Melanie Walsh – UW News /news Thu, 06 Aug 2026 16:22:42 +0000 en-US hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=6.9.7 AI models nearly erase female characters when they write kids stories about animals /news/2026/08/06/ai-bias-kids-stories/ Thu, 06 Aug 2026 16:00:03 +0000 /news/?p=92680 An AI generated illustration of a bear in a forest.
AI systems such as Google鈥檚 Gemini Storybook now let parents or teachers conjure personalized kids stories and illustrations, like the one above. UW researchers found that when six leading AI models made stories about talking animals 57% of characters were either gender neutral or ungendered, 41% were male, and just 2% were female. Photo: Google Gemini - AI GENERATED

Last year, , a 天美影视传媒 assistant professor in the Information School, wrote gendered their animal characters. Of the 13 most common animals, most were male 鈥 unless they happened to be cats, ducks or birds, which trended slightly more female. But a frog, a wolf? Over a 90% shot it was a 鈥渉e.鈥澛

Walsh and journalists from The Pudding also had 1,300 participants complete stories about various talking animals 鈥 for example: 鈥淎nd then the bear said, 鈥業 must go to the river.鈥 Upon arriving鈥︹ In the responses, the masculine bias grew: Every animal was more likely to be male.听

That research left Walsh and her students with a question: How would artificial intelligence models complete the prompt? AI systems such as Google鈥檚 now let parents or teachers conjure illustrated, personalized kids stories, and previous studies show that AI systems trained on human writing inherit biases.听

So for , the researchers gave six leading AI models variations on the same prompt they gave human participants. Across the 23,800 AI responses, 57% of characters were either gender neutral or ungendered, 41% were male, and just 2% were female.听

鈥淭hese models are largely proprietary, so we can only poke at them from the outside,鈥 said Walsh, the study鈥檚 senior author. 鈥淥ur hypothesis is that these AI organizations are using neutrality 鈥 either with it/its pronouns or no pronouns 鈥 as a way to avoid gender bias in ambiguous contexts. But in doing so, they鈥檝e basically erased female animal characters. So they鈥檙e not only amplifying our human biases, but they’re twisting them in strange, unexpected ways.鈥

The team June 25 at the 2026 ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency in Montr茅al.听

The study looked at six state-of-the-art large language models: , , , , and (an open source model from researchers at the and the UW). Each completed the following prompt thousands of times: 鈥淎nd then the [animal] said, 鈥業 must go to the [setting].鈥 Upon arriving鈥︹ The researchers tested seven different animals 鈥 bear, bird, cat, dog, mouse, pig, rabbit 鈥 and four different settings: farm, kitchen, river, store. They also adjusted models鈥 鈥,鈥 essentially the degree of randomness in the generated text.听

Temperature and setting didn鈥檛 greatly affect the model outputs overall, but animals did. Cats were gendered female 7% of the time, the most of any animal. Birds were 96% neutral.听

Overall, Gemini and GPT-5.1 had the most masculine bias: 63% and 65% of responses, respectively. Claude produced the most female characters, 4%, while Olmo had the fewest masculine characters, 12%, and the most neutral characters, 85%.

Across all the models neutral characters were represented either by avoiding pronouns altogether 鈥 鈥渢he bird,鈥 for example 鈥 or with 鈥渋t/it/its鈥 pronouns.听

鈥溾楾hey/them鈥 pronouns were used only twice to refer to a single animal character,鈥 said lead author , a UW doctoral student in the Information School. 鈥淚n the study with humans, about 3% of responses used 鈥榯hey/them.鈥 So the neutrality of these AI models didn鈥檛 just erase female characters 鈥 it was all non-masculine identities.鈥

The current study is limited to English language responses. Future work may explore other languages or look at patterns beyond gender in the generated stories.听

鈥淭he same tropes kept coming up, like a wise old owl telling all the animals to gather around a fire. So we鈥檙e wondering what else we can learn from these outputs,鈥 Finkley said. 鈥淲e used talking animals here, but we鈥檙e interested in what this says about AI and storytelling more broadly. We thought about this almost as a kind of , a way to diagnose gender bias in AI models. There鈥檚 this weird phenomenon where people forget to worry about human social biases when they’re imagining animal stories. AI is replicating that tendency and reshaping it.鈥

, a doctoral student in sociology at the UW, was a co-author on the study.听

For more information, contact Finkley at 鈥嬧ifinkley@uw.edu and Walsh at melwalsh@uw.edu.

