cs.HCMar 18, 2026

Auditing Preferences for Brands and Cultures in LLMs

Authors: Jasmine Rienecker, Katarina Mpofu, Naman Goel, Siddhartha Datta, Jun Zhao, Oscar Danielsson, Fredrik Thorsen

Organizations: Stupid Human · University of Oxford

Abstract

Large language models (LLMs) based AI systems increasingly mediate what billions of people see, choose and buy. This creates an urgent need to quantify the systemic risks of LLM-driven market intermediation, including its implications for market fairness, competition, and the diversity of information exposure. This paper introduces ChoiceEval, a reproducible framework for auditing preferences for brands and cultures in large language models (LLMs) under realistic usage conditions. ChoiceEval addresses two core technical challenges: (i) generating realistic, persona-diverse evaluation queries and (ii) converting free-form outputs into comparable choice sets and quantitative preference metrics. For a given topic (e.g. running shoes, hotel chains, travel destinations), the framework segments users into psychographic profiles (e.g., budget-conscious, wellness-focused, convenience), and then derives diverse prompts that reflect real-world advice-seeking and decision-making behaviour. LLM responses are converted into normalised top-k choice sets. Preference and geographic bias are then quantified using comparable metrics across topics and personas. Thus, ChoiceEval provides a scalable audit pipeline for researchers, platforms, and regulators, linking model behaviour to real-world economic outcomes. Applied to Gemini, GPT, and DeepSeek across 10 topics spanning commerce and culture and more than 2,000 questions, ChoiceEval reveals consistent preferences: U.S.-developed models Gemini and GPT show marked favouritism toward American entities, while China-developed DeepSeek exhibits more balanced yet still detectable geographic preferences. These patterns persist across user personas, suggesting systematic rather than incidental effects.

Figures & tables

Appendix figures & tables3 assets

Supplementary material from the paper’s appendix.

Appendix

Explore similar work

CardsList
  1. A Scalable Entity-Based Framework for Auditing Bias in Large Language Models

    Jan 18, 2026Akram Elbouanani, Aboubacar Tuo, Adrian PopescuLLM AuditingPolitical Bias in Language Models

  2. Every Token Counts: Exact Likert-Scale Distributions for Measuring LLM Attitudes and Biases

    Aug 11, 2026Davood Wadi, Mohsen Ghodrat, Matthew PhilpLLM EvaluationCultural Bias in Language Models

  3. MLLM-as-a-Judge Exhibits Model Preference Bias

    Apr 13, 2026Shuitsu Koyama, Yuiga Wada, Daichi Yashima +1Bias in LLM-as-a-JudgeMultimodal Model Evaluation