Search arXiv⌕ Search

arXiv · 2610.10864

Localized, unstable, and entangled: Exploring `Us vs. Them' bias in Large Language Models

Abstract

Large language models (LLMs) exhibit us-vs.-them bias: A behavioral asymmetry in which prompts framed around an ingroup (``we''/``us'') receive systematically more positive continuations than matched prompts framed around an outgroup (``they''/``them''). Using Edge Attribution Patching (EAP), we localize this behavior to directed circuits in GPT-2 Small, GPT-2 Large, Llama-2 7B, and Llama-3 8B. Across models, high-attribution edges are sparse and concentrated primarily in middle-to-late layers, while ingroup- and outgroup-related pathways are only partially overlapping and reorganize under fine-tuning. Behavioral comparisons and 30-token generations show that the measured asymmetry extends beyond next-token evaluation. Targeted patching of EAP-ranked edges reduces the bias score more than equal-cardinality random-edge controls, but also substantially degrades performance on CoLA, HellaSwag, and WikiText-2, suggesting that bias-relevant pathways are functionally entangled with broader language capabilities. Overall, our findings characterize us-vs.-them bias as a sparse, context-dependent, and functionally entangled computational phenomenon whose internal organization varies across the models examined.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Tabia Tanzin Prama, Julia Witte Zimmerman, Christopher M. Danforth, Peter Sheridan Dodds. 2026-10-07. Localized, unstable, and entangled: Exploring `Us vs. Them' bias in Large Language Models. https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.10864

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

A data-driven heuristic-ensemble method for behavioural inference in collective-risk dilemma experiments

The collective-risk dilemma has become a paradigm for studying cooperation in a wide variety of social experiments, initiatives that generate increasingly rich datasets describing individual actions over successive decision-making processes. Beyond the purely descriptive analysis of such empirical datasets, a methodological framework is required to interpret and reproduce the observed dynamics, a scheme that may be skewed by exogenous biases. Here, we introduce a data-driven, non-parametric method for simulating individual decisions together with a validation protocol for assessing the fidelity level of the outcomes they generate. Our methodological contribution is based on an empirical heuristic ensemble: agents are represented by a finite set of behavioural heuristics, probabilities conditioned on different observable features of the game state, endowed with a hard-voting arbitration that determines their per-round final decisions. This reproducible generative framework allows for behavioural inference in different collective-risk dilemma setups: Behavioural heuristics are seeded directly from empirical data assessing conditional probabilities, without a priori assumptions; a plurality vote with uniform random tie-breaking resolves between competing heuristics each round, adding no free parameters; validation follows a pattern-oriented approach, comparing synthetic and empirical macro-indicators against single-heuristic and uniform-random baselines; synthetic data generated allow exploration of scenarios or experimental setups that have not been empirically realised; as a worked example, we instantiate our methodological approach on the xAire citizen science collective-risk dilemma experiment run in Barcelona.

physics.soc-ph↗

Modelling the complex dynamics of online disinformation cascades

Disinformation on online social media has been on the rise in the past years. While there is extensive literature modelling social cascades, online disinformation cascades show distinctive characteristics: they provoke debunking reactions, they spread over networks with heterogeneous connectivity, and they compete for the limited attention of users --- which recommendation algorithms may partly offset. We propose a model including these ingredients and study it through Monte--Carlo simulations and mean--field approximations, on random graphs and an empirical Twitter network. We find that debunking reactions are double--edged: they reduce the reach of appealing items but allow unappealing ones to reach audiences they would not otherwise reach. Degree heterogeneity makes cascades trigger at a much lower content appeal but limits their final reach: heterogeneous networks are easy to ignite yet hard to saturate. Limited attention cancels the effects from degree heterogeneity, although the mediation of recommendation algorithms may restore them.

physics.soc-ph↗

Coupling with opinion dynamics promotes prosocial behavior in multilayer networks

Various theoretical and empirical studies have accounted for why humans cooperate in competitive environments. Although prior work has revealed that network structure and multiplex interactions can promote cooperation, most theory assumes that individuals play dilemma games in all social contexts. However, real-world agents may participate in a diversity of interactions, not all of which present dilemmas. We develop an evolutionary game model on multilayer networks in which one layer supports the prisoner's dilemma game, while the other follows constant-selection dynamics, representing biased but non-dilemmatic competition, akin to opinion or fad spreading. Our theoretical analysis reveals that coupling a social dilemma layer to a non-dilemmatic constant-selection layer robustly enhances cooperation in many cases, across different multilayer networks, updating rules, and payoff schemes. These findings suggest that embedding individuals within diverse networked settings---even those unrelated to direct social dilemmas---can be a principled approach to engineering cooperation in socio-ecological and organizational systems.

physics.soc-ph↗