NLP datasets are richer than just input-output pairs; rather, they carry causal relations between the input and output variables. In this work, we take sentiment classification as an example and look into the causal relations between the review (X) and sentiment (Y). As psychology studies show that language can affect emotion, different psychological processes are evoked when a person first makes a rating and then self-rationalizes their feeling in a review (where the sentiment causes the review, i.e., Y -> X), versus first describes their experience, and weighs the pros and cons to give a final rating (where the review causes the sentiment, i.e., X -> Y ). Furthermore, it is also a completely different psychological process if an annotator infers the original rating of the user by theory of mind (ToM) (where the review causes the rating, i.e., X -ToM-> Y ). In this paper, we verbalize these three causal mechanisms of human psychological processes of sentiment classification into three different causal prompts, and study (1) how differently they perform, and (2) what nature of sentiment classification data leads to agreement or diversity in the model responses elicited by the prompts. We suggest future work raise awareness of different causal structures in NLP tasks. Our code and data are at https://github.com/cogito233/psych-causal-prompt

How can model designers turn task instructions into effective prompts for language models? Backed by extensive empirical analysis on GPT3, we observe important features for successful instructional prompts, and propose several reframing techniques for model designers to create such prompts. For example, a complex task can be decomposed into multiple simpler tasks. We experiment over 12 NLP tasks across 6 diverse categories (question generation, classification, etc.). Our results show that reframing improves few-shot learning performance by 14\% while reducing sample complexity over existing few-shot baselines. The performance gains are particularly important on large language models, such as GPT3 where tuning models or prompts on large datasets is not feasible. Furthermore, we observe that such gains are not limited to GPT3; the reframed tasks remain superior over raw instructions across different model architectures, underscoring the cross-model generality of these guidelines. We hope these empirical-driven techniques will pave way for more effective ways to prompt LMs in future.