GPT 中令人惊讶的性别偏见

IF 4.9 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL Computers in human behavior reports Pub Date : 2024-11-22 DOI:10.1016/j.chbr.2024.100533
Raluca Alexandra Fulgu, Valerio Capraro
{"title":"GPT 中令人惊讶的性别偏见","authors":"Raluca Alexandra Fulgu,&nbsp;Valerio Capraro","doi":"10.1016/j.chbr.2024.100533","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>We present eight experiments exploring gender biases in GPT. Initially, GPT was asked to generate demographics of a potential writer of fourty phrases ostensibly written by elementary school students, twenty containing feminine stereotypes and twenty with masculine stereotypes. Results show a strong bias, with stereotypically masculine sentences attributed to a female more often than vice versa. For example, the sentence “I love playing fotbal! Im practicing with my cosin Michael” was constantly assigned by GPT-3.5 Turbo to a female writer. This phenomenon likely reflects that while initiatives to integrate women in traditionally masculine roles have gained momentum, the reverse movement remains relatively underdeveloped. Subsequent experiments investigate the same issue in high-stakes moral dilemmas. GPT-4 finds it more appropriate to abuse a man to prevent a nuclear apocalypse than to abuse a woman. This bias extends to other forms of violence central to the gender parity debate (abuse), but not to those less central (torture). Moreover, this bias increases in cases of mixed-sex violence for the greater good: GPT-4 agrees with a woman using violence against a man to prevent a nuclear apocalypse but disagrees with a man using violence against a woman for the same purpose. Finally, these biases are implicit, as they do not emerge when GPT-4 is directly asked to rank moral violations. These results highlight the necessity of carefully managing inclusivity efforts to prevent unintended discrimination.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":72681,"journal":{"name":"Computers in human behavior reports","volume":"16 ","pages":"Article 100533"},"PeriodicalIF":4.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Surprising gender biases in GPT\",\"authors\":\"Raluca Alexandra Fulgu,&nbsp;Valerio Capraro\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.chbr.2024.100533\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>We present eight experiments exploring gender biases in GPT. Initially, GPT was asked to generate demographics of a potential writer of fourty phrases ostensibly written by elementary school students, twenty containing feminine stereotypes and twenty with masculine stereotypes. Results show a strong bias, with stereotypically masculine sentences attributed to a female more often than vice versa. For example, the sentence “I love playing fotbal! Im practicing with my cosin Michael” was constantly assigned by GPT-3.5 Turbo to a female writer. This phenomenon likely reflects that while initiatives to integrate women in traditionally masculine roles have gained momentum, the reverse movement remains relatively underdeveloped. Subsequent experiments investigate the same issue in high-stakes moral dilemmas. GPT-4 finds it more appropriate to abuse a man to prevent a nuclear apocalypse than to abuse a woman. This bias extends to other forms of violence central to the gender parity debate (abuse), but not to those less central (torture). Moreover, this bias increases in cases of mixed-sex violence for the greater good: GPT-4 agrees with a woman using violence against a man to prevent a nuclear apocalypse but disagrees with a man using violence against a woman for the same purpose. Finally, these biases are implicit, as they do not emerge when GPT-4 is directly asked to rank moral violations. These results highlight the necessity of carefully managing inclusivity efforts to prevent unintended discrimination.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":72681,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Computers in human behavior reports\",\"volume\":\"16 \",\"pages\":\"Article 100533\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-22\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Computers in human behavior reports\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2451958824001660\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Computers in human behavior reports","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2451958824001660","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

我们介绍了探索 GPT 中性别偏见的八项实验。起初,我们要求 GPT 生成一个潜在作者的人口统计数据,这些数据包含 40 个表面上由小学生书写的短语,其中 20 个包含女性刻板印象,20 个包含男性刻板印象。结果显示出强烈的偏差,刻板的男性化句子被归于女性的频率高于反之。例如,句子 "I love playing fotbal!I love playing fotbal! Im practicing with my cosin Michael"(我和我的朋友迈克尔一起练习)这句话经常被 GPT-3.5 Turbo 归于女性作者。这一现象很可能反映出,虽然让女性融入传统男性角色的举措已经取得了一定的进展,但反向运动仍然相对落后。随后的实验研究了高风险道德困境中的同一问题。GPT-4 发现,与虐待女性相比,虐待男性来防止核启示更为合适。这种偏差延伸到了性别均等辩论中的其他重要暴力形式(虐待),但没有延伸到那些不那么重要的暴力形式(酷刑)。此外,在为更大利益而实施男女混合暴力的情况下,这种偏见会加剧:GPT-4 同意女性为防止核灾难而对男性施暴,但不同意男性为同样目的对女性施暴。最后,这些偏差是隐性的,因为当直接要求 GPT-4 对违反道德的行为进行排序时,这些偏差并没有出现。这些结果凸显了谨慎管理包容性工作以防止意外歧视的必要性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Surprising gender biases in GPT
We present eight experiments exploring gender biases in GPT. Initially, GPT was asked to generate demographics of a potential writer of fourty phrases ostensibly written by elementary school students, twenty containing feminine stereotypes and twenty with masculine stereotypes. Results show a strong bias, with stereotypically masculine sentences attributed to a female more often than vice versa. For example, the sentence “I love playing fotbal! Im practicing with my cosin Michael” was constantly assigned by GPT-3.5 Turbo to a female writer. This phenomenon likely reflects that while initiatives to integrate women in traditionally masculine roles have gained momentum, the reverse movement remains relatively underdeveloped. Subsequent experiments investigate the same issue in high-stakes moral dilemmas. GPT-4 finds it more appropriate to abuse a man to prevent a nuclear apocalypse than to abuse a woman. This bias extends to other forms of violence central to the gender parity debate (abuse), but not to those less central (torture). Moreover, this bias increases in cases of mixed-sex violence for the greater good: GPT-4 agrees with a woman using violence against a man to prevent a nuclear apocalypse but disagrees with a man using violence against a woman for the same purpose. Finally, these biases are implicit, as they do not emerge when GPT-4 is directly asked to rank moral violations. These results highlight the necessity of carefully managing inclusivity efforts to prevent unintended discrimination.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
7.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
The impact of social media reports on nurses’ job satisfaction: A cross-section suvery I Don't matter anyway. Will more Instagram change that? Anti-mattering and Instagram Feed vs. stories addiction symptoms: The moderating roles of loneliness and life satisfaction Surprising gender biases in GPT IT really matters: Associations of computer hassles and technical support with medically certified sickness absence due to mental health complaints Effect of business intelligence on organizational competitiveness- exploring the mediation of technology anxiety
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1