# Invisible Influences: Investigating Implicit Intersectional Biases through Persona Engineering in Large Language Models

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2604.06213 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2604.06213/

## Key facts

- No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 13 of its 32 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 16 Mar 2026.

## Builds on (most cited first, 13 of 13)

- [Language Models are Few-Shot Learners](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2005.14165/) (2020)
- [Language (Technology) is Power: A Critical Survey of "Bias" in NLP](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2005.14050/) (2020)
- [Semantics derived automatically from language corpora contain human-like biases](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1608.07187/) (2016)
- [CrowS-Pairs: A Challenge Dataset for Measuring Social Biases in Masked Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2010.00133/) (2020)
- [The Woman Worked as a Babysitter: On Biases in Language Generation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1909.01326/) (2019)
- [On Measuring Social Biases in Sentence Encoders](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1903.10561/) (2019)
- [Bias in Bios: A Case Study of Semantic Representation Bias in a High-Stakes Setting](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1901.09451/) (2019)
- [Detecting Emergent Intersectional Biases: Contextualized Word Embeddings Contain a Distribution of Human-like Biases](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2006.03955/) (2020)
- [Assessing Social and Intersectional Biases in Contextualized Word Representations](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1911.01485/) (2019)
- [IndiBias: A Benchmark Dataset to Measure Social Biases in Language Models for Indian Context](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2403.20147/) (2024)
- [Evaluating Biased Attitude Associations of Language Models in an Intersectional Context](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2307.03360/) (2023)
- [Examining the Influence of Political Bias on Large Language Model Performance in Stance Classification](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2407.17688/) (2024)
- [Implicit Bias in LLMs: A Survey](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2503.02776/) (2025)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Large Language Models (LLMs) excel at human-like language generation but often embed and amplify implicit, intersectional biases, especially under persona-driven contexts. Existing bias audits rely on static, embedding-based tests (CEAT, I-WEAT, I-SEAT) that quantify absolute association strengths. We show that they have limitations in capturing dynamic shifts when models adopt social roles. We address this gap by introducing the Bias Amplification Differential and Explainability Score (BADx): a novel, scalable metric that measures persona-induced bias amplification and integrates local explainability insights. BADx comprises three components - differential bias scores (BAD, based on CEAT, I-WEAT, I-SEAT),Persona Sensitivity Index (PSI), and Volatility (Standard Deviation), augmented by LIME-based analysis for emphasizing explainability. This study is divided and performed as two different tasks. Task 1 establishes static bias baselines, and Task 2 applies six persona frames (marginalized and structurally advantaged) to measure BADx, PSI, and volatility. This is studied across five state-of-the-art LLMs (GPT-4o, DeepSeek-R1, LLaMA-4, Claude 4.0 Sonnet and Gemma-3n E4B). Results show persona context significantly modulates bias. GPT-4o exhibits high sensitivity and volatility; DeepSeek-R1 suppresses bias but with erratic volatility; LLaMA-4 maintains low volatility and a stable bias profile with limited amplification; Claude 4.0 Sonnet achieves balanced modulation; and Gemma-3n E4B attains the lowest volatility with moderate amplification. BADx performs better than static methods by revealing context-sensitive biases overlooked in static methods. Our unified method offers a systematic way to detect dynamic implicit intersectional bias in five popular LLMs.