Using Large Language Models for Qualitative Analysis can Introduce Serious Bias

Julian Ashwin, Aditya Chhabra and Vijayendra Rao

Papers from arXiv.org

Abstract: Large Language Models (LLMs) are quickly becoming ubiquitous, but the implications for social science research are not yet well understood. This paper asks whether LLMs can help us analyse large-N qualitative data from open-ended interviews, with an application to transcripts of interviews with Rohingya refugees in Cox's Bazaar, Bangladesh. We find that a great deal of caution is needed in using LLMs to annotate text as there is a risk of introducing biases that can lead to misleading inferences. We here mean bias in the technical sense, that the errors that LLMs make in annotating interview transcripts are not random with respect to the characteristics of the interview subjects. Training simpler supervised models on high-quality human annotations with flexible coding leads to less measurement error and bias than LLM annotations. Therefore, given that some high quality annotations are necessary in order to asses whether an LLM introduces bias, we argue that it is probably preferable to train a bespoke model on these annotations than it is to use an LLM for annotation.

Date: 2023-09, Revised 2023-10
New Economics Papers: this item is included in nep-ain, nep-big and nep-cmp
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (1)

Downloads: (external link)
http://arxiv.org/pdf/2309.17147 Latest version (application/pdf)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:arx:papers:2309.17147

Access Statistics for this paper

More papers in Papers from arXiv.org
Bibliographic data for series maintained by arXiv administrators ().