Gendered Mental Health Stigma in Masked Language Models

AI-generated keywords: Gendered Mental Health Stigma Masked Language Models Computational Models Social Biases Contextual Considerations

AI-generated Key Points

  • Gendered aspects of mental health stigma in masked language models (MLMs) are explored
  • MLMs consistently predict female subjects more than male subjects when discussing mental health conditions and seeking treatment
  • Stereotypes such as anger, blame, and pity are associated more with women than men who have mental health conditions
  • Context and overlapping dimensions of identity should be considered when assessing social biases in computational models
  • Limitations include reliance on interpretations of black-box models instead of modern interpretability methods, caution against using the framework as an off-the-shelf metric, lack of examination of concrete impacts in real-world applications, potential bias from English Wikipedia data used to derive gender associations, limitations related to nonbinary and genderqueer identities, limited size and artifacts in the set of curated prompts used in the study, and potential inaccuracies in representing stigma in other languages or cultures.
  • Further research is needed to fully understand the impact of gender on mental health stigma captured by MLMs, consider diverse gender identities and cultural contexts, address social biases in computational models, and evaluate the broader implications of their outputs.
Also access our AI generated: Comprehensive summary, Lay summary, Blog-like article; or ask questions about this paper to our AI assistant.

Authors: Inna Wanyin Lin, Lucille Njoo, Anjalie Field, Ashish Sharma, Katharina Reinecke, Tim Althoff, Yulia Tsvetkov

EMNLP 2022
License: CC BY 4.0

Abstract: Mental health stigma prevents many individuals from receiving the appropriate care, and social psychology studies have shown that mental health tends to be overlooked in men. In this work, we investigate gendered mental health stigma in masked language models. In doing so, we operationalize mental health stigma by developing a framework grounded in psychology research: we use clinical psychology literature to curate prompts, then evaluate the models' propensity to generate gendered words. We find that masked language models capture societal stigma about gender in mental health: models are consistently more likely to predict female subjects than male in sentences about having a mental health condition (32% vs. 19%), and this disparity is exacerbated for sentences that indicate treatment-seeking behavior. Furthermore, we find that different models capture dimensions of stigma differently for men and women, associating stereotypes like anger, blame, and pity more with women with mental health conditions than with men. In showing the complex nuances of models' gendered mental health stigma, we demonstrate that context and overlapping dimensions of identity are important considerations when assessing computational models' social biases.

Submitted to arXiv on 27 Oct. 2022

Ask questions about this paper to our AI assistant

You can also chat with multiple papers at once here.

AI assistant instructions?

Results of the summarizing process for the arXiv paper: 2210.15144v2

This study explores the gendered aspects of mental health stigma in masked language models (MLMs) and how these models generate words related to mental health based on gender. The researchers develop a framework using clinical psychology literature to measure mental health stigma and curate prompts for MLMs. Their findings reveal that the models consistently predict female subjects more than male subjects when discussing mental health conditions and seeking treatment. Additionally, the models associate stereotypes such as anger, blame, and pity more with women than men who have mental health conditions. This study highlights the complex nuances of gendered mental health stigma captured by MLMs and emphasizes the importance of considering context and overlapping dimensions of identity when assessing social biases in computational models. The authors acknowledge some limitations of their work, including relying on interpretations of black-box models rather than using modern interpretability methods to identify specific aspects responsible for generating gendered words. They also caution against using their framework as an off-the-shelf metric to evaluate models in practice since it is a preliminary exploration rather than a benchmarking tool. Furthermore, this study does not examine the concrete impacts of model behaviors in real-world applications or measure their harmfulness in the lived experiences of affected individuals. Moreover, there are limitations related to nonbinary and genderqueer identities as well as potential bias from English Wikipedia data used to derive gender associations. The set of manually curated prompts used in this study is also limited in size and may contain artifacts from the curation process or psychology literature it was based on. Additionally, these prompts were derived from a survey conducted in standard American English which may not accurately represent stigma in other languages or cultures. In conclusion, while this study provides valuable insights into how gender influences mental health stigma captured by MLMs, further research is needed to fully understand its impact in real-world applications and consider diverse gender identities and cultural contexts. The findings of this study highlight the importance of addressing social biases in computational models and considering the broader implications of their outputs in specific social domains, such as mental health.
Created on 10 Jan. 2024

Assess the quality of the AI-generated content by voting

Score: 0

Why do we need votes?

Votes are used to determine whether we need to re-run our summarizing tools. If the count reaches -10, our tools can be restarted.

Similar papers summarized with our AI tools

Navigate through even more similar papers through a

tree representation

Look for similar papers (in beta version)

By clicking on the button above, our algorithm will scan all papers in our database to find the closest based on the contents of the full papers and not just on metadata. Please note that it only works for papers that we have generated summaries for and you can rerun it from time to time to get a more accurate result while our database grows.

Disclaimer: The AI-based summarization tool and virtual assistant provided on this website may not always provide accurate and complete summaries or responses. We encourage you to carefully review and evaluate the generated content to ensure its quality and relevance to your needs.