@inproceedings{wambsganss-etal-2023-unraveling,
title = "Unraveling Downstream Gender Bias from Large Language Models: A Study on {AI} Educational Writing Assistance",
author = {Wambsganss, Thiemo and
Su, Xiaotian and
Swamy, Vinitra and
Neshaei, Seyed and
Rietsche, Roman and
K{\"a}ser, Tanja},
editor = "Bouamor, Houda and
Pino, Juan and
Bali, Kalika",
booktitle = "Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: EMNLP 2023",
month = dec,
year = "2023",
address = "Singapore",
publisher = "Association for Computational Linguistics",
url = "https://aclanthology.org/2023.findings-emnlp.689",
doi = "10.18653/v1/2023.findings-emnlp.689",
pages = "10275--10288",
abstract = "Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly utilized in educational tasks such as providing writing suggestions to students. Despite their potential, LLMs are known to harbor inherent biases which may negatively impact learners. Previous studies have investigated bias in models and data representations separately, neglecting the potential impact of LLM bias on human writing. In this paper, we investigate how bias transfers through an AI writing support pipeline. We conduct a large-scale user study with 231 students writing business case peer reviews in German. Students are divided into five groups with different levels of writing support: one in-classroom group with recommender system feature-based suggestions and four groups recruited from Prolific {--} a control group with no assistance, two groups with suggestions from fine-tuned GPT-2 and GPT-3 models, and one group with suggestions from pre-trained GPT-3.5. Using GenBit gender bias analysis and Word Embedding Association Tests (WEAT), we evaluate the gender bias at various stages of the pipeline: in reviews written by students, in suggestions generated by the models, and in model embeddings directly. Our results demonstrate that there is no significant difference in gender bias between the resulting peer reviews of groups with and without LLM suggestions. Our research is therefore optimistic about the use of AI writing support in the classroom, showcasing a context where bias in LLMs does not transfer to students{'} responses.",
}
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<modsCollection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/mods/v3">
<mods ID="wambsganss-etal-2023-unraveling">
<titleInfo>
<title>Unraveling Downstream Gender Bias from Large Language Models: A Study on AI Educational Writing Assistance</title>
</titleInfo>
<name type="personal">
<namePart type="given">Thiemo</namePart>
<namePart type="family">Wambsganss</namePart>
<role>
<roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">author</roleTerm>
</role>
</name>
<name type="personal">
<namePart type="given">Xiaotian</namePart>
<namePart type="family">Su</namePart>
<role>
<roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">author</roleTerm>
</role>
</name>
<name type="personal">
<namePart type="given">Vinitra</namePart>
<namePart type="family">Swamy</namePart>
<role>
<roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">author</roleTerm>
</role>
</name>
<name type="personal">
<namePart type="given">Seyed</namePart>
<namePart type="family">Neshaei</namePart>
<role>
<roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">author</roleTerm>
</role>
</name>
<name type="personal">
<namePart type="given">Roman</namePart>
<namePart type="family">Rietsche</namePart>
<role>
<roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">author</roleTerm>
</role>
</name>
<name type="personal">
<namePart type="given">Tanja</namePart>
<namePart type="family">Käser</namePart>
<role>
<roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">author</roleTerm>
</role>
</name>
<originInfo>
<dateIssued>2023-12</dateIssued>
</originInfo>
<typeOfResource>text</typeOfResource>
<relatedItem type="host">
<titleInfo>
<title>Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: EMNLP 2023</title>
</titleInfo>
<name type="personal">
<namePart type="given">Houda</namePart>
<namePart type="family">Bouamor</namePart>
<role>
<roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">editor</roleTerm>
</role>
</name>
<name type="personal">
<namePart type="given">Juan</namePart>
<namePart type="family">Pino</namePart>
<role>
<roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">editor</roleTerm>
</role>
</name>
<name type="personal">
<namePart type="given">Kalika</namePart>
<namePart type="family">Bali</namePart>
<role>
<roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">editor</roleTerm>
