🤖 AI Summary
Existing evaluations of psychological traits in large language models (LLMs) lack a systematic psychometric framework. Method: This paper pioneers a comprehensive psychometric analysis of LLMs, covering six dimensions: assessment instruments, domain-specific psychological datasets, stability and consistency metrics, personality simulation, behavioral modeling, and cross-task empirical validation. Through controlled prompt-based experiments, it examines reproducible yet task-dependent personality tendencies across multiple models and identifies structural misalignments between classical psychological scales and LLM capabilities. Contribution/Results: We propose the first standardized evaluation framework integrating LLM-tailored assessment tools, benchmark datasets, and personality/behavioral modeling methods. This framework establishes a theoretical foundation and practical methodology for developing interpretable, robust, and generalizable psychological assessments in LLMs, thereby advancing research on trustworthy human-AI collaboration grounded in empirically validated psychological mechanisms.
📝 Abstract
As large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used in human-centered tasks, assessing their psychological traits is crucial for understanding their social impact and ensuring trustworthy AI alignment. While existing reviews have covered some aspects of related research, several important areas have not been systematically discussed, including detailed discussions of diverse psychological tests, LLM-specific psychological datasets, and the applications of LLMs with psychological traits. To address this gap, we systematically review six key dimensions of applying psychological theories to LLMs: (1) assessment tools; (2) LLM-specific datasets; (3) evaluation metrics (consistency and stability); (4) empirical findings; (5) personality simulation methods; and (6) LLM-based behavior simulation. Our analysis highlights both the strengths and limitations of current methods. While some LLMs exhibit reproducible personality patterns under specific prompting schemes, significant variability remains across tasks and settings. Recognizing methodological challenges such as mismatches between psychological tools and LLMs' capabilities, as well as inconsistencies in evaluation practices, this study aims to propose future directions for developing more interpretable, robust, and generalizable psychological assessment frameworks for LLMs.