# When AI Takes Sides on Questions of Faith: Persistent Asymmetries in AI-Mediated Faith Guidance

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2605.22975 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2605.22975/

## Key facts

- Cited by 1 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 18 of its 52 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 21 May 2026.

## Builds on (most cited first, 18 of 18)

- [Judging LLM-as-a-Judge with MT-Bench and Chatbot Arena](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2306.05685/) (2023)
- [A Survey on LLM-as-a-Judge](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2411.15594/) (2024)
- [Towards Understanding Sycophancy in Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.13548/) (2023)
- [StereoSet: Measuring stereotypical bias in pretrained language models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2004.09456/) (2020)
- [CrowS-Pairs: A Challenge Dataset for Measuring Social Biases in Masked Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2010.00133/) (2020)
- [BBQ: A Hand-Built Bias Benchmark for Question Answering](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2110.08193/) (2021)
- [BOLD: Dataset and Metrics for Measuring Biases in Open-Ended Language Generation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2101.11718/) (2021)
- [Persistent Anti-Muslim Bias in Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2101.05783/) (2021)
- [What Large Language Models Know and What People Think They Know](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2401.13835/) (2024)
- [Trust or Escalate: LLM Judges with Provable Guarantees for Human Agreement](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2407.18370/) (2024)
- [Can LLMs Replace Human Evaluators? An Empirical Study of LLM-as-a-Judge in Software Engineering](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2502.06193/) (2025)
- [Knowledge of cultural moral norms in large language models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2306.01857/) (2023)
- [Large Language Models Help Humans Verify Truthfulness -- Except When They Are Convincingly Wrong](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.12558/) (2023)
- [The Persuasive Power of Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2312.15523/) (2023)
- [Objection Overruled! Lay People can Distinguish Large Language Models from Lawyers, but still Favour Advice from an LLM](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2409.07871/) (2024)
- [How Deep Is Representational Bias in LLMs? The Cases of Caste and Religion](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2508.03712/) (2025)
- [Divine LLaMAs: Bias, Stereotypes, Stigmatization, and Emotion Representation of Religion in Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2407.06908/) (2024)
- [Debiased Large Language Models Still Associate Muslims with Uniquely Violent Acts](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2208.04417/) (2022)

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

- [FaithfulBench: Does AI Counsel Uphold or Undermine the User's Professed Faith?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2609.13634/) (2026)

## Abstract (arXiv)

We ask whether large language models (LLMs) treat queries about religious conversion symmetrically. The answer is no. When asked for advice on hypothetical faith transitions from religion A->B vs. religion B->A , models exhibited consistent asymmetries, favoring some religions while subtly discouraging conversion to others. On average Catholic, Bah'a''i, and Sikh religions were broadly favored (high support for joining, low support for leaving), while Atheists, Agnostics, and Jehovah's Witnesses were primarily disfavored. Patterns varied by model size and model provider, with Grok 4.20 exhibiting the strongest asymmetries. We tested 20 commercial and open-source language models across 182 religion pairings using a human-verified LLM-as-judge framework. Each model was probed via interactions with a simulated user asking for advice on a potential faith conversion. Models tended to use more encouraging language for some faith transitions over others; these patterns were systematically repeatable across multiple trials. All LLMs tested exhibited reproducible asymmetry, though the pattern of preferences differed for each. Overall preferences persist across multiple question phrasings and variations in the religious pairing dataset. Taken together, these results suggest that asymmetry is a robust property of model behavior rather than an artifact of how the models' answers were scored. It is important to consider that any imbalances deployed and reproduced at scale can have real-world implications.