mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Revisiting Popularity and Demographic Biases in Recommender Evaluation and Effectiveness

arXiv 2110.08353 ↗First posted 15 Oct 2021cs.IR cs.AI cs.LGcited by 12

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Recommendation algorithms are susceptible to popularity bias: a tendency to recommend popular items even when they fail to meet user needs. A related issue is that the recommendation quality can vary by demographic groups. Marginalized groups or groups that are under-represented in the training data may receive less relevant recommendations from these algorithms compared to others. In a recent study, Ekstrand et al. investigate how recommender performance varies according to popularity and demographics, and find statistically significant differences in recommendation utility between binary genders on two datasets, and significant effects based on age on one dataset. Here we reproduce those results and extend them with additional analyses. We find statistically significant differences in recommender performance by both age and gender. We observe that recommendation utility steadily degrades for older users, and is lower for women than men. We also find that the utility is higher for users from countries with more representation in the dataset. In addition, we find that total usage and the popularity of consumed content are strong predictors of recommender performance and also vary significantly across demographic groups.

Key facts. Cited by 12 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 17 of its 44 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 15 Oct 2021.

Builds on

17 of 44 references.

References · 17

  1. 2017Men Also Like Shopping: Reducing Gender Bias Amplification using Corpus-level Constraintscited by 420
  2. 2018Fairness Without Demographics in Repeated Loss Minimizationcited by 364
  3. 2019InterpretML: A Unified Framework for Machine Learning Interpretabilitycited by 246
  4. 2020Bias and Debias in Recommender System: A Survey and Future Directionscited by 240
  5. 2018Fairness of Exposure in Rankingscited by 190
  6. 2017How Algorithmic Confounding in Recommendation Systems Increases Homogeneity and Decreases Utilitycited by 120
  7. 2014Automated Experiments on Ad Privacy Settings: A Tale of Opacity, Choice, and Discriminationcited by 83
  8. 2020FairRec: Two-Sided Fairness for Personalized Recommendations in Two-Sided Platformscited by 78
  9. 2017Multisided Fairness for Recommendationcited by 70
  10. 2020Evaluating Stochastic Rankings with Expected Exposurecited by 53
  11. 2020The Connection Between Popularity Bias, Calibration, and Fairness in Recommendationcited by 35
  12. 2018Exploring Author Gender in Book Rating and Recommendationcited by 29
5 more
  1. 2020Multi-sided Exposure Bias in Recommendationcited by 23
  2. 2019Multi-stakeholder Recommendation and its Connection to Multi-sided Fairnesscited by 19
  3. 2018A Study of Position Bias in Digital Library Recommender Systemscited by 13
  4. 2017Auditing Search Engines for Differential Satisfaction Across Demographicscited by 12
  5. 2021Algorithms are not neutral: Bias in collaborative filteringcited by 3

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2022: 5; 2023: 2; 2024: 1; 2025: 3; 2026: 1.

12 papers.