Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

Multilingual Language Models are not Multicultural: A Case Study in Emotion

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2307.01370 v2 pith:3NOQVZO7 submitted 2023-07-03 cs.CL

Shreya Havaldar , Sunny Rai , Bhumika Singhal , Langchen Liu , Sharath Chandra Guntuku , Lyle Ungar This is my paper · ORCID
classification cs.CL
keywords multilingualemotionreflectacrossemotionallanguagelanguagesmodels
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

Emotions are experienced and expressed differently across the world. In order to use Large Language Models (LMs) for multilingual tasks that require emotional sensitivity, LMs must reflect this cultural variation in emotion. In this study, we investigate whether the widely-used multilingual LMs in 2023 reflect differences in emotional expressions across cultures and languages. We find that embeddings obtained from LMs (e.g., XLM-RoBERTa) are Anglocentric, and generative LMs (e.g., ChatGPT) reflect Western norms, even when responding to prompts in other languages. Our results show that multilingual LMs do not successfully learn the culturally appropriate nuances of emotion and we highlight possible research directions towards correcting this.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Emotionally-Aware Agents for Dispute Resolution

    cs.CL 2025-08 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    LLM emotion labeling of dispute dialogues explains up to ~40% of variance in subjective outcomes (vs ~5% in prior negotiation work) and reveals anger escalation and compassion de-escalation patterns.

Pith tools