Previous discussions have highlighted the need for generative AI tools to become more culturally sensitive, yet often neglect the complexities of handling content about marginalized groups, who are perceived differently across cultures and religions. Our study examined the responses of two generative AI systems to homophobic statements and explored how their outputs varied when different societal and religious context information about the user was provided. Findings showed that ChatGPT 3.5's replies frequently reflected cultural relativism, as evidenced by an emphasis in the outputs on the idea that different cultures hold distinct perspectives and that these diverse viewpoints should be respected. In contrast, Bard's responses often stressed human rights and provided more support for gay people and lesbian, gay, bisexual, trans, and queer (LGBTQ)+ issues. Both systems demonstrated significant variation in their responses depending on the contextual information provided in the prompts, suggesting that AI systems may adjust the degree and form of support they express for LGBTQ+ people and issues according to the information they receive about a user's background. While our analysis focused specifically on chatbot responses to homophobic statements, the study underscores a broader dilemma concerning the tension between cultural relativism and universal human rights in generative AI—an issue that extends beyond homophobia to include animosity toward other marginalized groups that are perceived differently across societies and religions. The study contributes to understanding the social and ethical implications of AI responses and argues that any work to make generative AI outputs more culturally diverse requires grounding in fundamental human rights.
Vancsó et al. (Mon,) studied this question.