mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Human Psychometric Questionnaires Mischaracterize LLM Behavior

arXiv 2509.10078 ↗First posted 12 Sep 2025cs.CL cs.AIcited by 2

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

We examine whether human psychometric questionnaires can serve as reliable tools for characterizing and predicting LLM behavior in everyday user interactions. We analyze eight open-source LLMs by comparing their value and personality profiles derived from two different methods: Likert self-reports on established questionnaires (PVQ-40/21 and BFI-44/10) and generation probabilities over value-laden responses to everyday user queries. The two profiles diverge substantially. Within-construct item consistency, often cited as evidence of stable LLM dispositions, disappears in generation probabilities. We find that established questionnaire items contain explicit lexical cues that allow models to recognize the target construct and respond in alignment-consistent, socially desirable ways, whereas realistic user queries contain far less recognizable cues. In addition, demographic persona prompts shift models' responses to human questionnaires in ways consistent with real human patterns, but no such shifts appear in the generation setting, highlighting that human questionnaires overestimate LLMs' ability to faithfully reproduce expected psychological traits when role-playing demographic personas. Overall, our study indicates that questionnaire scores alone should not be treated as evidence of LLMs' response tendencies in realistic user interactions, and supports generation-probability profiling with ecologically valid items as a complementary behavioral measure.

Key facts. Cited by 2 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 23 of its 67 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 12 Sep 2025.

Builds on

23 of 67 references.

References · 23

  1. 2019Sentence-BERT: Sentence Embeddings using Siamese BERT-Networkscited by 9,170
  2. 2023Efficient Memory Management for Large Language Model Serving with PagedAttentioncited by 5,944
  3. 2021Calibrate Before Use: Improving Few-Shot Performance of Language Modelscited by 1,392
  4. 2023Whose Opinions Do Language Models Reflect?cited by 773
  5. 2023LMSYS-Chat-1M: A Large-Scale Real-World LLM Conversation Datasetcited by 461
  6. 2024Political Compass or Spinning Arrow? Towards More Meaningful Evaluations for Values and Opinions in Large Language Modelscited by 162
  7. 2022Who is GPT-3? An Exploration of Personality, Values and Demographicscited by 112
  8. 2020Scruples: A Corpus of Community Ethical Judgments on 32,000 Real-Life Anecdotescited by 101
  9. 2024Evaluating Large Language Model Biases in Persona-Steered Generationcited by 78
  10. 2023Ethical Reasoning over Moral Alignment: A Case and Framework for In-Context Ethical Policies in LLMscited by 64
  11. 2024Do LLMs Have Distinct and Consistent Personality? TRAIT: Personality Testset designed for LLMs with Psychometricscited by 59
  12. 2024Can Large Language Models be Good Emotional Supporter? Mitigating Preference Bias on Emotional Support Conversationcited by 55
11 more
  1. 2025Mind the Value-Action Gap: Do LLMs Act in Alignment with Their Values?cited by 51
  2. 2023You don't need a personality test to know these models are unreliable: Assessing the Reliability of Large Language Models on Psychometric Instrumentscited by 48
  3. 2023Self-Assessment Tests are Unreliable Measures of LLM Personalitycited by 39
  4. 2025The Personality Illusion: Revealing Dissociation Between Self-Reports & Behavior in LLMscited by 36
  5. 2024Large Language Models Show Human-like Social Desirability Biases in Survey Responsescited by 28
  6. 2024Log Probabilities Are a Reliable Estimate of Semantic Plausibility in Base and Instruction-Tuned Language Modelscited by 24
  7. 2024Can LLM "Self-report"?: Evaluating the Validity of Self-report Scales in Measuring Personality Design in LLM-based Chatbotscited by 20
  8. 2025Value Portrait: Assessing Language Models' Values through Psychometrically and Ecologically Valid Itemscited by 18
  9. 2024Is Self-knowledge and Action Consistent or Not: Investigating Large Language Model's Personalitycited by 8
  10. 2025Measuring Bias or Measuring the Task: Understanding the Brittle Nature of LLM Gender Biasescited by 8
  11. 2025Psychometric Item Validation Using Virtual Respondents with Trait-Response Mediatorscited by 3

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2026: 2.

2 papers.