Sign inGet started
Paper · arXiv

A Two-Stage Statistical Framework for Evaluating Associative Interference in Large Language Models

Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly evaluated for bias using adaptations of human psychological paradigms, yet methodological limitations-particularly the conflation of refusal behavior with task performance-have hindered clear interpretation. Here, we adapt the Implicit Association Test (IAT) to a controlled, forced-choice framework and introduce a two-stage modeling approach that separates response compliance from task-consistent classification. Across three contemporary LLMs (Claude Sonnet-4, Gemini 2.5 Pro, and GPT-5), we evaluate associative interference, defined as reduced task-consistency in incongruent relative to congruent conditions. While compliance with the structure...

AuthorsAchraf Cohen, Andrew Kincaid
Primary categorystat.ME
Published12 June 2026
Last updated at source12 June 2026
stat.MEcs.AI
Embed this entry
<iframe src="https://silytics.si/embed/item/d1360370-ea50-469f-b7c6-78b99fa9d2fe" width="420" height="190" style="border:0" loading="lazy" title="Silytics entry"></iframe>

Free, no tracking. More about feeds and embeds.

Silytics shows public metadata from arXiv and links to the original. Information may be incomplete or out of date. Last refreshed 17 October 2026. Licenses and terms of the original apply to the work itself. Not financial, legal or professional advice.