Misaligned by Reward: Socially Undesirable Preferences in LLMs

TL;DR

This paper extends reward-model benchmarking to social domains, revealing that current models often prefer socially undesirable responses and exhibit biased preferences, highlighting gaps in social alignment evaluation.

Contribution

It introduces a framework converting social evaluation datasets into preference data, enabling assessment of social preferences in reward models across multiple domains.

Findings

Reward models often prefer socially undesirable responses.

Models produce systematically biased output distributions.

Stronger bias avoidance can reduce contextual sensitivity.

Abstract

Reward models are a key component of large language model alignment, serving as proxies for human preferences during training. However, existing evaluations focus primarily on broad instruction-following benchmarks, providing limited insight into whether these models capture socially desirable preferences. As a result, important failures in social alignment can remain hidden. We extend reward-model benchmarking to four socially consequential domains: bias, safety, morality, and ethical reasoning. We introduce a framework that converts social evaluation datasets into pairwise preference data, leveraging gold labels where available and directional bias indicators otherwise. This enables us to test whether reward models prefer socially undesirable responses, and whether their preferences produce systematically biased distributions over selected outputs. Across five publicly available reward models and two instruction-tuned models used as reward proxies, we find substantial variation across domains, with no single model performing best overall. The models fall well short of strong social intelligence: they often prefer socially undesirable options, and their preferences produce systematically biased distributions. Moreover, stronger bias avoidance can reduce sensitivity to context, revealing a key alignment trade-off between avoiding biased outcomes and preserving contextual faithfulness. These findings show that standard reward benchmarks are insufficient for assessing social alignment and highlight the need for evaluations that directly measure the social preferences encoded in reward models.