IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/arx/papers/2403.15281.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Measuring Gender and Racial Biases in Large Language Models

Author

Listed:
  • Jiafu An
  • Difang Huang
  • Chen Lin
  • Mingzhu Tai

Abstract

In traditional decision making processes, social biases of human decision makers can lead to unequal economic outcomes for underrepresented social groups, such as women, racial or ethnic minorities. Recently, the increasing popularity of Large language model based artificial intelligence suggests a potential transition from human to AI based decision making. How would this impact the distributional outcomes across social groups? Here we investigate the gender and racial biases of OpenAIs GPT, a widely used LLM, in a high stakes decision making setting, specifically assessing entry level job candidates from diverse social groups. Instructing GPT to score approximately 361000 resumes with randomized social identities, we find that the LLM awards higher assessment scores for female candidates with similar work experience, education, and skills, while lower scores for black male candidates with comparable qualifications. These biases may result in a 1 or 2 percentage point difference in hiring probabilities for otherwise similar candidates at a certain threshold and are consistent across various job positions and subsamples. Meanwhile, we also find stronger pro female and weaker anti black male patterns in democratic states. Our results demonstrate that this LLM based AI system has the potential to mitigate the gender bias, but it may not necessarily cure the racial bias. Further research is needed to comprehend the root causes of these outcomes and develop strategies to minimize the remaining biases in AI systems. As AI based decision making tools are increasingly employed across diverse domains, our findings underscore the necessity of understanding and addressing the potential unequal outcomes to ensure equitable outcomes across social groups.