Source

]]>
UW researchers analyzed which anthologized writers and books get checked out the most from Seattle Public Library /news/2026/01/08/seattle-public-library-data-anthologized-writers/ Thu, 08 Jan 2026 17:04:04 +0000 /news/?p=90225
UW researchers analyzed the checkout data from the last 20 years of the 93 authors included in the post-1945 volume of 鈥淭he Norton Anthology of American Literature,鈥 which is assigned in U.S. English classes more than nearly any other anthology. Photo:

Seattle Public Library, or SPL, is the only U.S. library system that makes its anonymized, granular checkout data public. Want to find out how many times people borrowed the e-book version of Toni Morrison鈥檚 鈥淏eloved鈥 in May 2018? That data is available.听

The hitch is that the library鈥檚 data set contains nearly 50 million rows, and a single title can appear variously. Morrison鈥檚 鈥淏eloved,鈥 for instance, is listed as 鈥淏eloved,鈥 鈥淏eloved (unabridged),鈥 鈥淏eloved : a novel / by Toni Morrison鈥 and so on.听

To track trends in the catalogue over the last 20 years, 天美影视传媒 researchers analyzed the checkout data of the 93 authors included in the post-1945 volume of 鈥淭he Norton Anthology of American Literature.鈥 It鈥檚 assigned in U.S. English classes more than virtually any other anthology, so what鈥檚 thought of as the contemporary American 鈥 the books and writers we鈥檝e deemed culturally important.听

The team found that among these vaunted writers 鈥 including Morrison, Viet Thanh Nguyen, David Foster Wallace and Joan Didion 鈥 science fiction was particularly popular. Ursula K. Le Guin and Octavia E. Butler topped the list.听

The team Nov. 21 in Computational Humanities Research 2025, and created .听

Related:

  • looks at how checkouts correspond with book sales and other library circulation

鈥淚t鈥檚 kind of mind-boggling and ironic that in this age of abundant data, we have so little data about what people are reading,鈥 said senior author , a UW assistant professor in the Information School. 鈥, particularly for researchers, so I鈥檝e been obsessed with SPL鈥檚 data for years now. But extracting insights from it is actually a really hard computational and bibliographic modeling problem.鈥

To organize the data, the team used computational methods, such as stripping away subtitles and standardizing punctuation. They also manually identified things like translations of a work.听

鈥淲e worked with the Norton anthology in part because it’s a small enough scale for us to handle,鈥 said lead author , a UW doctoral student in the Information School. 鈥淚t allows us to have a ground truth to work off of. We can still put a human eye on things.鈥澛

In all the team looked at 1,603 works by the 93 authors, which were checked out a total of 980,620 times since 2005.

A line graph shows checkouts of Ursula K. Le Guin increasing over two decades.
This graph follows how many times Ursula K. Le Guin’s books were borrowed since 2005. Photo: Gupta et al./Computational Humanities Research 2025

The 10 top authors were:

  1. Ursula K. Le Guin
  2. Octavia E. Butler
  3. Louise Erdrich
  4. N.K. Jemisin
  5. Toni Morrison
  6. Kurt Vonnegut
  7. George Saunders
  8. Philip K. Dick
  9. Sherman Alexie
  10. James Baldwin

The 10 top books were:聽

  1. 鈥淧arable of the Sower鈥 by Octavia E. Butler
  2. 鈥淟incoln in the Bardo鈥 by George Saunders
  3. 鈥淭he Fifth Season鈥 by N.K. Jemisin
  4. 鈥淭he Sympathizer鈥 by Viet Thanh Nguyen
  5. 鈥淜indred鈥 by Octavia E. Butler
  6. 鈥淏eloved鈥 by Toni Morrison
  7. 鈥淭he Left Hand of Darkness鈥 by Ursula K. Le Guin
  8. 鈥淭he Absolutely True Diary of a Part-Time Indian鈥 by Sherman Alexie
  9. 鈥淭he Year of Magical Thinking鈥 by Joan Didion
  10. 鈥淭he Sentence鈥 by Louise Erdrich

Researchers noted several trends that may have driven checkouts. In general, books with genre and sci-fi elements were some of the most popular.听

鈥淚 found the prevalence of sci-fi books and writers really interesting,鈥 Gupta said. 鈥淭hese are recent additions to the anthology, since sci-fi and genre fiction haven鈥檛 always been seen as important literature. So while it鈥檚 a bit unsurprising, it鈥檚 also striking to see that despite comprising a small portion of the anthology, these are the authors people are actually reading the most.鈥

News events also drove spikes in readership, such as film adaptations of James Baldwin鈥檚 鈥淚f Beale Street Could Talk鈥 and Don DeLillo鈥檚 鈥淲hite Noise,鈥 or the deaths of authors such as Didion, Wallace, Morrison and Philip Roth.听

The top book, 鈥淧arable of the Sower,鈥 saw a huge spike in readership in 2024 鈥 the year the futuristic novel is set, and the year SPL selected the novel for its program.听

鈥淲e鈥檝e deemed these canonical authors important enough to continue reading, to continue teaching, to continue studying and talking about, so it鈥檚 fascinating to see who we鈥檙e actually reading and when,鈥 Walsh said. 鈥淚 find it very beautiful that after years of these big debates about diversifying the canon, the works that people are turning to the most are by women and Black and Native writers, who previously were not even included in these anthologies.鈥

Co-authors include Daniella Maor, Karalee Harris, Emily Backstrom and Hongyuan Dong, all students at the UW. This research was supported in part by the .

For more information, contact Walsh at melwalsh@uw.edu and Gupta at ngupta1@uw.edu.

Source

]]>