AI chatbots have been shown to be “unreliable and clearly biased” when offering voting advice, the Dutch data protection authority (AP) has stated, issuing warnings about a possible risk to democracy just eight days before national elections.
Study Shows Consistent Bias in AI Suggestions
The four chatbots tested by the AP “often end up with the same two parties”, irrespective of the user’s question or command, the watchdog explained in a analysis released ahead of the late October vote.
For over 50% of instances, the chatbot suggested either the right-wing PVV of Geert Wilders or the progressive GroenLinks-PvdA led by the former European Commission vice-president Frans Timmermans.
Some parties, such as the moderate CDA, “are almost never mentioned”, even when the voter’s query precisely aligns with the positions of these political entities, the study pointed out.
Authority Figure Cautions Against Relying on AI Assistants for Voting Guidance
The vice-chair of the AP, the official Monique Verdier, commented that while AI assistants appear to be smart resources, “for election guidance, they repeatedly fall short”. Voters were being pushed toward a party that might not correspond to their political views, she added.
“This immediately affects a cornerstone of democracy: the honesty of open and just votes,” said Verdier. “We thus caution against employing AI assistants for voting advice, as their operation is unclear and difficult to verify.”
Election Context and Party Dynamics
The Dutch head to the polls on 29 October in an electoral contest that will be keenly observed across the continent for the showing of the PVV.
The far-right party of Wilders is ahead in surveys but the gap to the left-wing and centre-right parties seems to be closing, with many voters yet to make up their minds.
All major parties have ruled out an alliance with the PVV, implying the runner-up party is highly probable to provide the next prime minister.
Unintentional Bias Linked to Chatbot Functioning
The AP stressed that the AI systems were not intentionally prejudiced, and that their “identified shortcomings” are a consequence of the manner in which AI assistants function.
