# Institutional Prestige as Geographic Bias in Large Language Models: Evidence from Three Factorial Experiments with Bootstrap Confidence Intervals

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2608.18107 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2608.18107/

## Key facts

- No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 13 of its 15 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 10 Jun 2026.

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

- [Judging LLM-as-a-Judge with MT-Bench and Chatbot Arena](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2306.05685/) (2023)
- [Bias and Fairness in Large Language Models: A Survey](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2309.00770/) (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)
- [Evaluating and Mitigating Discrimination in Language Model Decisions](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2312.03689/) (2023)
- [A Survey on Fairness in Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2308.10149/) (2023)
- [Do Large Language Models Discriminate in Hiring Decisions on the Basis of Race, Ethnicity, and Gender?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2406.10486/) (2024)
- [Evaluating Bias in LLMs for Job-Resume Matching: Gender, Race, and Education](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2503.19182/) (2025)
- [Evaluation of LLMs Biases Towards Elite Universities: A Persona-Based Exploration](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2407.12801/) (2024)
- [Colombian Waitresses y Jueces canadienses: Gender and Country Biases in Occupation Recommendations from LLMs](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2505.02456/) (2025)
- [Invisible Filters: Cultural Bias in Hiring Evaluations Using Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2508.16673/) (2025)
- [Prestige over merit: An adapted audit of LLM bias in peer review](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2509.15122/) (2025)
- [When Names Change Verdicts: Intervention Consistency Reveals Systematic Bias in LLM Decision-Making](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2603.18530/) (2026)

## Abstract (arXiv)

We investigate whether large language models (LLMs) systematically discriminate in candidate evaluations based on applicant name ethnicity and/or institutional prestige and geographic location. Three factorial experiments are reported (4,320 API calls, four LLMs, five professional domains). Study 1 (3x4 design) finds a statistically robust institution-tier gradient of +0.297 points on a 10-point scale (95% bootstrap CI: +0.175 to +0.422), while name-origin effects are negligible and non-significant (95% CI crosses zero). Study 2 (2x2 Prestige x Country design) breaks the prestige-geography confound: the prestige effect (+0.185; 95% CI: +0.093 to +0.275) exceeds the country-of-origin effect (+0.126; 95% CI: +0.037 to +0.218) by 1.5x. Study 3 (2x2 Journal x Institution design) reveals that journal prestige (Nature vs. a peripheral open-access journal) dominates institutional prestige by 5.7x: journal effect +1.937 (95% CI: +1.811 to +2.062) vs. institution effect +0.341 (95% CI: +0.184 to +0.504). A "rescue effect" is confirmed: publishing in Nature compensates for low institutional prestige more strongly for candidates from the University of Guayaquil (+2.127) than from MIT (+1.745). Results are quantified using the Neutrosophic Bias Index NBI<T,I,F>; the I component reveals elevated evaluation inconsistency for low-prestige profiles, an epistemic disadvantage not captured by mean-only metrics. Code and data: https://github.com/mleyvaz/geo-bias-llm