Research

Paper

AI LLM March 25, 2026

Gendered Prompting and LLM Code Review: How Gender Cues in the Prompt Shape Code Quality and Evaluation

Authors

Lynn Janzen, Üveys Eroglu, Dorothea Kolossa, Pia Knöferle, Sebastian Möller, Vera Schmitt, Veronika Solopova

Abstract

LLMs are increasingly embedded in programming workflows, from code generation to automated code review. Yet, how gendered communication styles interact with LLM-assisted programming and code review remains underexplored. We present a mixed-methods pilot study examining whether gender-related linguistic differences in prompts influence code generation outcomes and code review decisions. Across three complementary studies, we analyze (i) collected real-world coding prompts, (ii) a controlled user study, in which developers solve identical programming tasks with LLM assistance, and (iii) an LLM-based simulated evaluation framework that systematically varies gender-coded prompt styles and reviewer personas. We find that gender-related differences in prompting style are subtle but measurable, with female-authored prompts exhibiting more indirect and involved language, which does not translate into consistent gaps in functional correctness or static code quality. For LLM code review, in contrast, we observe systematic biases: on average, models approve female-authored code more, despite comparable quality. Controlled experiments show that gender-coded prompt style affect code length and maintainability, while reviewer behavior varies across models. Our findings suggest that fairness risks in LLM-assisted programming arise less from generation accuracy than from LLM evaluation, as LLMs are increasingly deployed as automated code reviewers.

Metadata

arXiv ID: 2603.24359
Provider: ARXIV
Primary Category: cs.SE
Published: 2026-03-25
Fetched: 2026-03-26 06:02

Related papers

Raw Data (Debug)
{
  "raw_xml": "<entry>\n    <id>http://arxiv.org/abs/2603.24359v1</id>\n    <title>Gendered Prompting and LLM Code Review: How Gender Cues in the Prompt Shape Code Quality and Evaluation</title>\n    <updated>2026-03-25T14:41:28Z</updated>\n    <link href='https://arxiv.org/abs/2603.24359v1' rel='alternate' type='text/html'/>\n    <link href='https://arxiv.org/pdf/2603.24359v1' rel='related' title='pdf' type='application/pdf'/>\n    <summary>LLMs are increasingly embedded in programming workflows, from code generation to automated code review. Yet, how gendered communication styles interact with LLM-assisted programming and code review remains underexplored. We present a mixed-methods pilot study examining whether gender-related linguistic differences in prompts influence code generation outcomes and code review decisions. Across three complementary studies, we analyze (i) collected real-world coding prompts, (ii) a controlled user study, in which developers solve identical programming tasks with LLM assistance, and (iii) an LLM-based simulated evaluation framework that systematically varies gender-coded prompt styles and reviewer personas. We find that gender-related differences in prompting style are subtle but measurable, with female-authored prompts exhibiting more indirect and involved language, which does not translate into consistent gaps in functional correctness or static code quality. For LLM code review, in contrast, we observe systematic biases: on average, models approve female-authored code more, despite comparable quality. Controlled experiments show that gender-coded prompt style affect code length and maintainability, while reviewer behavior varies across models. Our findings suggest that fairness risks in LLM-assisted programming arise less from generation accuracy than from LLM evaluation, as LLMs are increasingly deployed as automated code reviewers.</summary>\n    <category scheme='http://arxiv.org/schemas/atom' term='cs.SE'/>\n    <category scheme='http://arxiv.org/schemas/atom' term='cs.HC'/>\n    <published>2026-03-25T14:41:28Z</published>\n    <arxiv:primary_category term='cs.SE'/>\n    <author>\n      <name>Lynn Janzen</name>\n    </author>\n    <author>\n      <name>Üveys Eroglu</name>\n    </author>\n    <author>\n      <name>Dorothea Kolossa</name>\n    </author>\n    <author>\n      <name>Pia Knöferle</name>\n    </author>\n    <author>\n      <name>Sebastian Möller</name>\n    </author>\n    <author>\n      <name>Vera Schmitt</name>\n    </author>\n    <author>\n      <name>Veronika Solopova</name>\n    </author>\n  </entry>"
}