The paper investigates how large language models (LLMs) can exhibit stigma toward people with psychological conditions by examining their intermediate reasoning steps rather than just final answers. Using clinical expertise, the authors develop a framework to identify and rate stigmatizing language in LLM reasoning, distinguishing between overt prejudice and subtler biases. They also expand an existing mental health stigma benchmark to include more psychological conditions, finding that reasoning analysis reveals far more stigma than traditional multiple-choice evaluations and exposes flaws in the models’ logic and understanding of mental health.
arXiv:2609.01548v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly used in advice seeking and decision making that may affect social judgements. Despite stigma's profound e...
arXiv:2608. 14161v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: LLMs exhibit social biases that can produce inaccurate and discriminatory inferences, posing risks in high-stakes applications.
arXiv:2608. 05583v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: As large language models (LLMs) enter high-stakes domains such as healthcare, understanding their moral reasoning becomes essential.
The paper introduces behavioral coherence evaluation, a design‑time method that uses validation evidence from an established instrument to test relationships among outputs of large language models (LLMs). Using the Individual Level Abortion Stigma Scale, the authors prompted five LLMs to complete questionnaires for 627 personas and found that the models scored personas lower on self‑judgment but higher on worries about judgment, often reversing the reference direction for Black personas. Expert review highlighted that disclosure guidance from the models requires context about relationship safety, legal risk, and trusted support.
As large language models (LLMs) enter high-stakes domains such as healthcare, understanding their moral reasoning becomes essential. Decisions about scarce medical resources often hinge on judgments of responsibility, particularly when patients' own actions contribute to illness.
arXiv:2608. 15254v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Clinical-AI guidance increasingly recommends prompting language models to reason with attention to diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI).
The paper introduces an adaptive triggering mechanism for bias correction in large language model (LLM) reasoning. By framing bias intervention as an online change‑point detection problem, the authors update a CUSUM statistic at each step using either a white‑box next‑token probability signal or a black‑box LLM judge signal, and inject corrective prompts only when the accumulated evidence exceeds a calibrated threshold. Experiments on gpt‑4o‑mini and six open‑weight models show that adaptive black‑box triggering restores most of the accuracy lost by fixed‑interval interventions while reducing the number of corrections, whereas the white‑box signal improves ambiguous‑item accuracy but can hurt disambiguated‑item accuracy due to difficulty distinguishing stereotype reliance from correct evidence.
arXiv:2606. 26698v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: In today's fast-paced information era, logical fallacies, defined as defective patterns of reasoning, inevitably contribute to the growth of information disorder.
arXiv:2511. 06160v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: While recent safety guardrails effectively suppress overtly biased outputs, subtler forms of social bias emerge during complex logical reasoning tasks that evade current evaluation benchmarks.
As Large Language Models are increasingly deployed in critical applications, robustly evaluating their social biases is paramount. However, the current literature suffers from widespread methodological fragmentation, which yields contradictory conclusions.
arXiv:2606. 02444v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Recent evidence shows that people with eating disorders (EDs) are increasingly seeking guidance, advice, and emotional support from Large Language Model (LLM)-based chat systems.
The paper reviews how large language models are applied in mental health, covering areas such as social media analysis, clinical conversational agents, therapy support tools, prompt engineering, and multimodal learning. It synthesizes interdisciplinary studies that use social media posts, electronic medical records, and multimodal inputs to detect depression, assess suicide risk, provide personalized therapy, and generate psychoeducational content. The review also discusses advances in model interpretability, annotation strategies, multimodal fusion techniques, and highlights ethical, sociotechnical, and regulatory challenges while proposing frameworks for safe, equitable, and accountable deployment.