mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Alleviating Choice Supportive Bias in LLM with Reasoning Dependency Generation

arXiv 2512.03082 ↗First posted 28 Nov 2025cs.CL cs.AIcited by 0

On the map: LLM reasoning → Reasoning benchmarks and evaluation

Abstract (arXiv)

Recent studies have demonstrated that some Large Language Models exhibit choice-supportive bias (CSB) when performing evaluations, systematically favoring their chosen options and potentially compromising the objectivity of AI-assisted decision making. While existing debiasing approaches primarily target demographic and social biases, methods for addressing cognitive biases in LLMs remain largely unexplored. In this work, we present the first solution to address CSB through Reasoning Dependency Generation (RDG), a novel framework for generating unbiased reasoning data to mitigate choice-supportive bias through fine-tuning. RDG automatically constructs balanced reasoning QA pairs, explicitly (un)modeling the dependencies between choices, evidences, and justifications. Our approach is able to generate a large-scale dataset of QA pairs across domains, incorporating Contextual Dependency Data and Dependency Decouple Data. Experiments show that LLMs fine-tuned on RDG-generated data demonstrate a 81.5% improvement in memory-based experiments and 94.3% improvement in the evaluation-based experiment, while maintaining similar performance on standard BBQ benchmarks. This work pioneers an approach for addressing cognitive biases in LLMs and contributes to the development of more reliable AI-assisted decision support systems.

Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 7 Oct 2026). Placed in Reasoning benchmarks and evaluation, one of 17 directions in LLM reasoning. Builds on 11 of its 27 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 28 Nov 2025.

Builds on

11 of 27 references.

Closest ancestors · 1

Same direction, newest first

  1. 2023Can ChatGPT Defend its Belief in Truth? Evaluating LLM Reasoning via Debate22 May

Other references · 10

  1. 2021BBQ: A Hand-Built Bias Benchmark for Question Answeringcited by 683
  2. 2022Prompting GPT-3 To Be Reliablecited by 258
  3. 2024Cognitive Bias in Decision-Making with LLMscited by 104
  4. 2021Sustainable Modular Debiasing of Language Modelscited by 98
  5. 2022Language Generation Models Can Cause Harm: So What Can We Do About It? An Actionable Surveycited by 80
  6. 2024Prompting Techniques for Reducing Social Bias in LLMs through System 1 and System 2 Cognitive Processescited by 38
  7. 2022Text Style Transfer for Bias Mitigation using Masked Language Modelingcited by 27
  8. 2024Prompting Fairness: Integrating Causality to Debias Large Language Modelscited by 20
  9. 2022MoralDial: A Framework to Train and Evaluate Moral Dialogue Systems via Moral Discussionscited by 17
  10. 2024Argumentative Experience: Reducing Confirmation Bias on Controversial Issues through LLM-Generated Multi-Persona Debatescited by 15

Built on by

Not cited yet.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2026BiasTrace: Linking Reasoning Behaviours to Biased Outputs in LLMs
  2. 2025Does Reasoning Introduce Bias? A Study of Social Bias Evaluation and Mitigation in LLM Reasoning
  3. 2025Assessing Judging Bias in Large Reasoning Models: An Empirical Study
  4. 2025BiasGuard: A Reasoning-enhanced Bias Detection Tool For Large Language Models
  5. 2024CBEval: A framework for evaluating and interpreting cognitive biases in LLMs
  6. 2025FairCoder: Probing LLM Bias in High-Stakes Decision Making via Coding Tasks
  7. 2025Any Large Language Model Can Be a Reliable Judge: Debiasing with a Reasoning-based Bias Detector
  8. 2025Are We on the Right Way to Assessing LLM-as-a-Judge?