ArticleProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America2025
Explicitly unbiased large language models still form biased associations.
Article in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
15 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Concerns of Using Large Language Models in Health Care Research and Practice: Umbrella Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Pooled it
- Article
- Article
- Measuring stereotype and deviation biases in large language models.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- How latent and prompting biases in AI-generated historical narratives influence opinions.PNAS nexus · 2026Article
- Intersectional biases in narratives produced by open-ended prompting of generative language models.Nature communications · 2026Article
- Same child, different risk: demographic bias in childhood obesity attribution by large language models.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- Implicit bias in safety-aligned large language models: A multi-faceted evaluation of clinical decision-making and health equity.PloS one · 2026Article
- Racial bias in AI-mediated psychiatric diagnosis and treatment: a qualitative comparison of four large language models.NPJ digital medicine · 2025Article
- Mitigating the risk of health inequity exacerbated by large language models.NPJ digital medicine · 2025Article
- Assessing and alleviating state anxiety in large language models.NPJ digital medicine · 2025Article
- Measuring gender and racial biases in large language models: Intersectional evidence from automated resume evaluation.PNAS nexus · 2025Article
- Gender disparities in the impact of generative artificial intelligence: Evidence from academia.PNAS nexus · 2025Article
- Cross-Care: Assessing the Healthcare Implications of Pre-training Data on Language Model Bias.Advances in neural information processing systems · 2024Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Large language models (LLMs) can pass explicit social bias tests but still harbor implicit biases, similar to humans who endorse egalitarian beliefs yet exhibit subtle biases. Measuring such implicit biases can be a challenge: As LLMs become increasingly proprietary, it may not be possible to access their embeddings and apply existing bias measures; furthermore, implicit biases are primarily a concern if they affect the actual decisions that these systems make. We address both challenges by introducing two measures: LLM Word Association Test, a prompt-based method for revealing implicit bias; and LLM Relative Decision Test, a strategy to detect subtle discrimination in contextual decisions. Both measures are based on psychological research: LLM Word Association Test adapts the Implicit Association Test, widely used to study the automatic associations between concepts held in human minds; and LLM Relative Decision Test operationalizes psychological results indicating that relative evaluations between two candidates, not absolute evaluations assessing each independently, are more diagnostic of implicit biases. Using these measures, we found pervasive stereotype biases mirroring those in society in 8 value-aligned models across 4 social categories (race, gender, religion, health) in 21 stereotypes (such as race and criminality, race and weapons, gender and science, age and negativity). These prompt-based measures draw from psychology's long history of research into measuring stereotypes based on purely observable behavior; they expose nuanced biases in proprietary value-aligned LLMs that appear unbiased according to standard benchmarks.
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.