Large Language Models (LLMs) have shown remarkable capabilities in a multitude of Natural Language Processing (NLP) tasks. However, these models are still not immune to limitations such as social biases, especially gender bias. This work investigates whether current closed and open-source LLMs possess gender bias, especially when asked to give moral opinions. To evaluate these models, we curate and introduce a new dataset GenMO (Gender-bias in Morality Opinions) comprising parallel short stories featuring male and female characters respectively. Specifically, we test models from the GPT family (GPT-3.5-turbo, GPT-3.5-turbo-instruct, GPT-4-turbo), Llama 3 and 3.1 families (8B/70B), Mistral-7B and Claude 3 families (Sonnet and Opus). Surprisingly, despite employing safety checks, all production-standard models we tested display significant gender bias with GPT-3.5-turbo giving biased opinions in 24% of the samples. Additionally, all models consistently favour female characters, with GPT showing bias in 68-85% of cases and Llama 3 in around 81-85% instances. Additionally, our study investigates the impact of model parameters on gender bias and explores real-world situations where LLMs reveal biases in moral decision-making.

Prior research demonstrates that Open AI's GPT models can predict variations in moral opinions between countries but that the accuracy tends to be substantially higher among high-income countries compared to low-income ones. This study aims to replicate previous findings and advance the research by examining how accuracy varies with different types of moral questions. Using responses from the World Value Survey and the European Value Study, covering 18 moral issues across 63 countries, we calculated country-level mean scores for each moral issue and compared them with GPT-4's predictions. Confirming previous findings, our results show that GPT-4 has greater predictive success in high-income than in low-income countries. However, our factor analysis reveals that GPT-4 bases its predictions primarily on a single dimension, presumably reflecting countries' degree of conservatism/liberalism. Conversely, the real-world moral landscape appears to be two-dimensional, differentiating between personal-sexual and violent-dishonest issues. When moral issues are categorized based on their moral domain, GPT-4's predictions are found to be remarkably accurate in the personal-sexual domain, across both high-income (r = .77) and low-income (r = .58) countries. Yet the predictive accuracy significantly drops in the violent-dishonest domain for both high-income (r = .30) and low-income (r = -.16) countries, indicating that GPT-4's one-dimensional world-view does not fully capture the complexity of the moral landscape. In sum, this study underscores the importance of not only considering country-specific characteristics to understand GPT-4's moral understanding, but also the characteristics of the moral issues at hand.

Most previous research on moral frames has focused on social media short texts, little work has explored moral sentiment within news articles. In news articles, authors often express their opinions or political stance through moral judgment towards events, specifically whether the event is right or wrong according to social moral rules. This paper initiates a new task to understand moral opinions towards events in news articles. We have created a new dataset, EMONA, and annotated event-level moral opinions in news articles. This dataset consists of 400 news articles containing over 10k sentences and 45k events, among which 9,613 events received moral foundation labels. Extracting event morality is a challenging task, as moral judgment towards events can be very implicit. Baseline models were built for event moral identification and classification. In addition, we also conduct extrinsic evaluations to integrate event-level moral opinions into three downstream tasks. The statistical analysis and experiments show that moral opinions of events can serve as informative features for identifying ideological bias or subjective events.