mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

The AI Gap: How Socioeconomic Status Affects Language Technology Interactions

arXiv 2505.12158 ↗First posted 17 May 2025cs.CLcited by 15

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Socioeconomic status (SES) fundamentally influences how people interact with each other and more recently, with digital technologies like Large Language Models (LLMs). While previous research has highlighted the interaction between SES and language technology, it was limited by reliance on proxy metrics and synthetic data. We survey 1,000 individuals from diverse socioeconomic backgrounds about their use of language technologies and generative AI, and collect 6,482 prompts from their previous interactions with LLMs. We find systematic differences across SES groups in language technology usage (i.e., frequency, performed tasks), interaction styles, and topics. Higher SES entails a higher level of abstraction, convey requests more concisely, and topics like 'inclusivity' and 'travel'. Lower SES correlates with higher anthropomorphization of LLMs (using ''hello'' and ''thank you'') and more concrete language. Our findings suggest that while generative language technologies are becoming more accessible to everyone, socioeconomic linguistic differences still stratify their use to exacerbate the digital divide. These differences underscore the importance of considering SES in developing language technologies to accommodate varying linguistic needs rooted in socioeconomic factors and limit the AI Gap across SES groups.

Key facts. Cited by 15 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 14 of its 51 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 17 May 2025.

Builds on

14 of 51 references.

References · 14

  1. 2019Sentence-BERT: Sentence Embeddings using Siamese BERT-Networkscited by 9,170
  2. 2020Measuring Massive Multitask Language Understandingcited by 7,963
  3. 2024M3-Embedding: Multi-Linguality, Multi-Functionality, Multi-Granularity Text Embeddings Through Self-Knowledge Distillationcited by 1,073
  4. 2024WildChat: 1M ChatGPT Interaction Logs in the Wildcited by 629
  5. 2024The PRISM Alignment Dataset: What Participatory, Representative and Individualised Human Feedback Reveals About the Subjective and Multicultural Alignment of Large Language Modelscited by 144
  6. 2025Which Economic Tasks are Performed with AI? Evidence from Millions of Claude Conversationscited by 96
  7. 2023Rethinking Model Evaluation as Narrowing the Socio-Technical Gapcited by 56
  8. 2017An optimal transportation approach for assessing almost stochastic ordercited by 33
  9. 2022What a Creole Wants, What a Creole Needscited by 27
  10. 2024AnthroScore: A Computational Linguistic Measure of Anthropomorphismcited by 27
  11. 2024What Do Dialect Speakers Want? A Survey of Attitudes Towards Language Technology for German Dialectscited by 21
  12. 2023Artificial Intelligence across Europe: A Study on Awareness, Attitude and Trustcited by 9
2 more
  1. 2024Classist Tools: Social Class Correlates with Performance in NLPcited by 9
  2. 2024Native Design Bias: Studying the Impact of English Nativeness on Language Model Performancecited by 5

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2025: 6; 2026: 9.

15 papers.

Sort:

By area: