating Social Bias
As Large Language Models are increasingly deployed in critical applications, robustly evaluating their social biases is paramount. However, the current literature suffers from widespread methodological fragmentation, which yields contradictory conclusions. This stems largely from ignoring the structural framing of benchmark-level evaluations. To resolve this, we introduce a unified and controllable framework that standardizes heterogeneous benchmarks to systematically contrast isolated demographic assessments with forced-choice comparative settings. Crucially, this allows us to disentangle the confounding effects of Chain-of-Thought reasoning, neutral fallback options, and other structural artifacts in social bias evaluations. Our evaluation across multiple model families reveals a massive, systematic paradigm gap: while isolated assessments limit prejudice activation, comparative settings act as aggressive catalysts for latent discrimination, a shift primarily driven by underspecified contexts. Alarmingly, CoT reasoning exacerbates social biases under comparative settings, and this systemic bias persists as a deterministic prejudice even when models are provided neutral fallback options or claim to answer randomly. Finally, we demonstrate that this comparative prejudice is a generalized phenomenon that scales positively with model size. Ultimately, we offer a crucial methodological guideline: while researchers must leverage comparative settings to robustly audit hidden biases, practitioners cannot safely rely on comparative deployments in ambiguous real-world tasks.
Code (0)
등록된 구현이 없습니다.
Similar Papers 제목 키워드 기반
Validating LLMs in social science: Epistemic threats and emerging norms
Large language models (LLMs) are reshaping social science methodology. Researchers increasingly prompt language models to generate quantitative measurements of social concepts, for example labeling data or simulating sur…
Toward best research practices in AI Psychology
Language models have become an essential part of the burgeoning field of AI Psychology. I discuss 14 methodological considerations that can help design more robust, generalizable studies evaluating the cognitive abilitie…
DiversityOn Evaluating Adversarial Robustness of Chest X-ray Classification: Pitfalls and Best Practices
Vulnerability to adversarial attacks is a well-known weakness of Deep Neural Networks. While most of the studies focus on natural images with standardized benchmarks like ImageNet and CIFAR, little research has considere…
Adversarial RobustnessClassificationMedical DiagnosisX-ray ClassificationTowards an efficient and risk aware strategy for guiding farmers in identifying best crop management
Identification of best performing fertilizer practices among a set of contrasting practices with field trials is challenging as crop losses are costly for farmers. To identify best management practices, an ''intuitive st…
ManagementParty Prediction for Twitter
A large number of studies on social media compare the behaviour of users from different political parties. As a basic step, they employ a predictive model for inferring their political affiliation. The accuracy of this m…
Prediction