mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Adding LLMs to the psycholinguistic norming toolbox: A practical guide to getting the most out of human ratings

arXiv 2509.14405 ↗First posted 17 Sep 2025cs.CLcited by 3

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Word-level psycholinguistic norms lend empirical support to theories of language processing. However, obtaining such human-based measures is not always feasible or straightforward. One promising approach is to augment human norming datasets by using Large Language Models (LLMs) to predict these characteristics directly, a practice that is rapidly gaining popularity in psycholinguistics and cognitive science. However, the novelty of this approach (and the relative inscrutability of LLMs) necessitates the adoption of rigorous methodologies that guide researchers through this process, present the range of possible approaches, and clarify limitations that are not immediately apparent, but may, in some cases, render the use of LLMs impractical. In this work, we present a comprehensive methodology for estimating word characteristics with LLMs, enriched with practical advice and lessons learned from our own experience. Our approach covers both the direct use of base LLMs and the fine-tuning of models, an alternative that can yield substantial performance gains in certain scenarios. A major emphasis in the guide is the validation of LLM-generated data with human "gold standard" norms. We also present a software framework that implements our methodology and supports both commercial and open-weight models. We illustrate the proposed approach with a case study on estimating word familiarity in English. Using base models, we achieved a Spearman correlation of 0.8 with human ratings, which increased to 0.9 when employing fine-tuned models. This methodology, framework, and set of best practices aim to serve as a reference for future research on leveraging LLMs for psycholinguistic and lexical studies.

Key facts. Cited by 3 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 26 of its 60 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 17 Sep 2025.

Builds on

26 of 60 references.

References · 26

  1. 2020Language Models are Few-Shot Learnerscited by 32,419
  2. 2023GPT-4 Technical Reportcited by 18,396
  3. 2024The Llama 3 Herd of Modelscited by 14,715
  4. 2025Gemini 2.5: Pushing the Frontier with Advanced Reasoning, Multimodality, Long Context, and Next Generation Agentic Capabilitiescited by 3,796
  5. 2023Pythia: A Suite for Analyzing Large Language Models Across Training and Scalingcited by 1,786
  6. 2023Language Models Don't Always Say What They Think: Unfaithful Explanations in Chain-of-Thought Promptingcited by 1,122
  7. 2019Attention is not Explanationcited by 929
  8. 2024Do Llamas Work in English? On the Latent Language of Multilingual Transformerscited by 281
  9. 2024On LLMs-Driven Synthetic Data Generation, Curation, and Evaluation: A Surveycited by 244
  10. 2023Language Model Tokenizers Introduce Unfairness Between Languagescited by 214
  11. 2023Time Travel in LLMs: Tracing Data Contamination in Large Language Modelscited by 177
  12. 2024Is Temperature the Creativity Parameter of Large Language Models?cited by 93
14 more
  1. 2023Testing the Predictions of Surprisal Theory in 11 Languagescited by 77
  2. 2024Why do language models perform worse for morphologically complex languages?cited by 62
  3. 2024Large Language Models and Cognitive Science: A Comprehensive Review of Similarities, Differences, and Challengescited by 49
  4. 2023Prompting is not a substitute for probability measurements in large language modelscited by 44
  5. 2024The illusion of artificial inclusioncited by 34
  6. 2025Language Models Fail to Introspect About Their Knowledge of Languagecited by 30
  7. 2024A Bit of a Problem: Measurement Disparities in Dataset Sizes Across Languagescited by 25
  8. 2024Six Fallacies in Substituting Large Language Models for Human Participantscited by 24
  9. 2025BenchMAX: A Comprehensive Multilingual Evaluation Suite for Large Language Modelscited by 23
  10. 2024Spanish and LLM Benchmarks: is MMLU Lost in Translation?cited by 20
  11. 2024Different Tokenization Schemes Lead to Comparable Performance in Spanish Number Agreementcited by 5
  12. 2024Evaluating Contextualized Representations of (Spanish) Ambiguous Words: A New Lexical Resource and Empirical Analysiscited by 5
  13. 2025Psycholinguistic Word Features: a New Approach for the Evaluation of LLMs Alignment with Humanscited by 5
  14. 2024Using large language models to estimate features of multi-word expressions: Concreteness, valence, arousalcited by 4

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2025: 1; 2026: 2.

3 papers.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2023Aligning Large Language Models with Human: A Survey
  2. 2025Humanizing LLMs: A Survey of Psychological Measurements with Tools, Datasets, and Human-Agent Applications
  3. 2023TencentLLMEval: A Hierarchical Evaluation of Real-World Capabilities for Human-Aligned LLMs
  4. 2023Large Linguistic Models: Investigating LLMs' metalinguistic abilities
  5. 2023Psychometric Predictive Power of Large Language Models
  6. 2025AIPsychoBench: Understanding the Psychometric Differences between LLMs and Humans
  7. 2026Evaluating LLMs as Human Surrogates in Controlled Experiments
  8. 2026Grading Scale Impact on LLM-as-a-Judge: Human-LLM Alignment Is Highest on 0-5 Grading Scale