IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/smo/raiswp/0451.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Political Bias in Large Language Models: A Comparative Analysis of ChatGPT-4, Perplexity, Google Gemini, and Claude

Author

Listed:
  • Tavishi Choudhary

    (Greenwich High, Greenwich, Connecticut, US)

Abstract

Artificial Intelligence large language models have rapidly gained widespread adoption, sparking discussions on their societal and political impact, especially for political bias and its far-reaching consequences on society and citizens. This study explores the political bias in large language models by conducting a comparative analysis across four popular AI mod-els—ChatGPT-4, Perplexity, Google Gemini, and Claude. This research systematically evaluates their responses to politically charged prompts and questions from the Pew Research Center’s Political Typology Quiz, Political Compass Quiz, and ISideWith Quiz. The findings revealed that ChatGPT-4 and Claude exhibit a liberal bias, Perplexity is more conservative, while Google Gemini adopts more centrist stances based on their training data sets. The presence of such biases underscores the critical need for transparency in AI development and the incorporation of diverse training datasets, regular audits, and user education to mitigate any of these biases. The most significant question surrounding political bias in AI is its consequences, particularly its influence on public discourse, policy-making, and democratic processes. The results of this study advocate for ethical implications for the development of AI models and the need for transparency to build trust and integrity in AI models. Additionally, future research directions have been outlined to explore and address the complex AI bias issue.

Suggested Citation

  • Tavishi Choudhary, 2024. "Political Bias in Large Language Models: A Comparative Analysis of ChatGPT-4, Perplexity, Google Gemini, and Claude," RAIS Conference Proceedings 2022-2024 0451, Research Association for Interdisciplinary Studies.
  • Handle: RePEc:smo:raiswp:0451
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://rais.education/wp-content/uploads/2024/10/0451.pdf
    File Function: Full text
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:smo:raiswp:0451. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Eduard David (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://rais.education/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.