@inproceedings{giorgi-etal-2024-modeling,
title = "Modeling Human Subjectivity in {LLM}s Using Explicit and Implicit Human Factors in Personas",
author = "Giorgi, Salvatore and
Liu, Tingting and
Aich, Ankit and
Isman, Kelsey and
Sherman, Garrick and
Fried, Zachary and
Sedoc, Jo{\~a}o and
Ungar, Lyle and
Curtis, Brenda",
editor = "Al-Onaizan, Yaser and
Bansal, Mohit and
Chen, Yun-Nung",
booktitle = "Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: EMNLP 2024",
month = nov,
year = "2024",
address = "Miami, Florida, USA",
publisher = "Association for Computational Linguistics",
url = "https://aclanthology.org/2024.findings-emnlp.420",
pages = "7174--7188",
abstract = "Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly being used in human-centered social scientific tasks, such as data annotation, synthetic data creation, and engaging in dialog. However, these tasks are highly subjective and dependent on human factors, such as one{'}s environment, attitudes, beliefs, and lived experiences. Thus, it may be the case that employing LLMs (which do not have such human factors) in these tasks results in a lack of variation in data, failing to reflect the diversity of human experiences. In this paper, we examine the role of prompting LLMs with human-like personas and asking the models to answer as if they were a specific human. This is done explicitly, with exact demographics, political beliefs, and lived experiences, or implicitly via names prevalent in specific populations. The LLM personas are then evaluated via (1) subjective annotation task (e.g., detecting toxicity) and (2) a belief generation task, where both tasks are known to vary across human factors. We examine the impact of explicit vs. implicit personas and investigate which human factors LLMs recognize and respond to. Results show that explicit LLM personas show mixed results when reproducing known human biases, but generally fail to demonstrate implicit biases. We conclude that LLMs may capture the statistical patterns of how people speak, but are generally unable to model the complex interactions and subtleties of human perceptions, potentially limiting their effectiveness in social science applications.",
}
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<modsCollection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/mods/v3">
<mods ID="giorgi-etal-2024-modeling">
<titleInfo>
<title>Modeling Human Subjectivity in LLMs Using Explicit and Implicit Human Factors in Personas</title>
</titleInfo>
<name type="personal">
<namePart type="given">Salvatore</namePart>
<namePart type="family">Giorgi</namePart>
<role>
<roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">author</roleTerm>
</role>
</name>
<name type="personal">
<namePart type="given">Tingting</namePart>
<namePart type="family">Liu</namePart>
<role>
<roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">author</roleTerm>
</role>
</name>
<name type="personal">
<namePart type="given">Ankit</namePart>
<namePart type="family">Aich</namePart>
<role>
<roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">author</roleTerm>
</role>
</name>
<name type="personal">
<namePart type="given">Kelsey</namePart>
<namePart type="family">Isman</namePart>
<role>
<roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">author</roleTerm>
</role>
</name>
<name type="personal">
<namePart type="given">Garrick</namePart>
<namePart type="family">Sherman</namePart>
<role>
<roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">author</roleTerm>
</role>
</name>
<name type="personal">
<namePart type="given">Zachary</namePart>
<namePart type="family">Fried</namePart>
<role>
<roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">author</roleTerm>
</role>
</name>
<name type="personal">
<namePart type="given">João</namePart>
<namePart type="family">Sedoc</namePart>
<role>
<roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">author</roleTerm>
</role>
</name>
<name type="personal">
<namePart type="given">Lyle</namePart>
<namePart type="family">Ungar</namePart>
<role>
<roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">author</roleTerm>
</role>
</name>
<name type="personal">
<namePart type="given">Brenda</namePart>
<namePart type="family">Curtis</namePart>
<role>
<roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">author</roleTerm>
</role>
</name>
<originInfo>
<dateIssued>2024-11</dateIssued>
</originInfo>
<typeOfResource>text</typeOfResource>
<relatedItem type="host">
<titleInfo>
<title>Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: EMNLP 2024</title>
</titleInfo>
<name type="personal">
<namePart type="given">Yaser</namePart>
<namePart type="family">Al-Onaizan</namePart>
<role>
<roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">editor</roleTerm>
</role>
</name>
<name type="personal">
<namePart type="given">Mohit</namePart>
<namePart type="family">Bansal</namePart>
<role>
<roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">editor</roleTerm>
