Embracing Dialectic Intersubjectivity: Coordination of Different Perspectives in Content Analysis with LLM Persona Simulation

This study attempts to advancing content analysis methodology from consensus-oriented to coordination-oriented practices, thereby embracing diverse coding outputs and exploring the dynamics among differential perspectives. As an exploratory investigation of this approach, we evaluate six GPT-4o configurations to analyze sentiment in Fox News and MSNBC transcripts on Biden and Trump during the 2020 U.S. presidential campaign, examining patterns across these models. By assessing each model's alignment with ideological perspectives, we explore how partisan selective processing could be identified in LLM-Assisted Content Analysis (LACA). Findings reveal that partisan persona LLMs exhibit stronger ideological biases when processing politically congruent content. Additionally, intercoder reliability is higher among same-partisan personas compared to cross-partisan pairs. This approach enhances the nuanced understanding of LLM outputs and advances the integrity of AI-driven social science research, enabling simulations of real-world implications.

Unpacking Political Bias in Large Language Models: Insights Across Topic Polarization

Large Language Models (LLMs) have been widely used to generate responses on social topics due to their world knowledge and generative capabilities. Beyond reasoning and generation performance, political bias is an essential issue that warrants attention. Political bias, as a universal phenomenon in human society, may be transferred to LLMs and distort LLMs' behaviors of information acquisition and dissemination with humans, leading to unequal access among different groups of people. To prevent LLMs from reproducing and reinforcing political biases, and to encourage fairer LLM-human interactions, comprehensively examining political bias in popular LLMs becomes urgent and crucial. In this study, we systematically measure the political biases in a wide range of LLMs, using a curated set of questions addressing political bias in various contexts. Our findings reveal distinct patterns in how LLMs respond to political topics. For highly polarized topics, most LLMs exhibit a pronounced left-leaning bias. Conversely, less polarized topics elicit greater consensus, with similar response patterns across different LLMs. Additionally, we analyze how LLM characteristics, including release date, model scale, and region of origin affect political bias. The results indicate political biases evolve with model scale and release date, and are also influenced by regional factors of LLMs.

Exploring Social Desirability Response Bias in Large Language Models: Evidence from GPT-4 Simulations

Large language models (LLMs) are employed to simulate human-like responses in social surveys, yet it remains unclear if they develop biases like social desirability response (SDR) bias. To investigate this, GPT-4 was assigned personas from four societies, using data from the 2022 Gallup World Poll. These synthetic samples were then prompted with or without a commitment statement intended to induce SDR. The results were mixed. While the commitment statement increased SDR index scores, suggesting SDR bias, it reduced civic engagement scores, indicating an opposite trend. Additional findings revealed demographic associations with SDR scores and showed that the commitment statement had limited impact on GPT-4's predictive performance. The study underscores potential avenues for using LLMs to investigate biases in both humans and LLMs themselves.