Measuring Human Value Expression in Social Media Texts: Calibrated LLM Annotation and Encoder Transfer
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Measuring subjective constructs in naturally occurring social media text requires annotation procedures that are theoretically grounded, empirically validated, and transferable to an encoder model for scalable prediction. Using posts annotated according to Schwartz's theory of basic human values, we investigate how different LLMs and prompting strategies, which we call annotation regimes, operationalize the expression of values in text. Beyond standard classification metrics, we evaluate structural alignment, annotation ambiguity, error patterns, and stability across repeated runs. We find that different LLMs produce different value interpretations, and iterative prompt calibration through error analysis reduces misattributions and improves alignment with expert annotations. Error patterns are further used to derive targeted expert-verification rules for corpus annotation. We transfer soft LLM labels to an encoder model for prediction, retaining information about ambiguity in value expression. Finally, a sensitivity analysis on more than one million posts shows that regime-specific annotation differences propagate into predicted levels of value expression, whereas standardized temporal dynamics and the direction of major event responses are more robust.
Key facts. Cited by 2 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 25 of its 42 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 9 Jun 2026.
Builds on
25 of 42 references.
References · 25
- 2021Dealing with Disagreements: Looking Beyond the Majority Vote in Subjective Annotationscited by 314
- 2024Large Language Models for Data Annotation and Synthesis: A Surveycited by 205
- 2025The Alternative Annotator Test for LLM-as-a-Judge: How to Statistically Justify Replacing Human Annotators with LLMscited by 74
- 2024Can Unconfident LLM Annotations Be Used for Confident Conclusions?cited by 49
- 2024MEGAnno+: A Human-LLM Collaborative Annotation Systemcited by 47
- 2013Evaluation Measures for Hierarchical Classification: a unified view and novel approachescited by 46
- 2024The Perspectivist Paradigm Shift: Assumptions and Challenges of Capturing Human Labelscited by 38
- 2024Codebook LLMs: Evaluating LLMs as Measurement Tools for Political Science Conceptscited by 30
- 2023The Touch'e23-ValueEval Dataset for Identifying Human Values behind Argumentscited by 28
- 2024Exploring Multilingual Concepts of Human Value in Large Language Models: Is Value Alignment Consistent, Transferable and Controllable across Languages?cited by 24
- 2024Personas with Attitudes: Controlling LLMs for Diverse Data Annotationcited by 21
- 2025Just Put a Human in the Loop? Investigating LLM-Assisted Annotation for Subjective Taskscited by 21
13 more
- 2024Enhancing Text Classification through LLM-Driven Active Learning and Human Annotationcited by 20
- 2024Keeping Humans in the Loop: Human-Centered Automated Annotation with Generative AIcited by 17
- 2023A Unified View of Evaluation Metrics for Structured Predictioncited by 11
- 2024Investigating Human Values in Online Communitiescited by 10
- 2024Which Demographics do LLMs Default to During Annotation?cited by 10
- 2023Are Chatbots Reliable Text Annotators? Sometimescited by 9
- 2025Arbiters of Ambivalence: Challenges of Using LLMs in No-Consensus Taskscited by 8
- 2024Revisiting Hierarchical Text Classification: Inference and Metricscited by 7
- 2025Bias in, Bias out: Annotation Bias in Multilingual Large Language Modelscited by 5
- 2025The Value of Nothing: Multimodal Extraction of Human Values Expressed by TikTok Influencerscited by 4
- 2025Will Annotators Disagree? Identifying Subjectivity in Value-Laden Argumentscited by 3
- 2025Value Lens: Using Large Language Models to Understand Human Valuescited by 3
- 2026Structure of Basic Human Values in Russian Social Mediacited by 1
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2026: 2.
2 papers.