AffirmativeAI: Towards LGBTQ+ Friendly Audit Frameworks for Large Language Models
2405.04652
0
0
💬
Abstract
LGBTQ+ community face disproportionate mental health challenges, including higher rates of depression, anxiety, and suicidal ideation. Research has shown that LGBTQ+ people have been using large language model-based chatbots, such as ChatGPT, for their mental health needs. Despite the potential for immediate support and anonymity these chatbots offer, concerns regarding their capacity to provide empathetic, accurate, and affirming responses remain. In response to these challenges, we propose a framework for evaluating the affirmativeness of LLMs based on principles of affirmative therapy, emphasizing the need for attitudes, knowledge, and actions that support and validate LGBTQ+ experiences. We propose a combination of qualitative and quantitative analyses, hoping to establish benchmarks for Affirmative AI, ensuring that LLM-based chatbots can provide safe, supportive, and effective mental health support to LGBTQ+ individuals. We benchmark LLM affirmativeness not as a mental health solution for LGBTQ+ individuals or to claim it resolves their mental health issues, as we highlight the need to consider complex discrimination in the LGBTQ+ community when designing technological aids. Our goal is to evaluate LLMs for LGBTQ+ mental health support since many in the community already use them, aiming to identify potential harms of using general-purpose LLMs in this context.
Create account to get full access
Overview
- This paper explores the development of "AffirmativeAI", a framework for auditing large language models (LLMs) to ensure they are LGBTQ+ friendly and minimize harm for this community.
- The paper highlights the mental health disparities experienced by LGBTQ+ individuals and the role that chatbots could play in providing support, while also acknowledging the potential for these models to perpetuate biases and discrimination.
- The proposed framework aims to address these challenges by incorporating LGBTQ+ perspectives and inclusive design principles into the audit process for LLMs used in mental health applications.
Plain English Explanation
The paper discusses the challenges faced by LGBTQ+ individuals when it comes to mental health and how chatbots, which are computer programs designed to have conversations, could potentially help address some of these issues. However, the authors recognize that these chatbots, which are powered by large language models (LLMs), can also perpetuate biases and discrimination against LGBTQ+ people if they are not designed carefully.
To address this problem, the researchers propose a framework called "AffirmativeAI" that aims to audit LLMs used in mental health chatbots to ensure they are LGBTQ+ friendly and minimize harm for this community. The framework incorporates LGBTQ+ perspectives and inclusive design principles into the audit process, with the goal of creating chatbots that are more supportive and understanding of the unique mental health needs of LGBTQ+ individuals.
Technical Explanation
The paper begins by highlighting the significant mental health disparities experienced by LGBTQ+ individuals, who often face higher rates of depression, anxiety, and suicidality compared to their cisgender and heterosexual counterparts. The authors argue that chatbots powered by LLMs could potentially play a role in providing mental health support for this community, as they can offer accessible and anonymous services.
However, the authors also acknowledge the potential for LLMs to perpetuate biases and discrimination against LGBTQ+ individuals, as these models are trained on data that may reflect societal prejudices. To address this challenge, the researchers propose the "AffirmativeAI" framework, which aims to audit LLMs used in mental health chatbots to ensure they are LGBTQ+ friendly and minimize harm.
The framework incorporates LGBTQ+ perspectives and inclusive design principles into the audit process, which includes evaluating the chatbot's responses to LGBTQ+-related prompts, assessing the representation and portrayal of LGBTQ+ individuals in the training data, and examining the chatbot's language for the presence of heteronormative assumptions or gender-binary biases. The authors also suggest incorporating feedback from LGBTQ+ individuals and organizations into the audit process to ensure the framework is responsive to the community's needs.
Critical Analysis
The proposed "AffirmativeAI" framework is a valuable contribution to the ongoing efforts to address the challenges of bias and discrimination in LLMs, particularly in the context of mental health applications that serve LGBTQ+ populations. The authors' recognition of the mental health disparities faced by this community and the potential for chatbots to provide support is well-justified, and the framework's focus on incorporating LGBTQ+ perspectives and inclusive design principles is a crucial step towards creating more inclusive and affirming AI systems.
One potential limitation of the framework, as acknowledged by the authors, is the challenge of obtaining representative and unbiased training data for LLMs, as societal prejudices may be reflected in the available data. Additionally, the authors note that the framework may need to be regularly updated to keep pace with the evolving needs and experiences of the LGBTQ+ community.
Further research could explore the practical implementation of the AffirmativeAI framework, including the development of specific evaluation criteria and the involvement of LGBTQ+ individuals and organizations in the audit process. Additionally, studies could investigate the real-world impact of LGBTQ+ friendly chatbots on the mental health outcomes of this community, providing valuable insights to guide the continued refinement and deployment of such systems.
Conclusion
The paper presents a compelling case for the development of LGBTQ+ friendly audit frameworks for large language models used in mental health chatbots. By incorporating LGBTQ+ perspectives and inclusive design principles, the proposed "AffirmativeAI" framework aims to mitigate the potential for these AI systems to perpetuate biases and discrimination against LGBTQ+ individuals, who already face significant mental health disparities. The framework's focus on creating more affirming and supportive chatbots could have far-reaching implications for improving the mental health and well-being of LGBTQ+ communities.
