IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/pubcho/v198y2024i1d10.1007_s11127-023-01097-2.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

More human than human: measuring ChatGPT political bias

Author

Listed:
  • Fabio Motoki

    (University of East Anglia)

  • Valdemar Pinho Neto

    (FGV EPGE and FGV CEEE)

  • Victor Rodrigues

    (Nova Educação)

Abstract

We investigate the political bias of a large language model (LLM), ChatGPT, which has become popular for retrieving factual information and generating content. Although ChatGPT assures that it is impartial, the literature suggests that LLMs exhibit bias involving race, gender, religion, and political orientation. Political bias in LLMs can have adverse political and electoral consequences similar to bias from traditional and social media. Moreover, political bias can be harder to detect and eradicate than gender or racial bias. We propose a novel empirical design to infer whether ChatGPT has political biases by requesting it to impersonate someone from a given side of the political spectrum and comparing these answers with its default. We also propose dose-response, placebo, and profession-politics alignment robustness tests. To reduce concerns about the randomness of the generated text, we collect answers to the same questions 100 times, with question order randomized on each round. We find robust evidence that ChatGPT presents a significant and systematic political bias toward the Democrats in the US, Lula in Brazil, and the Labour Party in the UK. These results translate into real concerns that ChatGPT, and LLMs in general, can extend or even amplify the existing challenges involving political processes posed by the Internet and social media. Our findings have important implications for policymakers, media, politics, and academia stakeholders.

Suggested Citation

  • Fabio Motoki & Valdemar Pinho Neto & Victor Rodrigues, 2024. "More human than human: measuring ChatGPT political bias," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 198(1), pages 3-23, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:kap:pubcho:v:198:y:2024:i:1:d:10.1007_s11127-023-01097-2
    DOI: 10.1007/s11127-023-01097-2
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11127-023-01097-2
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11127-023-01097-2?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Bias; Political bias; Large language models; ChatGPT;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C10 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric and Statistical Methods and Methodology: General - - - General
    • C89 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Data Collection and Data Estimation Methodology; Computer Programs - - - Other
    • D83 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Search; Learning; Information and Knowledge; Communication; Belief; Unawareness
    • L86 - Industrial Organization - - Industry Studies: Services - - - Information and Internet Services; Computer Software
    • Z00 - Other Special Topics - - General - - - General

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:kap:pubcho:v:198:y:2024:i:1:d:10.1007_s11127-023-01097-2. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.