📝 SummarXiv

Abstract

Amidst the rapid normalization of generative artificial intelligence (GAI), intelligent systems have come to dominate political discourse across information mediums. However, internalized political biases stemming from training data skews, human prejudice, and algorithmic flaws continue to plague the novel technology. This paper employs a zero-shot classification approach to evaluate algorithmic political partisanship through a methodical combination of ideological alignment, topicality, response sentiment, and objectivity. A total of 1800 model responses across six mainstream large language models (LLMs) were individually input into four distinct fine-tuned classification algorithms, each responsible for computing an aforementioned bias evaluation metric. Results show an amplified liberal-authoritarian alignment across all six LLMs evaluated, with notable instances of reasoning supersessions and canned refusals. The study subsequently highlights the psychological influences underpinning human-computer interactions and how intrinsic biases can permeate public discourse. The resulting distortion of the political landscape can ultimately manifest as conformity or polarization, depending on a region's pre-existing socio-political structures.