AI assistants are proving to be “unreliable and clearly biased” when providing election recommendations, the Dutch data protection authority (AP) has stated, issuing warnings about a possible risk to democratic processes just eight days before the country’s general election.
Study Shows Repeated Partiality in Chatbot Recommendations
The quartet of AI assistants tested by the AP “often end up with the same two parties”, regardless of the voter’s inquiry or input, the watchdog noted in a analysis published ahead of the 29 October election.
In more than half of the cases, the AI recommended either the right-wing PVV of Geert Wilders or the leftwing GroenLinks-PvdA led by the former European Commission vice-president Frans Timmermans.
Certain groups, such as the centre-right CDA, “are almost never mentioned”, even when the user’s input exactly matches the stances of these parties, the study indicated.
Authority Figure Cautions Against Using AI Chatbots for Election Advice
The vice-chair of the AP, Monique Verdier, stated that while chatbots may seem like clever tools, “as a voting aid, they consistently fail”. Citizens were being steered toward a political group that might not correspond to their ideological beliefs, she added.
“This directly impacts a cornerstone of democracy: the honesty of open and just votes,” said Verdier. “We thus caution against using AI chatbots for voting advice, as their functioning is opaque and hard to confirm.”
Voting Background and Political Landscape
The Dutch head to the polls on 29 October in an election that will be keenly observed across the continent for the showing of the PVV.
The far-right party of Geert Wilders is leading the polls but the gap to the GroenLinks-PvdA and CDA appears to be narrowing, with numerous electors still undecided.
Every significant political faction have rejected a coalition with the PVV, meaning the runner-up party is highly probable to provide the next prime minister.
Unintentional Bias Linked to AI Operation
The authority emphasised that the AI systems were not intentionally prejudiced, and that their “identified shortcomings” are a result of the manner in which AI assistants function.
