Offensive language detection systems often rely on majority-aggregated annotations, overlooking the diversity of perspectives that shape how different communities perceive harm. In this contribution, we introduce HurtLens, a perspectivist corpus of hurtful language leveraging four disaggregated datasets which are automatically enriched through HurtLex lemmas, a multilingual resource of offensive and derogatory terms. Using mixed-effects modeling, we investigate how annotators’ sociodemographic backgrounds, the presence of specific types of offensive language (through Hurtlex categories) and their interaction influence offensiveness ratings. Our analysis reveals that offensiveness ratings are influenced both by annotators’ sociodemographic characteristics (particularly when considering them in intersection) and by the presence of specific types of offensive language. Additionally, we identify significant interaction effects showing that different demographic groups vary in their sensitivity to texts containing particular types of offensive language.

Several recent works have examined the generations produced by large language models (LLMs) on subjective topics such as political opinions and attitudinal questionnaires. There is growing interest in controlling these outputs to align with specific users or perspectives using model steering techniques. However, several studies have highlighted unintended and unexpected steering effects, where minor changes in the prompt or irrelevant contextual cues influence model-generated opinions.This work empirically tests how irrelevant information can systematically bias model opinions in specific directions. Using the Political Compass Test questionnaire, we conduct a detailed statistical analysis to quantify these shifts using the opinions generated by LLMs in an open-generation setting. The results demonstrate that even seemingly unrelated contexts consistently alter model responses in predictable ways, further highlighting challenges in ensuring the robustness and reliability of LLMs when generating opinions on subjective topics.