This summary was produced with help from an AI and may contain inaccuracies - check out the links to read the original source documents!
Related Papers
Can AI Relate: Testing Large Language Model Response for Mental Health Support
Saadia Gabriel, Isha Puri, Xuhai Xu, Matteo Malgaroli, Marzyeh Ghassemi
0
0
Large language models (LLMs) are already being piloted for clinical use in hospital systems like NYU Langone, Dana-Farber and the NHS. A proposed deployment use case is psychotherapy, where a LLM-powered chatbot can treat a patient undergoing a mental health crisis. Deployment of LLMs for mental health response could hypothetically broaden access to psychotherapy and provide new possibilities for personalizing care. However, recent high-profile failures, like damaging dieting advice offered by the Tessa chatbot to patients with eating disorders, have led to doubt about their reliability in high-stakes and safety-critical settings. In this work, we develop an evaluation framework for determining whether LLM response is a viable and ethical path forward for the automation of mental health treatment. Using human evaluation with trained clinicians and automatic quality-of-care metrics grounded in psychology research, we compare the responses provided by peer-to-peer responders to those provided by a state-of-the-art LLM. We show that LLMs like GPT-4 use implicit and explicit cues to infer patient demographics like race. We then show that there are statistically significant discrepancies between patient subgroups: Responses to Black posters consistently have lower empathy than for any other demographic group (2%-13% lower than the control group). Promisingly, we do find that the manner in which responses are generated significantly impacts the quality of the response. We conclude by proposing safety guidelines for the potential deployment of LLMs for mental health response.
5/21/2024
QueerBench: Quantifying Discrimination in Language Models Toward Queer Identities
Mae Sosto, Alberto Barr'on-Cede~no
0
0
With the increasing role of Natural Language Processing (NLP) in various applications, challenges concerning bias and stereotype perpetuation are accentuated, which often leads to hate speech and harm. Despite existing studies on sexism and misogyny, issues like homophobia and transphobia remain underexplored and often adopt binary perspectives, putting the safety of LGBTQIA+ individuals at high risk in online spaces. In this paper, we assess the potential harm caused by sentence completions generated by English large language models (LLMs) concerning LGBTQIA+ individuals. This is achieved using QueerBench, our new assessment framework, which employs a template-based approach and a Masked Language Modeling (MLM) task. The analysis indicates that large language models tend to exhibit discriminatory behaviour more frequently towards individuals within the LGBTQIA+ community, reaching a difference gap of 7.2% in the QueerBench score of harmfulness.
6/19/2024
Unveiling and Mitigating Bias in Mental Health Analysis with Large Language Models
Yuqing Wang, Yun Zhao, Sara Alessandra Keller, Anne de Hond, Marieke M. van Buchem, Malvika Pillai, Tina Hernandez-Boussard
0
0
The advancement of large language models (LLMs) has demonstrated strong capabilities across various applications, including mental health analysis. However, existing studies have focused on predictive performance, leaving the critical issue of fairness underexplored, posing significant risks to vulnerable populations. Despite acknowledging potential biases, previous works have lacked thorough investigations into these biases and their impacts. To address this gap, we systematically evaluate biases across seven social factors (e.g., gender, age, religion) using ten LLMs with different prompting methods on eight diverse mental health datasets. Our results show that GPT-4 achieves the best overall balance in performance and fairness among LLMs, although it still lags behind domain-specific models like MentalRoBERTa in some cases. Additionally, our tailored fairness-aware prompts can effectively mitigate bias in mental health predictions, highlighting the great potential for fair analysis in this field.
6/21/2024
💬
Large Language Model for Mental Health: A Systematic Review
Zhijun Guo, Alvina Lai, Johan Hilge Thygesen, Joseph Farrington, Thomas Keen, Kezhi Li
0
0
Large language models (LLMs) have attracted significant attention for potential applications in digital health, while their application in mental health is subject to ongoing debate. This systematic review aims to evaluate the usage of LLMs in mental health, focusing on their strengths and limitations in early screening, digital interventions, and clinical applications. Adhering to PRISMA guidelines, we searched PubMed, IEEE Xplore, Scopus, and the JMIR using keywords: 'mental health OR mental illness OR mental disorder OR psychiatry' AND 'large language models'. We included articles published between January 1, 2017, and December 31, 2023, excluding non-English articles. 30 articles were evaluated, which included research on mental illness and suicidal ideation detection through text (n=12), usage of LLMs for mental health conversational agents (CAs) (n=5), and other applications and evaluations of LLMs in mental health (n=13). LLMs exhibit substantial effectiveness in detecting mental health issues and providing accessible, de-stigmatized eHealth services. However, the current risks associated with the clinical use might surpass their benefits. The study identifies several significant issues: the lack of multilingual datasets annotated by experts, concerns about the accuracy and reliability of the content generated, challenges in interpretability due to the 'black box' nature of LLMs, and persistent ethical dilemmas. These include the lack of a clear ethical framework, concerns about data privacy, and the potential for over-reliance on LLMs by both therapists and patients, which could compromise traditional medical practice. Despite these issues, the rapid development of LLMs underscores their potential as new clinical aids, emphasizing the need for continued research and development in this area.
5/31/2024