Suggested Citation

  • Jiafu An & Difang Huang & Chen Lin & Mingzhu Tai, 2024. "Measuring Gender and Racial Biases in Large Language Models," Papers 2403.15281, arXiv.org.
  • Handle: RePEc:arx:papers:2403.15281
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://arxiv.org/pdf/2403.15281
    File Function: Latest version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Yiting Chen & Tracy Xiao Liu & You Shan & Songfa Zhong, 2023. "The emergence of economic rationality of GPT," Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, vol. 120(51), pages 2316205120-, December.
    2. David Neumark & Ian Burn & Patrick Button, 2019. "Is It Harder for Older Workers to Find Jobs? New and Improved Evidence from a Field Experiment," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 127(2), pages 922-970.
    3. Patrick Kline & Evan K Rose & Christopher R Walters, 2022. "Systemic Discrimination Among Large U.S. Employers [“Teachers and Student Achievement in the Chicago Public High Schools,”]," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 137(4), pages 1963-2036.
    4. Heather Sarsons, 2017. "Recognition for Group Work: Gender Differences in Academia," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 107(5), pages 141-145, May.
    5. Kerwin Kofi Charles & Jonathan Guryan, 2008. "Prejudice and Wages: An Empirical Assessment of Becker's The Economics of Discrimination," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 116(5), pages 773-809, October.
    6. John J. Horton, 2023. "Large Language Models as Simulated Economic Agents: What Can We Learn from Homo Silicus?," NBER Working Papers 31122, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    7. John J. Horton, 2023. "Large Language Models as Simulated Economic Agents: What Can We Learn from Homo Silicus?," Papers 2301.07543, arXiv.org.
    8. Marianne Bertrand & Sendhil Mullainathan, 2004. "Are Emily and Greg More Employable Than Lakisha and Jamal? A Field Experiment on Labor Market Discrimination," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 94(4), pages 991-1013, September.
    9. Amanda Agan & Sonja Starr, 2018. "Ban the Box, Criminal Records, and Racial Discrimination: A Field Experiment," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 133(1), pages 191-235.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Joanna N. Lahey & Douglas R. Oxley, 2021. "Discrimination at the Intersection of Age, Race, and Gender: Evidence from an Eye‐Tracking Experiment," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 40(4), pages 1083-1119, September.
    2. Button, Patrick & Walker, Brigham, 2020. "Employment discrimination against Indigenous Peoples in the United States: Evidence from a field experiment," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(C).
    3. Christoph Engel & Max R. P. Grossmann & Axel Ockenfels, 2023. "Integrating machine behavior into human subject experiments: A user-friendly toolkit and illustrations," Discussion Paper Series of the Max Planck Institute for Research on Collective Goods 2024_01, Max Planck Institute for Research on Collective Goods.
    4. Demeze-Jouatsa, Ghislain-Herman & Pongou, Roland & Tondji, Jean-Baptiste, 2021. "A Free and Fair Economy: A Game of Justice and Inclusion," Center for Mathematical Economics Working Papers 653, Center for Mathematical Economics, Bielefeld University.
    5. Joanna N. Lahey & Douglas R. Oxley, 2018. "Discrimination at the Intersection of Age, Race, and Gender: Evidence from a Lab-in-the-field Experiment," NBER Working Papers 25357, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    6. Bauer, Kevin & Liebich, Lena & Hinz, Oliver & Kosfeld, Michael, 2023. "Decoding GPT's hidden "rationality" of cooperation," SAFE Working Paper Series 401, Leibniz Institute for Financial Research SAFE.
    7. Ghislain H. Demeze-Jouatsa & Roland Pongou & Jean-Baptiste Tondji, 2021. "A Free and Fair Economy: A Game of Justice and Inclusion," Papers 2107.12870, arXiv.org.
    8. Zanoni, Wladimir & Díaz, Lina, 2024. "Discrimination against migrants and its determinants: Evidence from a Multi-Purpose Field Experiment in the Housing Rental Market," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 167(C).
    9. Kevin Lang & Ariella Kahn-Lang Spitzer, 2020. "Race Discrimination: An Economic Perspective," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 34(2), pages 68-89, Spring.
    10. Ritwik Banerjee & Nabanita Datta Gupta, 2015. "Awareness Programs and Change in Taste-Based Caste Prejudice," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(4), pages 1-17, April.
    11. Bryson, Alex & Chevalier, Arnaud, 2015. "Is there a taste for racial discrimination amongst employers?," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 34(C), pages 51-63.
    12. Morten Størling Hedegaard & Jean-Robert Tyran, 2018. "The Price of Prejudice," American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, American Economic Association, vol. 10(1), pages 40-63, January.
    13. Adnan, Wifag & Arin, K. Peren & Charness, Gary & Lacomba, Juan A. & Lagos, Francisco, 2022. "Which social categories matter to people: An experiment," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 193(C), pages 125-145.
    14. Celeste K. Carruthers & Marianne H. Wanamaker, 2017. "Separate and Unequal in the Labor Market: Human Capital and the Jim Crow Wage Gap," Journal of Labor Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 35(3), pages 655-696.
    15. Amanda Agan & Sonja Starr, 2016. "Ban the Box, Criminal Records, and Statistical Discrimination: A Field Experiment," Working Papers 598, Princeton University, Department of Economics, Industrial Relations Section..
    16. Kevin Leyton-Brown & Paul Milgrom & Neil Newman & Ilya Segal, 2023. "Artificial Intelligence and Market Design: Lessons Learned from Radio Spectrum Reallocation," NBER Chapters, in: New Directions in Market Design, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    17. Benjamin Hansen & Drew McNichols, 2020. "Information and the Persistence of the Gender Wage Gap: Early Evidence from California's Salary History Ban," NBER Working Papers 27054, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    18. Baert, Stijn, 2017. "Hiring Discrimination: An Overview of (Almost) All Correspondence Experiments Since 2005," GLO Discussion Paper Series 61, Global Labor Organization (GLO).
    19. Stijn Baert & Sunčica Vujić, 2018. "Does it pay to care? Volunteering and employment opportunities," Journal of Population Economics, Springer;European Society for Population Economics, vol. 31(3), pages 819-836, July.
    20. Ross Levine & Alexey Levkov & Yona Rubinstein, 2008. "Racial Discrimination and Competition," NBER Working Papers 14273, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.

    More about this item

    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:arx:papers:2403.15281. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: arXiv administrators (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://arxiv.org/ .

    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.