# A Cross-Cultural Comparison of LLM-based Public Opinion Simulation: Evaluating Chinese and U.S. Models on Diverse Societies

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2506.21587 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2506.21587/

## Key facts

- Cited by 1 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 21 of its 35 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 17 Jun 2025.

## Builds on (most cited first, 21 of 21)

- [GPT-4 Technical Report](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2303.08774/) (2023)
- [The Llama 3 Herd of Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2407.21783/) (2024)
- [LLaMA: Open and Efficient Foundation Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2302.13971/) (2023)
- [Qwen2.5 Technical Report](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2412.15115/) (2024)
- [Bias and Fairness in Large Language Models: A Survey](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2309.00770/) (2023)
- [Fairness in Machine Learning: A Survey](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2010.04053/) (2020)
- [Justice or Prejudice? Quantifying Biases in LLM-as-a-Judge](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2410.02736/) (2024)
- [From Pretraining Data to Language Models to Downstream Tasks: Tracking the Trails of Political Biases Leading to Unfair NLP Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.08283/) (2023)
- [Assessing Cross-Cultural Alignment between ChatGPT and Human Societies: An Empirical Study](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2303.17466/) (2023)
- ["Kelly is a Warm Person, Joseph is a Role Model": Gender Biases in LLM-Generated Reference Letters](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.09219/) (2023)
- [Having Beer after Prayer? Measuring Cultural Bias in Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.14456/) (2023)
- [Cultural Bias and Cultural Alignment of Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2311.14096/) (2023)
- [Systematic Biases in LLM Simulations of Debates](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2402.04049/) (2024)
- [Fairness in Serving Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2401.00588/) (2023)
- [Assessing the Fairness of AI Systems: AI Practitioners' Processes, Challenges, and Needs for Support](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2112.05675/) (2021)
- [How Well Do LLMs Represent Values Across Cultures? Empirical Analysis of LLM Responses Based on Hofstede Cultural Dimensions](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2406.14805/) (2024)
- [What's in a Name? Auditing Large Language Models for Race and Gender Bias](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2402.14875/) (2024)
- [Representation Bias in Political Sample Simulations with Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2407.11409/) (2024)
- [Cultural Value Differences of LLMs: Prompt, Language, and Model Size](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2407.16891/) (2024)
- [Machine learning as a model for cultural learning: Teaching an algorithm what it means to be fat](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2003.12133/) (2020)
- [Who Is Missing? Characterizing the Participation of Different Demographic Groups in a Korean Nationwide Daily Conversation Corpus](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2204.09209/) (2022)

## Built on by (most cited first, 1 of 1)

- [Can LLMs Think Like Consumers? Benchmarking Crowd-Level Reaction Reconstruction with ConsumerSimBench](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2605.17079/) (2026)

## Abstract (arXiv)

This study evaluates the ability of DeepSeek, an open-source large language model (LLM), to simulate public opinions in comparison to LLMs developed by major tech companies. By comparing DeepSeek-R1 and DeepSeek-V3 with Qwen2.5, GPT-4o, and Llama-3.3 and utilizing survey data from the American National Election Studies (ANES) and the Zuobiao dataset of China, we assess these models' capacity to predict public opinions on social issues in both China and the United States, highlighting their comparative capabilities between countries. Our findings indicate that DeepSeek-V3 performs best in simulating U.S. opinions on the abortion issue compared to other topics such as climate change, gun control, immigration, and services for same-sex couples, primarily because it more accurately simulates responses when provided with Democratic or liberal personas. For Chinese samples, DeepSeek-V3 performs best in simulating opinions on foreign aid and individualism but shows limitations in modeling views on capitalism, particularly failing to capture the stances of low-income and non-college-educated individuals. It does not exhibit significant differences from other models in simulating opinions on traditionalism and the free market. Further analysis reveals that all LLMs exhibit the tendency to overgeneralize a single perspective within demographic groups, often defaulting to consistent responses within groups. These findings highlight the need to mitigate cultural and demographic biases in LLM-driven public opinion modeling, calling for approaches such as more inclusive training methodologies.