</role>
</name>
<name type="personal">
<namePart type="given">Yun-Nung</namePart>
<namePart type="family">Chen</namePart>
<role>
<roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">editor</roleTerm>
</role>
</name>
<originInfo>
<publisher>Association for Computational Linguistics</publisher>
<place>
<placeTerm type="text">Miami, Florida, USA</placeTerm>
</place>
</originInfo>
<genre authority="marcgt">conference publication</genre>
</relatedItem>
<abstract>Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly being used in human-centered social scientific tasks, such as data annotation, synthetic data creation, and engaging in dialog. However, these tasks are highly subjective and dependent on human factors, such as one’s environment, attitudes, beliefs, and lived experiences. Thus, it may be the case that employing LLMs (which do not have such human factors) in these tasks results in a lack of variation in data, failing to reflect the diversity of human experiences. In this paper, we examine the role of prompting LLMs with human-like personas and asking the models to answer as if they were a specific human. This is done explicitly, with exact demographics, political beliefs, and lived experiences, or implicitly via names prevalent in specific populations. The LLM personas are then evaluated via (1) subjective annotation task (e.g., detecting toxicity) and (2) a belief generation task, where both tasks are known to vary across human factors. We examine the impact of explicit vs. implicit personas and investigate which human factors LLMs recognize and respond to. Results show that explicit LLM personas show mixed results when reproducing known human biases, but generally fail to demonstrate implicit biases. We conclude that LLMs may capture the statistical patterns of how people speak, but are generally unable to model the complex interactions and subtleties of human perceptions, potentially limiting their effectiveness in social science applications.</abstract>
<identifier type="citekey">giorgi-etal-2024-modeling</identifier>
<location>
<url>https://aclanthology.org/2024.findings-emnlp.420</url>
</location>
<part>
<date>2024-11</date>
<extent unit="page">
<start>7174</start>
<end>7188</end>
</extent>
</part>
</mods>
</modsCollection>
%0 Conference Proceedings
%T Modeling Human Subjectivity in LLMs Using Explicit and Implicit Human Factors in Personas
%A Giorgi, Salvatore
%A Liu, Tingting
%A Aich, Ankit
%A Isman, Kelsey
%A Sherman, Garrick
%A Fried, Zachary
%A Sedoc, João
%A Ungar, Lyle
%A Curtis, Brenda
%Y Al-Onaizan, Yaser
%Y Bansal, Mohit
%Y Chen, Yun-Nung
%S Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: EMNLP 2024
%D 2024
%8 November
%I Association for Computational Linguistics
%C Miami, Florida, USA
%F giorgi-etal-2024-modeling
%X Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly being used in human-centered social scientific tasks, such as data annotation, synthetic data creation, and engaging in dialog. However, these tasks are highly subjective and dependent on human factors, such as one’s environment, attitudes, beliefs, and lived experiences. Thus, it may be the case that employing LLMs (which do not have such human factors) in these tasks results in a lack of variation in data, failing to reflect the diversity of human experiences. In this paper, we examine the role of prompting LLMs with human-like personas and asking the models to answer as if they were a specific human. This is done explicitly, with exact demographics, political beliefs, and lived experiences, or implicitly via names prevalent in specific populations. The LLM personas are then evaluated via (1) subjective annotation task (e.g., detecting toxicity) and (2) a belief generation task, where both tasks are known to vary across human factors. We examine the impact of explicit vs. implicit personas and investigate which human factors LLMs recognize and respond to. Results show that explicit LLM personas show mixed results when reproducing known human biases, but generally fail to demonstrate implicit biases. We conclude that LLMs may capture the statistical patterns of how people speak, but are generally unable to model the complex interactions and subtleties of human perceptions, potentially limiting their effectiveness in social science applications.
%U https://aclanthology.org/2024.findings-emnlp.420
%P 7174-7188
Markdown (Informal)
[Modeling Human Subjectivity in LLMs Using Explicit and Implicit Human Factors in Personas](https://aclanthology.org/2024.findings-emnlp.420) (Giorgi et al., Findings 2024)
ACL
- Salvatore Giorgi, Tingting Liu, Ankit Aich, Kelsey Isman, Garrick Sherman, Zachary Fried, João Sedoc, Lyle Ungar, and Brenda Curtis. 2024. Modeling Human Subjectivity in LLMs Using Explicit and Implicit Human Factors in Personas. In Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: EMNLP 2024, pages 7174–7188, Miami, Florida, USA. Association for Computational Linguistics.