mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

How Inclusively do LMs Perceive Social and Moral Norms?

arXiv 2502.02696 ↗First posted 4 Feb 2025cs.CLcited by 3

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

This paper discusses and contains offensive content. Language models (LMs) are used in decision-making systems and as interactive assistants. However, how well do these models making judgements align with the diversity of human values, particularly regarding social and moral norms? In this work, we investigate how inclusively LMs perceive norms across demographic groups (e.g., gender, age, and income). We prompt 11 LMs on rules-of-thumb (RoTs) and compare their outputs with the existing responses of 100 human annotators. We introduce the Absolute Distance Alignment Metric (ADA-Met) to quantify alignment on ordinal questions. We find notable disparities in LM responses, with younger, higher-income groups showing closer alignment, raising concerns about the representation of marginalized perspectives. Our findings highlight the importance of further efforts to make LMs more inclusive of diverse human values. The code and prompts are available on GitHub under the CC BY-NC 4.0 license.

Key facts. Cited by 3 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 20 of its 35 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 4 Feb 2025.

Builds on

20 of 35 references.

References · 20

  1. 2023Towards Understanding Sycophancy in Language Modelscited by 988
  2. 2020Language (Technology) is Power: A Critical Survey of "Bias" in NLPcited by 951
  3. 2022Discovering Language Model Behaviors with Model-Written Evaluationscited by 805
  4. 2023Whose Opinions Do Language Models Reflect?cited by 759
  5. 2023Towards Measuring the Representation of Subjective Global Opinions in Language Modelscited by 424
  6. 2017Men Also Like Shopping: Reducing Gender Bias Amplification using Corpus-level Constraintscited by 420
  7. 2016A Corpus and Evaluation Framework for Deeper Understanding of Commonsense Storiescited by 413
  8. 2021Annotators with Attitudes: How Annotator Beliefs And Identities Bias Toxic Language Detectioncited by 258
  9. 2020Social Chemistry 101: Learning to Reason about Social and Moral Normscited by 253
  10. 2023"Kelly is a Warm Person, Joseph is a Role Model": Gender Biases in LLM-Generated Reference Letterscited by 196
  11. 2023The political ideology of conversational AI: Converging evidence on ChatGPT's pro-environmental, left-libertarian orientationcited by 183
  12. 2023Having Beer after Prayer? Measuring Cultural Bias in Large Language Modelscited by 153
8 more
  1. 2021On Releasing Annotator-Level Labels and Information in Datasetscited by 123
  2. 2022Is Your Toxicity My Toxicity? Exploring the Impact of Rater Identity on Toxicity Annotationcited by 67
  3. 2023"I'm fully who I am": Towards Centering Transgender and Non-Binary Voices to Measure Biases in Open Language Generationcited by 56
  4. 2023Everyone's Voice Matters: Quantifying Annotation Disagreement Using Demographic Informationcited by 52
  5. 2020Detecting Stance in Media on Global Warmingcited by 48
  6. 2018Modeling Semantic Plausibility by Injecting World Knowledgecited by 24
  7. 2023Vicarious Offense and Noise Audit of Offensive Speech Classifiers: Unifying Human and Machine Disagreement on What is Offensivecited by 16
  8. 2024Rater Cohesion and Quality from a Vicarious Perspectivecited by 8

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2025: 1; 2026: 2.

3 papers.