Search papers, labs, and topics across Lattice.
This study investigates the impact of gender cues on decision-making in large language models (LLMs) using the Realistic Value Decision Benchmark (RVDB), which isolates gender from other variables in value-sensitive scenarios. The findings reveal that explicit gender cues can induce systematic decision changes, particularly in contexts with less clear value boundaries, while models often deny the influence of gender on their choices. The research highlights a significant asymmetry in decision-making based on gender roles, suggesting that LLMs may not fully recognize the impact of demographic factors on their value trade-offs.
Explicit gender cues can systematically shift LLM decision-making, even as models deny their influence鈥攔evealing a hidden layer of bias in AI judgments.
Large language models are increasingly used in value-sensitive decision settings, where irrelevant demographic cues should not alter judgments. We construct the Realistic Value Decision Benchmark (RVDB), a controlled benchmark that varies only the role-gender configuration while holding the scenario, ordered value pair, roles, candidate decisions, Value Distance, and Decision Severity fixed. Using a position-balanced evaluation across seven models, we test whether models preserve decision invariance under gender perturbations and whether their self-attributions reflect observed behavioral changes. We find that explicit gender cues induce bounded but systematic decision flips, including under an explicit gender-attribution prompt that asks models to report whether gender influenced their choice. Cross-gender role swaps reveal a consistent female-proposed-decision asymmetry, while models often attribute flipped decisions to No Influence or other non-gender factors. Further analysis shows that gender effects concentrate near less determinate value boundaries and under more severe decision contexts, suggesting that gender cues act as local boundary-shifting factors rather than global overrides of value reasoning. Value rankings remain largely stable, but ordered value-pair trade-offs shift unevenly across role-gender configurations. These results show that gender can enter LLM value trade-offs behaviorally while remaining obscured in self-attribution, motivating controlled behavioral audits beyond explanation-based evaluation.