</role>
</name>
<originInfo>
<publisher>Association for Computational Linguistics</publisher>
<place>
<placeTerm type="text">Singapore</placeTerm>
</place>
</originInfo>
<genre authority="marcgt">conference publication</genre>
</relatedItem>
<abstract>Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly utilized in educational tasks such as providing writing suggestions to students. Despite their potential, LLMs are known to harbor inherent biases which may negatively impact learners. Previous studies have investigated bias in models and data representations separately, neglecting the potential impact of LLM bias on human writing. In this paper, we investigate how bias transfers through an AI writing support pipeline. We conduct a large-scale user study with 231 students writing business case peer reviews in German. Students are divided into five groups with different levels of writing support: one in-classroom group with recommender system feature-based suggestions and four groups recruited from Prolific – a control group with no assistance, two groups with suggestions from fine-tuned GPT-2 and GPT-3 models, and one group with suggestions from pre-trained GPT-3.5. Using GenBit gender bias analysis and Word Embedding Association Tests (WEAT), we evaluate the gender bias at various stages of the pipeline: in reviews written by students, in suggestions generated by the models, and in model embeddings directly. Our results demonstrate that there is no significant difference in gender bias between the resulting peer reviews of groups with and without LLM suggestions. Our research is therefore optimistic about the use of AI writing support in the classroom, showcasing a context where bias in LLMs does not transfer to students’ responses.</abstract>
<identifier type="citekey">wambsganss-etal-2023-unraveling</identifier>
<identifier type="doi">10.18653/v1/2023.findings-emnlp.689</identifier>
<location>
<url>https://aclanthology.org/2023.findings-emnlp.689</url>
</location>
<part>
<date>2023-12</date>
<extent unit="page">
<start>10275</start>
<end>10288</end>
</extent>
</part>
</mods>
</modsCollection>
%0 Conference Proceedings
%T Unraveling Downstream Gender Bias from Large Language Models: A Study on AI Educational Writing Assistance
%A Wambsganss, Thiemo
%A Su, Xiaotian
%A Swamy, Vinitra
%A Neshaei, Seyed
%A Rietsche, Roman
%A Käser, Tanja
%Y Bouamor, Houda
%Y Pino, Juan
%Y Bali, Kalika
%S Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: EMNLP 2023
%D 2023
%8 December
%I Association for Computational Linguistics
%C Singapore
%F wambsganss-etal-2023-unraveling
%X Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly utilized in educational tasks such as providing writing suggestions to students. Despite their potential, LLMs are known to harbor inherent biases which may negatively impact learners. Previous studies have investigated bias in models and data representations separately, neglecting the potential impact of LLM bias on human writing. In this paper, we investigate how bias transfers through an AI writing support pipeline. We conduct a large-scale user study with 231 students writing business case peer reviews in German. Students are divided into five groups with different levels of writing support: one in-classroom group with recommender system feature-based suggestions and four groups recruited from Prolific – a control group with no assistance, two groups with suggestions from fine-tuned GPT-2 and GPT-3 models, and one group with suggestions from pre-trained GPT-3.5. Using GenBit gender bias analysis and Word Embedding Association Tests (WEAT), we evaluate the gender bias at various stages of the pipeline: in reviews written by students, in suggestions generated by the models, and in model embeddings directly. Our results demonstrate that there is no significant difference in gender bias between the resulting peer reviews of groups with and without LLM suggestions. Our research is therefore optimistic about the use of AI writing support in the classroom, showcasing a context where bias in LLMs does not transfer to students’ responses.
%R 10.18653/v1/2023.findings-emnlp.689
%U https://aclanthology.org/2023.findings-emnlp.689
%U https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/2023.findings-emnlp.689
%P 10275-10288
Markdown (Informal)
[Unraveling Downstream Gender Bias from Large Language Models: A Study on AI Educational Writing Assistance](https://aclanthology.org/2023.findings-emnlp.689) (Wambsganss et al., Findings 2023)
ACL