Papers
arxiv:2510.09905

The Personalization Trap: How User Memory Alters Emotional Reasoning in LLMs

Published on Oct 10
· Submitted by Weijie Xu on Oct 14
Authors:
,
,
,
,
,

Abstract

LLMs exhibit systematic biases in emotional interpretation and support based on user profiles, potentially reinforcing social hierarchies.

AI-generated summary

When an AI assistant remembers that Sarah is a single mother working two jobs, does it interpret her stress differently than if she were a wealthy executive? As personalized AI systems increasingly incorporate long-term user memory, understanding how this memory shapes emotional reasoning is critical. We investigate how user memory affects emotional intelligence in large language models (LLMs) by evaluating 15 models on human validated emotional intelligence tests. We find that identical scenarios paired with different user profiles produce systematically divergent emotional interpretations. Across validated user independent emotional scenarios and diverse user profiles, systematic biases emerged in several high-performing LLMs where advantaged profiles received more accurate emotional interpretations. Moreover, LLMs demonstrate significant disparities across demographic factors in emotion understanding and supportive recommendations tasks, indicating that personalization mechanisms can embed social hierarchies into models emotional reasoning. These results highlight a key challenge for memory enhanced AI: systems designed for personalization may inadvertently reinforce social inequalities.

Community

Paper submitter

🎯 Core idea: Personalization via long-term user memory can warp LLMs’ emotional reasoning.
🧠📒 When the same scenario is paired with different user profiles, models interpret emotions differently—often favoring “advantaged” profiles.
👥⚖️ Clear disparities show up across demographics for emotion understanding + support recommendations, meaning memory features can quietly encode social hierarchies.
🧪🤖 Studied across 15 LLMs on human-validated EI tests; results highlight a key risk for memory-enhanced AI.
🚨 Takeaway: Personalization ≠ neutral—without safeguards, it may reinforce inequality. ✋🧩

fig2_3

This setting is so interesting! Does LLM actually perform differently on EQ question given different memory!!!

exp2_plot (1)
This draws my attention. DeepSeek has such strong bias towards Muslim!!!

This is an automated message from the Librarian Bot. I found the following papers similar to this paper.

The following papers were recommended by the Semantic Scholar API

Please give a thumbs up to this comment if you found it helpful!

If you want recommendations for any Paper on Hugging Face checkout this Space

You can directly ask Librarian Bot for paper recommendations by tagging it in a comment: @librarian-bot recommend

Sign up or log in to comment

Models citing this paper 0

No model linking this paper

Cite arxiv.org/abs/2510.09905 in a model README.md to link it from this page.

Datasets citing this paper 0

No dataset linking this paper

Cite arxiv.org/abs/2510.09905 in a dataset README.md to link it from this page.

Spaces citing this paper 0

No Space linking this paper

Cite arxiv.org/abs/2510.09905 in a Space README.md to link it from this page.

Collections including this paper 2