Do Psychometric Tests Work for Large Language Models? Evaluation of Tests on Sexism, Racism, and Morality
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Psychometric tests are increasingly used to assess psychological constructs in large language models (LLMs). However, it remains unclear whether these tests -- originally developed for humans -- yield meaningful results when applied to LLMs. In this study, we systematically evaluate the reliability and validity of human psychometric tests on 17 LLMs for three constructs: sexism, racism, and morality. We find moderate reliability across multiple item and prompt variations. Validity is evaluated through both convergent (i.e., testing theory-based inter-test correlations) and ecological approaches (i.e., testing the alignment between tests scores and behavior in real-world downstream tasks). Crucially, we find that psychometric test scores do not align, and in some cases even negatively correlate with, model behavior in downstream tasks, indicating low ecological validity. Our results highlight that systematic evaluations of psychometric tests on LLMs are essential before interpreting their scores. Our findings also suggest that psychometric tests designed for humans cannot be applied directly to LLMs without adaptation.
Key facts. Cited by 9 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 22 of its 112 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 13 Oct 2025.
Builds on
22 of 112 references.
References · 22
- 2024The Llama 3 Herd of Modelscited by 14,715
- 2019Sentence-BERT: Sentence Embeddings using Siamese BERT-Networkscited by 9,170
- 2024LLM Evaluators Recognize and Favor Their Own Generationscited by 686
- 2023Evaluating the Moral Beliefs Encoded in LLMscited by 215
- 2023"Kelly is a Warm Person, Joseph is a Role Model": Gender Biases in LLM-Generated Reference Letterscited by 199
- 2024Political Compass or Spinning Arrow? Towards More Meaningful Evaluations for Values and Opinions in Large Language Modelscited by 162
- 2022Who is GPT-3? An Exploration of Personality, Values and Demographicscited by 112
- 2023Moral Foundations of Large Language Modelscited by 85
- 2024DailyDilemmas: Revealing Value Preferences of LLMs with Quandaries of Daily Lifecited by 59
- 2024How Well Do LLMs Represent Values Across Cultures? Empirical Analysis of LLM Responses Based on Hofstede Cultural Dimensionscited by 52
- 2025Mind the Value-Action Gap: Do LLMs Act in Alignment with Their Values?cited by 51
- 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
10 more
- 2025Large Language Model Psychometrics: A Systematic Review of Evaluation, Validation, and Enhancementcited by 45
- 2023Exploring the psychology of LLMs' Moral and Legal Reasoningcited by 44
- 2024Centaur: a foundation model of human cognitioncited by 36
- 2025The Personality Illusion: Revealing Dissociation Between Self-Reports & Behavior in LLMscited by 36
- 2025Actions Speak Louder than Words: Agent Decisions Reveal Implicit Biases in Language Modelscited by 30
- 2024AnthroScore: A Computational Linguistic Measure of Anthropomorphismcited by 27
- 2023Denevil: Towards Deciphering and Navigating the Ethical Values of Large Language Models via Instruction Learningcited by 26
- 2024Are Large Language Models Moral Hypocrites? A Study Based on Moral Foundationscited by 19
- 2023Inducing anxiety in large language models can induce biascited by 10
- 2025Position: Stop Evaluating AI with Human Tests, Develop Principled, AI-specific Tests insteadcited by 7
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2026: 9.
9 papers.
- 2026Different Demographic Cues Yield Inconsistent Conclusions About LLM Personalization and Biascited by 4
- 2026Every Token Counts: Exact Likert-Scale Distributions for Measuring LLM Attitudes and Biasescited by 3
- 2026Evaluating Cognitive Age Alignment in Interactive AI Agentscited by 2
- 2026Apparent Psychological Profiles of Large Language Models are Largely a Measurement Artifactcited by 2
- 2026Persona-Model Collapse in Emergent Misalignmentcited by 1
- 2026Rethinking Psychometric Evaluation of LLMs: When and Why Self-Reports Predict Behaviorcited by 1
- 2026AuAu: A Benchmark for Auditing Authoritarian Alignment in Large Language Modelscited by 0
- 2026CogArena: A Multimethod Evaluation of Cognitive Ability Structure in Large Language Modelscited by 0
- 2026When benchmark inferences do not compose: Projectibility in AI evaluationcited by 0
- 2026Every Token Counts: Exact Likert-Scale Distributions for Measuring LLM Attitudes and Biases11 Aug 2026
- 2026When benchmark inferences do not compose: Projectibility in AI evaluation28 Jul 2026
- 2026CogArena: A Multimethod Evaluation of Cognitive Ability Structure in Large Language Models27 Jul 2026
- 2026Apparent Psychological Profiles of Large Language Models are Largely a Measurement Artifact18 Jun 2026
- 2026AuAu: A Benchmark for Auditing Authoritarian Alignment in Large Language Models15 Jun 2026
- 2026Rethinking Psychometric Evaluation of LLMs: When and Why Self-Reports Predict Behavior10 Jun 2026
- 2026Evaluating Cognitive Age Alignment in Interactive AI Agents18 May 2026
- 2026Persona-Model Collapse in Emergent Misalignment13 May 2026
- 2026Different Demographic Cues Yield Inconsistent Conclusions About LLM Personalization and Bias26 Jan 2026