Biased LLMs can Influence Political Decision-Making
Jillian Fisher, Shangbin Feng, Robert Aron, Thomas Richardson, Yejin Choi, Daniel W. Fisher, Jennifer Pan, Yulia Tsvetkov, Katharina Reinecke
Abstract
As modern large language models (LLMs) become integral to everyday tasks, concerns about their inherent biases and their potential impact on human decision-making have emerged. While bias in models are well-documented, less is known about how these biases influence human decisions. This paper presents two interactive experiments investigating the effects of partisan bias in LLMs on political opinions and decision-making. Participants interacted freely with either a biased liberal, biased conservative, or unbiased control model while completing these tasks. We found that participants exposed to partisan biased models were significantly more likely to adopt opinions and make decisions which matched the LLM's bias. Even more surprising, this influence was seen when the model bias and personal political partisanship of the participant were opposite. However, we also discovered that prior knowledge of AI was weakly correlated with a reduction of the impact of the bias, highlighting the possible importance of AI education for robust mitigation of bias effects. Our findings not only highlight the critical effects of interacting with biased LLMs and its ability to impact public discourse and political conduct, but also highlights potential techniques for mitigating these risks in the future. Conservative Supported Topic Participant Partisanship Treatment Bias Beta Value t Value p-value Democrat Liberal -0.85 -2.38 0.02 Conservative 0.98 2.71 <0.01 Republican Liberal -0.79 -2.16 0.03 Conservative 0.19 0.55 0.58 Liberal Supported Topic Participant Partisanship Treatment Bias Beta Value t Value p-value Democrat Liberal 0.01 0.03 0.98 Conservative 1.44 3.82 <.01 Republican Liberal 0.20 0.58 0.56 Conservative 1.42 3.91 <.01 Table 1: Results of the Topic Opinion Task. All change in topic opinion ordinal logistic regression models were run without control variables. We ran two models, one for each participant partisanship. Bold indicates significant results with α = 0.05. Education Welfare Safety Veterans Education Welfare Safety Veterans Education Welfare Safety Veterans -10.
Ask about this paper
Your agent reads all of it.
Lune indexed this paper to the last equation, along with the top-tier papers that cite it. Ask a question and the answer quotes them.
Your agent calls
Luneget_paper_fulltext
Free to start. No credit card required.
Terminal
Install the CLIlune papers fulltext b2b45520-1c48-4c6f-adc8-c9dfc09a1bd7Cited by top-tier papers3
- Among Us: Measuring and Mitigating Malicious Contributions in Model Collaboration SystemsZiyuan Yang, Wenxuan Ding, Shangbin Feng, Yulia TsvetkovACL 2026 · 1 citation
- Emergence of Biased Consensus in Multi-Agent LLM DebatesMaya OkawaICML 2026
- Feeling Right vs. Being Right: How AI Sycophancy Affects Value-Laden DeliberationJeongwoo Ryu, Soomin Kim, Jinsu Eun, Kyusik Kim et al.ACL 2026
Builds on4
- Co-Writing with Opinionated Language Models Affects Users' ViewsMaurice Jakesch, Advait Bhat, Daniel Buschek, Lior Zalmanson et al.CHI 2023 · 249 citations
- Bias Out-of-the-Box: An Empirical Analysis of Intersectional Occupational Biases in Popular Generative Language ModelsHannah Rose Kirk, Yennie Jun, Filippo Volpin, Haider Iqbal et al.NeurIPS 2021 · 243 citations
- How Johnny Can Persuade LLMs to Jailbreak Them: Rethinking Persuasion to Challenge AI Safety by Humanizing LLMsYi Zeng, Hongpeng Lin, Jingwen Zhang, Diyi Yang et al.ACL 2024 · 64 citations
- BiasAsker: Measuring the Bias in Conversational AI SystemYuxuan Wan, Wenxuan Wang, Pinjia He, Jiazhen Gu et al.FSE 2023 · 50 citations
Related papers
- Generative Echo Chamber? Effect of LLM-Powered Search Systems on Diverse Information SeekingNikhil Sharma, Q. Vera Liao, Ziang XiaoCHI 2024 · 123 citations
- Examining Alignment of Large Language Models through Representative Heuristics: the case of political stereotypesSullam Jeoung, Yubin Ge, Haohan Wang, Jana DiesnerICLR 2025
- Emulating Aggregate Human Choice Behavior and Biases with GPT Conversational AgentsStephen Pilli, Vivek NallurCHI 2026 · 2 citations
- Systematic Biases in LLM Simulations of DebatesAmir Taubenfeld, Yaniv Dover, Roi Reichart, Ariel GoldsteinEMNLP 2024 · 35 citations
- Assessing Reliability and Political Bias In LLMs' Judgements of Formal and Material Inferences With Partisan ConclusionsReto Gubelmann, Ghassen KarrayACL 2025
