# Applying Large Language Models to Characterize Public Narratives

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2511.13505 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2511.13505/

## Key facts

- No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 16 of its 64 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 17 Nov 2025.

## Builds on (most cited first, 16 of 16)

- [Language Models are Few-Shot Learners](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2005.14165/) (2020)
- [Judging LLM-as-a-Judge with MT-Bench and Chatbot Arena](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2306.05685/) (2023)
- [ChatGPT Outperforms Crowd-Workers for Text-Annotation Tasks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2303.15056/) (2023)
- [AI Chains: Transparent and Controllable Human-AI Interaction by Chaining Large Language Model Prompts](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2110.01691/) (2021)
- [Is GPT-3 a Good Data Annotator?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2212.10450/) (2022)
- [Want To Reduce Labeling Cost? GPT-3 Can Help](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2108.13487/) (2021)
- [Is ChatGPT better than Human Annotators? Potential and Limitations of ChatGPT in Explaining Implicit Hate Speech](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2302.07736/) (2023)
- [Supporting Qualitative Analysis with Large Language Models: Combining Codebook with GPT-3 for Deductive Coding](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2304.10548/) (2023)
- [Automated Annotation with Generative AI Requires Validation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2306.00176/) (2023)
- [LLM-Assisted Content Analysis: Using Large Language Models to Support Deductive Coding](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2306.14924/) (2023)
- [Human-AI Collaborative Essay Scoring: A Dual-Process Framework with LLMs](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2401.06431/) (2024)
- [Best Practices for Text Annotation with Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2402.05129/) (2024)
- [Do Language Models Enjoy Their Own Stories? Prompting Large Language Models for Automatic Story Evaluation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2405.13769/) (2024)
- [Using Large Language Models for Qualitative Analysis can Introduce Serious Bias](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2309.17147/) (2023)
- [Unveiling Scoring Processes: Dissecting the Differences between LLMs and Human Graders in Automatic Scoring](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2407.18328/) (2024)
- [Towards Human-Level Text Coding with LLMs: The Case of Fatherhood Roles in Public Policy Documents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2311.11844/) (2023)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Public Narratives (PNs) are key tools for leadership development and civic mobilization, yet their systematic analysis remains challenging due to their subjective interpretation and the high cost of expert annotation. In this work, we propose a novel computational framework that leverages large language models (LLMs) to automate the qualitative annotation of public narratives. Using a codebook we co-developed with subject-matter experts, we evaluate LLM performance against that of expert annotators. Our work reveals that LLMs can achieve near-human-expert performance, achieving an average F1 score of 0.80 across 8 narratives and 14 codes. We then extend our analysis to empirically explore how PN framework elements manifest across a larger dataset of 22 stories. Lastly, we extrapolate our analysis to a set of political speeches, establishing a novel lens in which to analyze political rhetoric in civic spaces. This study demonstrates the potential of LLM-assisted annotation for scalable narrative analysis and highlights key limitations and directions for future research in computational civic storytelling.