Large Language Models (LLMs) are becoming increasingly capable across global languages. However, the ability to communicate across languages does not necessarily translate to appropriate cultural representations. A key concern is US-centric bias, where LLMs reflect US rather than local cultural values. We propose a novel methodology that compares LLM-generated response distributions against population-level opinion data from the World Value Survey across four languages (Danish, Dutch, English, and Portuguese). Using a rigorous linear mixed-effects regression framework, we compare two families of models: Google's Gemma models (2B--27B parameters) and successive iterations of OpenAI's turbo-series. Across the families of models, we find no consistent relationships between language capabilities and cultural alignment. While the Gemma models have a positive correlation between language capability and cultural alignment across languages, the OpenAI models do not. Importantly, we find that self-consistency is a stronger predictor of multicultural alignment than multilingual capabilities. Our results demonstrate that achieving meaningful cultural alignment requires dedicated effort beyond improving general language capabilities.
Multilingual != Multicultural: Evaluating Gaps Between Multilingual Capabilities and Cultural Alignment in LLMs
Research shows that self-consistency is a stronger predictor of multicultural alignment in LLMs than multilingual capabilities, and that cultural alignment does not consistently improve with language capability across different models.
- Year
- 2025
- Venue
- arXiv 2025
- Authors
- 3
- Hosting
- Abstract onlyARXIV-DEFAULT
Cite
Notes
Only stored in your browser.
Attribution
- Abstract & full text
- arxiv.org/abs/2502.16534ARXIV-DEFAULT
- TL;DR
- Semantic Scholar