Beyond Surface Cues: Disentangling Sociocultural Signals in Multilingual LLMs
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Multilingual LLM outputs can vary across sociocultural contexts. However, evidence of cultural grounding can be misleading: identity labels may be inferred from explicit or indirect textual cues, while names and wording can reveal the source language. Treating all these signals as evidence of cultural grounding may obscure potential biases. We present a human-validated, multi-agent audit that separates three questions: whether outputs reproduce social biases, whether identity groups are represented differently, and whether outputs reflect cross-cultural patterns. The study analyzes 89,253 outputs from 12 LLMs in English, French, and Chinese, spanning 18 occupations and three task conditions. We find that bias representation varies systematically across languages and tasks. Removing direct identity cues sharply reduces identity-label prediction in English and Chinese, but has a much smaller effect in French. Across all language-genre settings, the cultural context associated with the source language receives the highest average relevance score, with moderate agreement between automated and human ratings. However, the ability to identify the source language drops substantially after translation and again after masking names. Without these controls, multilingual audits may mistake surface cues for cultural understanding, leading to misleading conclusions about cross-cultural variation and bias. Our audit offers a practical framework for separating such shortcuts from more meaningful cross-cultural patterns.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 21 of its 53 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 24 Aug 2026.
Builds on
21 of 53 references.
References · 21
- 2022Training language models to follow instructions with human feedbackcited by 15,971
- 2016Man is to Computer Programmer as Woman is to Homemaker? Debiasing Word Embeddingscited by 1,312
- 2021Ethical and social risks of harm from Language Modelscited by 966
- 2020StereoSet: Measuring stereotypical bias in pretrained language modelscited by 924
- 2016Semantics derived automatically from language corpora contain human-like biasescited by 901
- 2020CrowS-Pairs: A Challenge Dataset for Measuring Social Biases in Masked Language Modelscited by 710
- 2018Gender Bias in Coreference Resolution: Evaluation and Debiasing Methodscited by 659
- 2021Persistent Anti-Muslim Bias in Large Language Modelscited by 377
- 2022Challenges and Strategies in Cross-Cultural NLPcited by 218
- 2019Gender Bias in Contextualized Word Embeddingscited by 203
- 2024BLEnD: A Benchmark for LLMs on Everyday Knowledge in Diverse Cultures and Languagescited by 173
- 2021Bias Out-of-the-Box: An Empirical Analysis of Intersectional Occupational Biases in Popular Generative Language Modelscited by 141
9 more
- 2023Cultural Alignment in Large Language Models: An Explanatory Analysis Based on Hofstede's Cultural Dimensionscited by 112
- 2024Measuring Political Bias in Large Language Models: What Is Said and How It Is Saidcited by 89
- 2025JSONSchemaBench: A Rigorous Benchmark of Structured Outputs for Language Modelscited by 71
- 2024Gender, Race, and Intersectional Bias in Resume Screening via Language Model Retrievalcited by 51
- 2023Not All Countries Celebrate Thanksgiving: On the Cultural Dominance in Large Language Modelscited by 43
- 2024Cultural Value Differences of LLMs: Prompt, Language, and Model Sizecited by 10
- 2025AI-generated stories favour stability over change: homogeneity and cultural stereotyping in narratives generated by gpt-4o-minicited by 7
- 2025Exploring Gender Bias in Large Language Models: An In-depth Dive into the German Languagecited by 3
- 2025Bias is a Math Problem, AI Bias is a Technical Problem: 10-year Literature Review of AI/LLM Bias Research Reveals Narrow [Gender-Centric] Conceptions of 'Bias', and Academia-Industry Gapcited by 1
Built on by
Not cited yet.