Large language models (LLMs) increasingly find their way into the most diverse areas of our everyday lives. They indirectly influence people's decisions or opinions through their daily use. Therefore, understanding how and which moral judgements these LLMs make is crucial. However, morality is not universal and depends on the cultural background. This raises the question of whether these cultural preferences are also reflected in LLMs when prompted in different languages or whether moral decision-making is consistent across different languages. So far, most research has focused on investigating the inherent values of LLMs in English. While a few works conduct multilingual analyses of moral bias in LLMs in a multilingual setting, these analyses do not go beyond atomic actions. To the best of our knowledge, a multilingual analysis of moral bias in dilemmas has not yet been conducted. To address this, our paper builds on the moral machine experiment (MME) to investigate the moral preferences of five LLMs, Falcon, Gemini, Llama, GPT, and MPT, in a multilingual setting and compares them with the preferences collected from humans belonging to different cultures. To accomplish this, we generate 6500 scenarios of the MME and prompt the models in ten languages on which action to take. Our analysis reveals that all LLMs inhibit different moral biases to some degree and that they not only differ from the human preferences but also across multiple languages within the models themselves. Moreover, we find that almost all models, particularly Llama 3, divert greatly from human values and, for instance, prefer saving fewer people over saving more.

本研究解决了关于大型语言模型（LLMs）在不同文化和语言背景下的道德判断问题，填补了当前多语种道德偏见分析的空白。通过道德机器实验（MME），我们分析了五种大型语言模型在十种语言中的道德偏好，发现模型的道德偏见与人类偏好之间存在显著差异，尤其是Llama 3偏离人类价值观，表现出偏好较少拯救人数的倾向。

解码多语言道德偏好：通过道德机器实验揭示大型语言模型的偏见