arXiv AI

When Personalization Becomes Bias: Structural and Discursive Religious Framing in AI-Generated Financial Advice

The study examines how large language models (ChatGPT, Gemini, and Grok) embed religious bias in AI‑generated financial advice. Using 432 simulated advisor‑client interactions across four religious identities and three financial decisions, the authors find that only 12‑18% of advice is unbiased, with Gemini showing the most bias and ChatGPT comparable to Grok. The research identifies structural biases in model design and discursive mechanisms—such as religious anchoring and tone modulation—that vary by scenario, revealing a tension between personalization and neutrality in AI advisory services.

arXiv AI
Sep 21

Trustworthy FinAInce: Unpacking How AI-Mediated Financial Advice is Judged

The study investigates how people evaluate AI-generated financial advice by conducting a randomized vignette experiment with 285 U.S. adults. Participants were presented with consistent financial recommendations delivered in three styles—AI, expert, and online community—alongside source labels. The results show that advice style most strongly influenced message and safety appraisals, expert labels increased perceived source knowledge, and decision context shaped risk and safety judgments, with these appraisals explaining a large portion of overall quality, trust, and intended reliance.

By Aryan Ramchandra Kapadia, Eshwar Chandrasekharan, Koustuv Saha
arXiv AI
Sep 2

Right Frame, Wrong Rule: Cultural Cues Expose the Financial Knowledge Gap They Were Meant to Close

arXiv:2609.00999v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: When a question has valid answers under different normative frameworks, a language model must decide which framework to use and whether it can answer...

By Rania Elbadry, Ahmed Heakl, Saeed Almheiri, Fan Zhang, Muhra AlMahri, Xueqing Peng, Mohsinul Kabir, Shuyao Wang, Yi Han, Saadeldine Eletter, Duzhen Zhang, Preslav Nakov, Yuxia Wang, Fajri Koto, Zhuohan Xie
Hugging Face Trending Papers
Sep 2

The Analyst in the Prompt: Role, Retrieval, and Memory Biases in LLM Financial Analysis

The paper investigates how user context—such as memory, profiles, and role prompts—affects large language models’ financial analysis. By testing 3,575 SEC filings across twelve LLMs, the study distinguishes between evidence selection and interpretation, finding that interpretation under different roles drives most user-context spillover. Two mitigation strategies—using a user profile instead of an assistant role and separating evidence-based from personalized outputs—reduce but do not eliminate this spillover, with effectiveness varying by model.

arXiv Computation and Language
Sep 4

The Analyst in the Prompt: Role, Retrieval, and Memory Biases in LLM Financial Analysis

The study examines how user context—such as memory, profiles, and role prompts—affects Large Language Models’ (LLMs) financial analysis. Using 3,575 SEC filings and twelve LLMs, the authors distinguish between evidence selection and interpretation, finding that most context spillover arises from differing interpretations under various roles rather than from retrieving different evidence. They evaluate two mitigation strategies—expressing investor mindset as a user profile instead of an assistant role, and separating evidence-based from personalized outputs—both of which reduce but do not eliminate spillover, with effectiveness varying across models.

By Ahmed Asaad, Amr Mohamed, Yang Zhang, Omneya Abdelsalam