Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

"Global is Good, Local is Bad?": Understanding Brand Bias in LLMs

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2406.13997 v2 pith:TASQEXUZ submitted 2024-06-20 cs.CL cs.CE

"Global is Good, Local is Bad?": Understanding Brand Bias in LLMs

classification cs.CL cs.CE
keywords llmsbrandbiasbrandsgloballocalbiasesdisproportionately
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved
0 comments
read the original abstract

Many recent studies have investigated social biases in LLMs but brand bias has received little attention. This research examines the biases exhibited by LLMs towards different brands, a significant concern given the widespread use of LLMs in affected use cases such as product recommendation and market analysis. Biased models may perpetuate societal inequalities, unfairly favoring established global brands while marginalizing local ones. Using a curated dataset across four brand categories, we probe the behavior of LLMs in this space. We find a consistent pattern of bias in this space -- both in terms of disproportionately associating global brands with positive attributes and disproportionately recommending luxury gifts for individuals in high-income countries. We also find LLMs are subject to country-of-origin effects which may boost local brand preference in LLM outputs in specific contexts.

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score.

  1. Demographic Prompting at Scale: When More Attributes Hurt LLM--Human Agreement

    cs.CL 2026-07 conditional novelty 6.5

    Across five subjective tasks and five open-source LLMs, demographic prompting improves human agreement only for 1–3 high-signal, directionally coherent attributes and degrades under the full attribute set.