# Language, Culture, and Ideology: Personalizing Offensiveness Detection in Political Tweets with Reasoning LLMs

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2510.02351 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2510.02351/

## Key facts

- Cited by 1 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Placed in Reasoning benchmarks and evaluation, one of 17 directions in LLM reasoning.
- Builds on 25 of its 65 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 27 Sep 2025.

## Placed in

- LLM reasoning / [Reasoning benchmarks and evaluation](https://mlsanity.com/lr/reasoning-benchmarks-and-evaluation/)

## Builds on (most cited first, 25 of 25)

- [Attention Is All You Need](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1706.03762/) (2017)
- [BERT: Pre-training of Deep Bidirectional Transformers for Language Understanding](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1810.04805/) (2018)
- [Language Models are Few-Shot Learners](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2005.14165/) (2020)
- [GPT-4 Technical Report](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2303.08774/) (2023)
- [The Llama 3 Herd of Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2407.21783/) (2024)
- [Self-Consistency Improves Chain of Thought Reasoning in Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2203.11171/) (2022)
- [Unsupervised Cross-lingual Representation Learning at Scale](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1911.02116/) (2019)
- [Mistral 7B](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.06825/) (2023)
- [StereoSet: Measuring stereotypical bias in pretrained language models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2004.09456/) (2020)
- [Automated Hate Speech Detection and the Problem of Offensive Language](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1703.04009/) (2017)
- [Social Bias Frames: Reasoning about Social and Power Implications of Language](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1911.03891/) (2019)
- [HateBERT: Retraining BERT for Abusive Language Detection in English](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2010.12472/) (2020)
- [ChatGPT: Jack of all trades, master of none](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2302.10724/) (2023)
- [Directions in Abusive Language Training Data: Garbage In, Garbage Out](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2004.01670/) (2020)
- [On the Apparent Conflict Between Individual and Group Fairness](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1912.06883/) (2019)
- [Teach Me to Explain: A Review of Datasets for Explainable Natural Language Processing](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2102.12060/) (2021)
- [Contextualizing Hate Speech Classifiers with Post-hoc Explanation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2005.02439/) (2020)
- [Agreeing to Disagree: Annotating Offensive Language Datasets with Annotators' Disagreement](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2109.13563/) (2021)
- ["HOT" ChatGPT: The promise of ChatGPT in detecting and discriminating hateful, offensive, and toxic comments on social media](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2304.10619/) (2023)
- [MUDES: Multilingual Detection of Offensive Spans](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2102.09665/) (2021)
- [Disentangling Perceptions of Offensiveness: Cultural and Moral Correlates](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2312.06861/) (2023)
- [Multilingual Offensive Language Identification for Low-resource Languages](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2105.05996/) (2021)
- [Modeling Uncertainty in Personalized Emotion Prediction with Normalizing Flows](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2312.06034/) (2023)
- [On The Role of Reasoning in the Identification of Subtle Stereotypes in Natural Language](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2308.00071/) (2023)
- [Towards Model-Based Data Acquisition for Subjective Multi-Task NLP Problems](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2312.08198/) (2023)

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

- [Not All Subjectivity Is the Same! Defining Desiderata for the Evaluation of Subjectivity in NLP](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2603.28351/) (2026)

## Abstract (arXiv)

We explore how large language models (LLMs) assess offensiveness in political discourse when prompted to adopt specific political and cultural perspectives. Using a multilingual subset of the MD-Agreement dataset centered on tweets from the 2020 US elections, we evaluate several recent LLMs - including DeepSeek-R1, o4-mini, GPT-4.1-mini, Qwen3, Gemma, and Mistral - tasked with judging tweets as offensive or non-offensive from the viewpoints of varied political personas (far-right, conservative, centrist, progressive) across English, Polish, and Russian contexts. Our results show that larger models with explicit reasoning abilities (e.g., DeepSeek-R1, o4-mini) are more consistent and sensitive to ideological and cultural variation, while smaller models often fail to capture subtle distinctions. We find that reasoning capabilities significantly improve both the personalization and interpretability of offensiveness judgments, suggesting that such mechanisms are key to adapting LLMs for nuanced sociopolitical text classification across languages and ideologies.