Age and gender distortion in online media and large language models

4 citations

Abstract

Are widespread stereotypes accurate1,2,3 or socially distorted4,5,6? This continuing debate is limited by the lack of large-scale multimodal data on stereotypical associations and the inability to compare these to ground truth indicators. Here we overcame these challenges in the analysis of age-related gender bias7,8,9, for which age provides an objective anchor for evaluating stereotype accuracy. Despite there being no systematic age differences between women and men in the workforce according to the US Census, we found that women are represented as younger than men across occupations and social roles in nearly 1.4 million images and videos from Google, Wikipedia, IMDb, Flickr and YouTube, as well as in nine language models trained on billions of words from the internet. This age gap is the starkest for content depicting occupations with higher status and earnings. We demonstrate how mainstream algorithms amplify this bias. A nationally representative pre-registered experiment (n = 459) found that Googling images of occupations amplifies age-related gender bias in participants’ beliefs and hiring preferences. Furthermore, when generating and evaluating resumes, ChatGPT assumes that women are younger and less experienced, rating older male applicants as of higher quality. Our study shows how gender and age are jointly distorted throughout the internet and its mediating algorithms, thereby revealing critical challenges and opportunities in the fight against inequality.

4
Citations
Research
Paper Only

Study specs

Analysis of 1.4 million images and videos from online sources and nine language models, followed by a pre-registered experiment involving participants to evaluate biases in internet content and algorithms.

Sample Size
N=459
Study Type
Experimental Study
Year
2025
Human Data Platform
Prolific

Measured Outcomes

Age and gender bias in occupational depiction across online platforms and language models, as well as its influence on beliefs and hiring preferences.

Peer Review & Critical Discussion

3 threads

Potential Selection Bias in 2023 Cohort

DSJDr. Sarah J.
Verified PhD Candidate
12 replies

The participant pool shows a concerning overrepresentation of users from high-income demographics. Looking at Table 3, we can see that 78% of respondents had annual incomes above $75k, which significantly limits the generalizability of these findings to broader populations.

2 hours ago

Non-naive Participants Issue

MCM. Chen (OpenAI)
Data Scientist
8 replies

I've noticed a methodological concern regarding participant naivety. Given that Prolific users often complete multiple studies, there's a real risk that participants had prior exposure to similar experimental paradigms, which could confound the results.

5 hours ago

RLHF Applicability to This Study Design

PRWProf. R. Williams
Verified Researcher
15 replies

The implications for RLHF training pipelines are understated. If we accept the authors' conclusions about preference stability, this has direct consequences for how we should structure reward model training. The temporal decay effect described in Section 4.2 is particularly relevant.

1 day ago

Verify your expertise to join discussion

Create an account and verify your credentials to participate in peer discussions.