Which Demographics do LLMs Default to During Annotation?
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Demographics and cultural background of annotators influence the labels they assign in text annotation -- for instance, an elderly woman might find it offensive to read a message addressed to a "bro", but a male teenager might find it appropriate. It is therefore important to acknowledge label variations to not under-represent members of a society. Two research directions developed out of this observation in the context of using large language models (LLM) for data annotations, namely (1) studying biases and inherent knowledge of LLMs and (2) injecting diversity in the output by manipulating the prompt with demographic information. We combine these two strands of research and ask the question to which demographics an LLM resorts to when no demographics is given. To answer this question, we evaluate which attributes of human annotators LLMs inherently mimic. Furthermore, we compare non-demographic conditioned prompts and placebo-conditioned prompts (e.g., "you are an annotator who lives in house number 5") to demographics-conditioned prompts ("You are a 45 year old man and an expert on politeness annotation. How do you rate {instance}"). We study these questions for politeness and offensiveness annotations on the POPQUORN data set, a corpus created in a controlled manner to investigate human label variations based on demographics which has not been used for LLM-based analyses so far. We observe notable influences related to gender, race, and age in demographic prompting, which contrasts with previous studies that found no such effects.
Key facts. Cited by 10 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 35 of its 77 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 11 Oct 2024.
Builds on
35 of 77 references.
References · 35
- 2020Language Models are Few-Shot Learnerscited by 32,199
- 2019Language Models as Knowledge Bases?cited by 1,922
- 2023Whose Opinions Do Language Models Reflect?cited by 759
- 2022Transformers learn in-context by gradient descentcited by 714
- 2019Benchmarking Zero-shot Text Classification: Datasets, Evaluation and Entailment Approachcited by 299
- 2023From Pretraining Data to Language Models to Downstream Tasks: Tracking the Trails of Political Biases Leading to Unfair NLP Modelscited by 257
- 2023Marked Personas: Using Natural Language Prompts to Measure Stereotypes in Language Modelscited by 204
- 2024Quantifying the Persona Effect in LLM Simulationscited by 164
- 2019A Survey on Recent Advances in Named Entity Recognition from Deep Learning modelscited by 117
- 2023NLPositionality: Characterizing Design Biases of Datasets and Modelscited by 91
- 2023Sensitivity, Performance, Robustness: Deconstructing the Effect of Sociodemographic Promptingcited by 80
- 2023Reasoning Implicit Sentiment with Chain-of-Thought Promptingcited by 79
23 more
- 2024Beyond prompt brittleness: Evaluating the reliability and consistency of political worldviews in LLMscited by 55
- 2022Prompt for Extraction? PAIE: Prompting Argument Interaction for Event Argument Extractioncited by 54
- 2023When Do Annotator Demographics Matter? Measuring the Influence of Annotator Demographics with the POPQUORN Datasetcited by 51
- 2023A Practical Survey on Zero-shot Prompt Design for In-context Learningcited by 49
- 2022Dimensional Modeling of Emotions in Text with Appraisal Theories: Corpus Creation, Annotation Reliability, and Predictioncited by 45
- 2024The Perspectivist Paradigm Shift: Assumptions and Challenges of Capturing Human Labelscited by 37
- 2023Can Large Language Models Capture Dissenting Human Voices?cited by 33
- 2021Ruddit: Norms of Offensiveness for English Reddit Commentscited by 26
- 2024Emotion Analysis in NLP: Trends, Gaps and Roadmap for Future Directionscited by 26
- 2022Unifying Data Perspectivism and Personalization: An Application to Social Normscited by 22
- 2024Annotation alignment: Comparing LLM and human annotations of conversational safetycited by 22
- 2024Cultural Conditioning or Placebo? On the Effectiveness of Socio-Demographic Promptingcited by 22
- 2023PromptNER: Prompt Locating and Typing for Named Entity Recognitioncited by 17
- 2024Interpreting Predictive Probabilities: Model Confidence or Human Label Variation?cited by 15
- 2023From Dissonance to Insights: Dissecting Disagreements in Rationale Construction for Case Outcome Classificationcited by 14
- 2022Natural Language Inference Prompts for Zero-shot Emotion Classification in Text across Corporacited by 13
- 2021Emotion Ratings: How Intensity, Annotation Confidence and Agreements are Entangledcited by 10
- 2022PromptDA: Label-guided Data Augmentation for Prompt-based Few-shot Learnerscited by 7
- 2023Where are We in Event-centric Emotion Analysis? Bridging Emotion Role Labeling and Appraisal-based Approachescited by 7
- 2024English Prompts are Better for NLI-based Zero-Shot Emotion Classification than Target-Language Promptscited by 7
- 2020Learning Unseen Emotions from Gestures via Semantically-Conditioned Zero-Shot Perception with Adversarial Autoencoderscited by 5
- 2024Different Tastes of Entities: Investigating Human Label Variation in Named Entity Annotationscited by 5
- 2020Semantic Role Labeling as Syntactic Dependency Parsingcited by 3
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2024: 1; 2025: 2; 2026: 7.
10 papers.
- 2024Robustness and Confounders in the Demographic Alignment of LLMs with Human Perceptions of Offensivenesscited by 7
- 2026Measuring Human Value Expression in Social Media Texts: Calibrated LLM Annotation and Encoder Transfercited by 2
- 2025Prioritize Economy or Climate Action? Investigating ChatGPT Response Differences Based on Inferred Political Orientationcited by 1
- 2026Reflect: Transparent Principle-Guided Reasoning for Constitutional Alignment at Scalecited by 1
- 2026Structure of Basic Human Values in Russian Social Mediacited by 1
- 2026Multi-Perspective LLM Annotations for Valid Analyses in Subjective Taskscited by 1
- 2025Are Humans as Brittle as Large Language Models?cited by 0
- 2026PartisanLens: A Multilingual Dataset of Hyperpartisan and Conspiratorial Immigration Narratives in European Mediacited by 0
- 2026Demographic Prompting at Scale: When More Attributes Hurt LLM--Human Agreementcited by 0
- 2026LLM-as-a-Demographic: Whom Sociodemographic Prompting Helps, and Whom It Hurtscited by 0
- 2026LLM-as-a-Demographic: Whom Sociodemographic Prompting Helps, and Whom It Hurts31 Aug 2026
- 2026Demographic Prompting at Scale: When More Attributes Hurt LLM--Human Agreement12 Jul 2026
- 2026Measuring Human Value Expression in Social Media Texts: Calibrated LLM Annotation and Encoder Transfer9 Jun 2026
- 2026Multi-Perspective LLM Annotations for Valid Analyses in Subjective Tasks22 Mar 2026
- 2026Structure of Basic Human Values in Russian Social Media19 Mar 2026
- 2026Reflect: Transparent Principle-Guided Reasoning for Constitutional Alignment at Scale26 Jan 2026
- 2026PartisanLens: A Multilingual Dataset of Hyperpartisan and Conspiratorial Immigration Narratives in European Media7 Jan 2026
- 2025Prioritize Economy or Climate Action? Investigating ChatGPT Response Differences Based on Inferred Political Orientation4 Nov 2025
- 2025Are Humans as Brittle as Large Language Models?9 Sep 2025
- 2024Robustness and Confounders in the Demographic Alignment of LLMs with Human Perceptions of Offensiveness13 Nov 2024