# From Five Dimensions to Many: Large Language Models as Precise and Interpretable Psychological Profilers

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2511.03235 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2511.03235/

## Key facts

- Cited by 5 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 37 of its 78 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 5 Nov 2025.

## Builds on (most cited first, 30 of 37)

- [Chain-of-Thought Prompting Elicits Reasoning in Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2201.11903/) (2022)
- [Qwen3 Technical Report](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2505.09388/) (2025)
- [Self-Consistency Improves Chain of Thought Reasoning in Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2203.11171/) (2022)
- [Large Language Models are Zero-Shot Reasoners](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2205.11916/) (2022)
- [Gemini 2.5: Pushing the Frontier with Advanced Reasoning, Multimodality, Long Context, and Next Generation Agentic Capabilities](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2507.06261/) (2025)
- [Self-RAG: Learning to Retrieve, Generate, and Critique through Self-Reflection](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.11511/) (2023)
- [Language Models Don't Always Say What They Think: Unfaithful Explanations in Chain-of-Thought Prompting](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.04388/) (2023)
- [Whose Opinions Do Language Models Reflect?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2303.17548/) (2023)
- [Out of One, Many: Using Language Models to Simulate Human Samples](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2209.06899/) (2022)
- [Measuring Faithfulness in Chain-of-Thought Reasoning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2307.13702/) (2023)
- [DeepSeek LLM: Scaling Open-Source Language Models with Longtermism](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2401.02954/) (2024)
- [Using Large Language Models to Simulate Multiple Humans and Replicate Human Subject Studies](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2208.10264/) (2022)
- [GLM-4.5: Agentic, Reasoning, and Coding (ARC) Foundation Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2508.06471/) (2025)
- [Can Large Language Models Transform Computational Social Science?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.03514/) (2023)
- [LLM Agents Grounded in Self-Reports Enable General-Purpose Simulation of Individuals](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2411.10109/) (2024)
- [PersonaLLM: Investigating the Ability of Large Language Models to Express Personality Traits](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.02547/) (2023)
- [Proving Test Set Contamination in Black Box Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.17623/) (2023)
- [Do LLMs exhibit human-like response biases? A case study in survey design](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2311.04076/) (2023)
- [Chain-of-Thought Reasoning In The Wild Is Not Always Faithful](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2503.08679/) (2025)
- [Personality Traits in Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2307.00184/) (2023)
- [Co-Writing with Opinionated Language Models Affects Users' Views](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2302.00560/) (2023)
- [Making Reasoning Matter: Measuring and Improving Faithfulness of Chain-of-Thought Reasoning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2402.13950/) (2024)
- [PersonaGym: Evaluating Persona Agents and LLMs](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2407.18416/) (2024)
- [Data Feedback Loops: Model-driven Amplification of Dataset Biases](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2209.03942/) (2022)
- [BIG5-CHAT: Shaping LLM Personalities Through Training on Human-Grounded Data](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2410.16491/) (2024)
- [Limited Ability of LLMs to Simulate Human Psychological Behaviours: a Psychometric Analysis](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2405.07248/) (2024)
- [PICLe: Eliciting Diverse Behaviors from Large Language Models with Persona In-Context Learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2405.02501/) (2024)
- [Intelligent problem-solving as integrated hierarchical reinforcement learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2208.08731/) (2022)
- [Very Large-Scale Multi-Agent Simulation in AgentScope](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2407.17789/) (2024)
- [Bias Amplification: Large Language Models as Increasingly Biased Media](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2410.15234/) (2024)

## Built on by (most cited first, 5 of 5)

- [Stable and Explainable Personality Trait Evaluation in Large Language Models with Internal Activations](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2601.09833/) (2026)
- [coTherapist: A Behavior-Aligned Small Language Model to Support Mental Healthcare Experts](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2601.10246/) (2026)
- [Can LLMs Assess Personality? Validating Conversational AI for Trait Profiling](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2602.15848/) (2026)
- [In-Situ Behavioral Evaluation for LLM Fairness, Not Standardized-Test Scores](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2605.12530/) (2026)
- [AI YOU Town: Make Friends and Money with Your Digital Twin](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2607.10539/) (2026)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Psychological constructs within individuals are widely believed to be interconnected. We investigated whether and how Large Language Models (LLMs) can model the correlational structure of human psychological traits from minimal quantitative inputs. We prompted various LLMs with Big Five Personality Scale responses from 816 human individuals to role-play their responses on nine other psychological scales. LLMs demonstrated remarkable accuracy in capturing human psychological structure, with the inter-scale correlation patterns from LLM-generated responses strongly aligning with those from human data (R2 > 0.89). This zero-shot performance substantially exceeded predictions based on semantic similarity and approached the accuracy of machine learning algorithms trained directly on the dataset. Analysis of reasoning traces revealed that LLMs use a systematic two-stage process: First, they transform raw Big Five responses into natural language personality summaries through information selection and compression, analogous to generating sufficient statistics. Second, they generate target scale responses based on reasoning from these summaries. For information selection, LLMs identify the same key personality factors as trained algorithms, though they fail to differentiate item importance within factors. The resulting compressed summaries are not merely redundant representations but capture synergistic information--adding them to original scores enhances prediction alignment, suggesting they encode emergent, second-order patterns of trait interplay. Our findings demonstrate that LLMs can precisely predict individual participants' psychological traits from minimal data through a process of abstraction and reasoning, offering both a powerful tool for psychological simulation and valuable insights into their emergent reasoning capabilities.