ArticlePNAS nexus2024
Directionality and representativeness are differentiable components of stereotypes in large language models.
Article in PNAS nexus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Moral stereotyping in large language models.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2026Article
- Do Language Models Know Who Did What to Whom?Open mind : discoveries in cognitive science · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Representativeness is a relevant but unexamined property of stereotypes in language models. Existing auditing and debiasing approaches address the direction of stereotypes, such as whether a social category (e.g. men, women) is associated more with incompetence vs. competence content. On the other hand, representativeness is the extent to which a social category's stereotypes are about a specific content dimension, such as Competence, regardless of direction (e.g. as indicated by how often dimension-related words appear in stereotypes about the social category). As such, two social categories may be associated with competence (vs. incompetence), yet one category's stereotypes are mostly about competence, whereas the other's are mostly about alternative content (e.g. Warmth). Such differentiability would suggest that direction-based auditing may fail to identify biases in content representativeness. Here, we use a large sample of social categories that are salient in American society (based on gender, race, occupation, and others) to examine whether representativeness is an independent feature of stereotypes in the ChatGPT chatbot and SBERT language model. We focus on the Warmth and Competence stereotype dimensions, given their well-established centrality in human stereotype content. Our results provide evidence for the construct differentiability of direction and representativeness for Warmth and Competence stereotypes across models and target stimuli (social category terms, racialized name exemplars). Additionally, both direction and representativeness uniquely predicted the models' internal general valence (positivity vs. negativity) and human stereotypes. We discuss implications for the use of AI in the study of human cognition and the field of fairness in AI.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.