While various approaches have recently been studied for bias identification, little is known about how implicit language that does not explicitly convey a viewpoint affects bias amplification in large language models. To examine the severity of bias toward a view, we evaluated the performance of two downstream tasks where the implicit and explicit knowledge of social groups were used. First, we present a stress test evaluation by using a biased model in edge cases of excessive bias scenarios. Then, we evaluate how LLMs calibrate linguistically in response to both implicit and explicit opinions when they are aligned with conflicting viewpoints. Our findings reveal a discrepancy in LLM performance in identifying implicit and explicit opinions, with a general tendency of bias toward explicit opinions of opposing stances. Moreover, the bias-aligned models generate more cautious responses using uncertainty phrases compared to the unaligned (zero-shot) base models. The direct, incautious responses of the unaligned models suggest a need for further refinement of decisiveness by incorporating uncertainty markers to enhance their reliability, especially on socially nuanced topics with high subjectivity.

This paper describes our system submission for the CLPsych 2019 shared task B on suicide risk assessment. We approached the problem with three separate models: a behaviour model; a language model and a hybrid model. For the behavioral model approach, we model each user’s behaviour and thoughts with four groups of features: posting behaviour, sentiment, motivation, and content of the user’s posting. We use these features as an input in a support vector machine (SVM). For the language model approach, we trained a language model for each risk level using all the posts from the users as the training corpora. Then, we computed the perplexity of each user’s posts to determine how likely his/her posts were to belong to each risk level. Finally, we built a hybrid model that combines both the language model and the behavioral model, which demonstrates the best performance in detecting the suicide risk level.