A Japanese Benchmark for Evaluating Social Bias in Reasoning Based on Attribution Theory

Social biases reflected in language are inherently shaped by cultural norms, which vary significantly across regions and lead to diverse manifestations of stereotypes. Existing evaluations of social bias in large language models (LLMs) for non-English contexts, however, often rely on translations of English benchmarks. Such benchmarks fail to reflect local cultural norms, including those found in Japanese. For instance, Western benchmarks may overlook Japan-specific stereotypes related to hierarchical relationships, regional dialects, or traditional gender roles. To address this limitation, we introduce Japanese cUlture adversarial BiAs benchmarK Under handcrafted creation (JUBAKU), a benchmark tailored to Japanese cultural contexts. JUBAKU uses adversarial construction to expose latent biases across ten distinct cultural categories. Unlike existing benchmarks, JUBAKU features dialogue scenarios hand-crafted by native Japanese annotators, specifically designed to trigger and reveal latent social biases in Japanese LLMs. We evaluated nine Japanese LLMs on JUBAKU and three others adapted from English benchmarks. All models clearly exhibited biases on JUBAKU, performing below the random baseline of 50% with an average accuracy of 23% (ranging from 13% to 33%), despite higher accuracy on the other benchmarks. Human annotators achieved 91% accuracy in identifying unbiased responses, confirming JUBAKU's reliability and its adversarial nature to LLMs.

As Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly deployed as autonomous agents, accurately evaluating their latent values and biases is critical. The NLP community typically evaluates models using large, unstructured benchmarks. While effective for general capabilities, these datasets fundamentally conflate causal mechanisms: even when an aggregate bias is detected, unstructured evaluations cannot disentangle whether it stems from baseline traits, contextual confounders, or complex interactions. To address this, we introduce an analytically exact framework for the controlled behavioral evaluation of LLMs. We bridge human psychometrics with LLM mechanics by resolving gaps in design, measurement, and analysis. First, we replace unstructured prompting with fully crossed factorial experiments to systematically isolate causal main and interaction effects. Second, we eliminate Monte Carlo text sampling noise by operating directly on exact, token-level Probability Mass Functions (PMFs). Third, we derive a multivariate ordinal consensus metric and a distributional ANOVA to process these PMFs analytically. We validate our framework with a case study on consumer ethnocentrism across five LLMs, demonstrating how our approach isolates systemic country-of-origin biases that aggregate benchmarks otherwise obscure.

Large Language Models increasingly suppress biased outputs when demographic identity is stated explicitly, yet may still exhibit implicit biases when identity is conveyed indirectly. Existing benchmarks use name based proxies to detect implicit biases, which carry weak associations with many social demographics and cannot extend to dimensions like age or socioeconomic status. We introduce ImplicitBBQ, a QA benchmark that evaluates implicit bias through characteristic based cues, demographically associated attributes that signal implicitly, across age, gender, region, religion, caste, and socioeconomic status. Evaluating 11 models, we find that implicit bias in ambiguous contexts is over six times higher than explicit bias in open weight models. Notably, this bias is distributed unevenly across demographics: caste emerges as the most severe while gender is the least affected. Safety prompting and chain-of-thought reasoning fail to substantially close this gap; even few-shot prompting, which reduces implicit bias by 79%, leaves caste bias at four times the level of any other dimension. These findings indicate that current alignment and prompting strategies address the surface of bias evaluation while leaving demographically associated stereotypic associations largely unresolved. We publicly release our code and dataset for model providers and researchers to benchmark potential mitigation techniques.