We present a novel approach for enhancing diversity and control in data annotation tasks by personalizing large language models (LLMs). We investigate the impact of injecting diverse persona descriptions into LLM prompts across two studies, exploring whether personas increase annotation diversity and whether the impacts of individual personas on the resulting annotations are consistent and controllable. Our results indicate that persona-prompted LLMs generate more diverse annotations than LLMs prompted without personas, and that the effects of personas on LLM annotations align with subjective differences in human annotations. These effects are both controllable and repeatable, making our approach a valuable tool for enhancing data annotation in subjective NLP tasks such as toxicity detection.

Recent research indicates that the online use of the term ”bot” has evolved over time. In the past, people used the term to accuse others of displaying automated behavior. However, it has gradually transformed into a linguistic tool to dehumanize the conversation partner, particularly on polarizing topics. Although this trend has been observed in English-speaking contexts, it is still unclear whether it holds true in other socio-linguistic environments. In this work we extend existing work on bot accusations and explore the phenomenon in a multilingual setting. We identify three distinct accusation patterns that characterize the different languages.