LLMs Reproduce Human Purchase Intent via Semantic Similarity Elicitation of Likert Ratings
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Consumer research costs companies billions annually yet suffers from panel biases and limited scale. Large language models (LLMs) offer an alternative by simulating synthetic consumers, but produce unrealistic response distributions when asked directly for numerical ratings. We present semantic similarity rating (SSR), a method that elicits textual responses from LLMs and maps these to Likert distributions using embedding similarity to reference statements. Testing on an extensive dataset comprising 57 personal care product surveys conducted by a leading corporation in that market (9,300 human responses), SSR achieves 90% of human test-retest reliability while maintaining realistic response distributions (KS similarity > 0.85). Additionally, these synthetic respondents provide rich qualitative feedback explaining their ratings. This framework enables scalable consumer research simulations while preserving traditional survey metrics and interpretability.
Key facts. Cited by 9 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 4 of its 23 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 9 Oct 2025.
Builds on
4 of 23 references.
References · 4
- 2022Out of One, Many: Using Language Models to Simulate Human Samplescited by 737
- 2022Using Large Language Models to Simulate Multiple Humans and Replicate Human Subject Studiescited by 506
- 2019Benchmarking Zero-shot Text Classification: Datasets, Evaluation and Entailment Approachcited by 299
- 2024Large Language Models Show Human-like Social Desirability Biases in Survey Responsescited by 27
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2026: 9.
9 papers.
- 2026Beyond the Mean: Three-Axis Fidelity for Aligning LLM-Based Survey Simulators from Small Pilot Datacited by 3
- 2026Can LLMs Think Like Consumers? Benchmarking Crowd-Level Reaction Reconstruction with ConsumerSimBenchcited by 1
- 2026Orchestrating LLM Agents for Scientific Research: A Pilot Study of Multiple Choice Question (MCQ) Generation and Evaluationcited by 0
- 2026CBT-Audio: Evaluating Audio Language Models for Patient-Side Distress Intensity Estimation in CBT Session Recordingscited by 0
- 2026Reason-Mediated Behavioral Models for Auditing LLM Social Simulatorscited by 0
- 2026Can AI Agents Simulate A/B Test Outcomes? A Validation Framework for Agentic Experimentationcited by 0
- 2026Item-Mean Surrogates: Why Richer Persona Data Fail to Improve LLMs as Human Surrogatescited by 0
- 2026Scored vs. Generated Readouts in Behavioral Language Models: An Empirical Study of Elicitation Formatcited by 0
- 2026Agent-based Modeling: Equilibrium, Echo Chambers, and Efficiency in Hybrid Coevolutionary Opinion Gamescited by 0
- 2026Agent-based Modeling: Equilibrium, Echo Chambers, and Efficiency in Hybrid Coevolutionary Opinion Games23 Sep 2026
- 2026Scored vs. Generated Readouts in Behavioral Language Models: An Empirical Study of Elicitation Format9 Sep 2026
- 2026Item-Mean Surrogates: Why Richer Persona Data Fail to Improve LLMs as Human Surrogates29 Aug 2026
- 2026Can AI Agents Simulate A/B Test Outcomes? A Validation Framework for Agentic Experimentation3 Aug 2026
- 2026Reason-Mediated Behavioral Models for Auditing LLM Social Simulators27 Jul 2026
- 2026Beyond the Mean: Three-Axis Fidelity for Aligning LLM-Based Survey Simulators from Small Pilot Data27 Jun 2026
- 2026CBT-Audio: Evaluating Audio Language Models for Patient-Side Distress Intensity Estimation in CBT Session Recordings17 May 2026
- 2026Can LLMs Think Like Consumers? Benchmarking Crowd-Level Reaction Reconstruction with ConsumerSimBench16 May 2026
- 2026Orchestrating LLM Agents for Scientific Research: A Pilot Study of Multiple Choice Question (MCQ) Generation and Evaluation21 Feb 2026