# LLM Targeted Underperformance Disproportionately Impacts Vulnerable Users

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2406.17737 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2406.17737/

## Key facts

- Cited by 15 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 11 of its 24 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 25 Jun 2024.

## Builds on (most cited first, 11 of 11)

- [Training language models to follow instructions with human feedback](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2203.02155/) (2022)
- [TruthfulQA: Measuring How Models Mimic Human Falsehoods](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2109.07958/) (2021)
- [Towards Understanding Sycophancy in Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.13548/) (2023)
- [Red Teaming Language Models with Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2202.03286/) (2022)
- [Discovering Language Model Behaviors with Model-Written Evaluations](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2212.09251/) (2022)
- [Crowdsourcing Multiple Choice Science Questions](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1707.06209/) (2017)
- [Personal LLM Agents: Insights and Survey about the Capability, Efficiency and Security](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2401.05459/) (2024)
- [CoMPosT: Characterizing and Evaluating Caricature in LLM Simulations](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.11501/) (2023)
- [Are You Sure? Challenging LLMs Leads to Performance Drops in The FlipFlop Experiment](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2311.08596/) (2023)
- [When Large Language Models contradict humans? Large Language Models' Sycophantic Behaviour](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2311.09410/) (2023)
- [Designing a Dashboard for Transparency and Control of Conversational AI](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2406.07882/) (2024)

## Built on by (most cited first, 15 of 15)

- [Persona-Augmented Benchmarking: Evaluating LLMs Across Diverse Writing Styles](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2507.22168/) (2025)
- [Conversational User-AI Intervention: A Study on Prompt Rewriting for Improved LLM Response Generation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2503.16789/) (2025)
- [One Persona, Many Cues, Different Results: How Sociodemographic Cues Impact LLM Personalization](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2601.18572/) (2026)
- [Unequal Opportunities: Examining the Bias in Geographical Recommendations by Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2504.05325/) (2025)
- [Characterizing Selective Refusal Bias in Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2510.27087/) (2025)
- [Dialect vs Demographics: Quantifying LLM Bias from Implicit Linguistic Signals vs. Explicit User Profiles](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2604.21152/) (2026)
- [From GPT-3 to GPT-5: Mapping their capabilities, scope, limitations, and consequences](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2604.10332/) (2026)
- [Affective Context Amplifies Sycophancy in LLM Responses](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2608.21242/) (2026)
- [Differential Harm Propensity in Personalized LLM Agents: The Curious Case of Mental Health Disclosure](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2603.16734/) (2026)
- [MIRA: A Bilingual Benchmark for Medical Information Response Audit](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2605.28025/) (2026)
- [Topics as Proxies for Sociodemographics: How Conversational Context Affects LLM Answers](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2606.02776/) (2026)
- [Can LLMs Simulate L2-English Dialogue? An Information-Theoretic Analysis of L1-Dependent Biases](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2502.14507/) (2025)
- [Cognitive-Level Adaptive Generation via Capability-Aware Retrieval and Style Adaptation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2509.19336/) (2025)
- [Defeat Devices in AI Systems](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2606.28863/) (2026)
- [The complexities of patient-centred conversational artificial intelligence](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2607.08625/) (2026)

## Abstract (arXiv)

While state-of-the-art large language models (LLMs) have shown impressive performance on many tasks, there has been extensive research on undesirable model behavior such as hallucinations and bias. In this work, we investigate how the quality of LLM responses changes in terms of information accuracy, truthfulness, and refusals depending on three user traits: English proficiency, education level, and country of origin. We present extensive experimentation on three state-of-the-art LLMs and two different datasets targeting truthfulness and factuality. Our findings suggest that undesirable behaviors in state-of-the-art LLMs occur disproportionately more for users with lower English proficiency, of lower education status, and originating from outside the US, rendering these models unreliable sources of information towards their most vulnerable users.